Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <rpCIgHAZRco4Ew$M@pickmere.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 19:47:37 +0000
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
From: "M.J.Powell" <mike@pickmere.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: LF: dxpedition
References: <38A1BD8F.26224C9B@netscapeonline.co.uk>
In-reply-to: <38A1BD8F.26224C9B@netscapeonline.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

In message <38A1BD8F.26224C9B@netscapeonline.co.uk>, g3kev
<g3kev@netscapeonline.co.uk> writes
>Hi All. Was planning to operated from Cookstown/Tyrone (GI) this weekend
>but because of the gales forecast it might be impossibe to get the 130
>ft antenna erected. The tower is in situ and would probably stand the
>gales but getting the antenna configured could be difficult. The antenna
>would consist of 3 inv L antennas in parallel each one 130 ft vertical
>and each top section 400 ft long. Wire used is 2.5 mm insulated with
>suitable marine insulators as required.
>They would converge at the bottom and be attached to a base loaded
>inductor to resonate at 137 khz. The ground radials consist of 10
>lengths of 400 ft 2.5 mm insulated wire and the far end of each one
>connected to sheep fencing which runs for miles across the country.
>The radials are elevated about 1 metre above ground. The output should
>be around 1w  erp.
>When serious transatlantic tests  evolve ie compatibility at each end I
>will extend each top loading wire several hundred feet to maximise
>efficiency both on tx and rx.
>I intend to operate from this qth several times each year wx permitting,
>I do not want the tower wrecked in gales or storms. The tower is heavy
>duty commercial lattice construction and telescopic and guyed with heavy
>marine rope. It is fine when erected but getting it up and wires
>attached in gales is another story. Getting it back down in a storm is
>even WORSE, the sections will not slide down properly because of the
>wind pressure agains the sides. The guys are slack and then it gets VERY
>DANGEROUS. You have to experience this to appreciate the hazards.
>Maybe a 20 ft pole or a low tree, which most are using on Lf  is the
>answer and would be safer and forget about DX except for a bit of luck
>once in a while.

Would it be worth remembering what Marconi discovered when the gales
ruined his aerials at Cape Cod? That an inverted 'L' aerial has some
gain towards the feed end (?). 

Mike 
-- 
M.J.Powell