Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses
From: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 23:29:01 EDT
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
In a message dated 6/4/01 6:31:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
<< This post was in anticipation of getting the band stateside..
I agree..  for receive I would use multiturn loops or a Flag antenna.

So I was wonder how well something like this would work for Xmit >>

Ah, hope springs eternal...  :-)

Antennas similar in configuration, if not size, have been successful at LowFER beacons, but not very many top-loaded ones have been that successful near trees. It does make losses more manageable to have the loading inductor near the top, as the guys mentioned earlier; but being a full near-field boundary distance from trees is desirable if it can be done (wavelength divided by 2*Pi).
Whereas many hams on the eastern side of the Atlantic are allowed to pump
massive quantities of power into a lossy antenna to achieve 1W ERP, if
necessary, we will be limited to 200W TPO. Antenna efficiency will be the
order of the day over here, I suspect.
John Davis

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>