ButlerAlerts
Member
lol. I suggested my friend to build a small dipole (This is for UHF) up in his attic, then have it run parallel with the truss's. Ive heard good results.
Need advice on compromise (i.e. stealth, low cost, etc.) HF antenna
- Thread starter jaded
- Start date
- Status
Most Verticals do not transmit well with one exception that I know of. That is the Gap Brand. I have a Gap Challenger, it covers 2 meters to 80 meters ( 130 MHZ 0f 80 Meters)
People are always amazed that I'm talking on a vertical, I get great reports with just 100 watts. I have talked all over the USA and broken in on many pile up's on DX stations.
Today on 15 meters, I make good contacts with info exchanges to Cuba, Italy, 2 to Japan, and Spain in a period of about 1.5 hours.
I have make great contacts with many other countries.
The gap Challenger only requires three radials of 25 feet each because it's a vertical dipole. You don't need to put out 60 radials for it to work right. If I can hear them, I can contact them.
Read the feedback from other hams on EHam and you will see just how good this antenna really is.
They also have the Voyager that goes from 20 meters to 100 MHz of 160 meters, and this one works as good as the challenger.
You can put these is a very small area, especially the challenger, it takes 2 people about 10 minutes to put it up.
I am so darn happy with this antenna. If you want close in contacts, you will also need a NVIS antenna as the Gap antennas go from about 800 miles to the other side of the world, but not real close in, it has a very low take off angle, I think that is one of the reasons for the great DX.
As I said, no one thinks I could be using a vertical because with all the traps and the wire required to be put down, they just don't work that well. Most verticals are lousy on the 10 and 15 meter band, but not the Challenger and 40 meters is it's strongest, the distance and readability you'll get with it will put a huge smile on your face. It works better than my inverted V dipoles also.
There is no one ideal antenna, but for just over $300.00, you will not find an antenna that will work better on so many bands, that includes the expensive verticals also, it smokes them. I'm not as loud as somebody running full limit with a yagi at 70 feet, but I still get the same DX contacts that they do, who could ask for more. It will fit a very small area, so you should have no trouble putting one up.
I would have had more contacts, but towards the end, some LID was keying up with at least 1500 watts saying H E L L O. Many of the DX stations finally quit transmitting. Some people's children.
73's John
People are always amazed that I'm talking on a vertical, I get great reports with just 100 watts. I have talked all over the USA and broken in on many pile up's on DX stations.
Today on 15 meters, I make good contacts with info exchanges to Cuba, Italy, 2 to Japan, and Spain in a period of about 1.5 hours.
I have make great contacts with many other countries.
The gap Challenger only requires three radials of 25 feet each because it's a vertical dipole. You don't need to put out 60 radials for it to work right. If I can hear them, I can contact them.
Read the feedback from other hams on EHam and you will see just how good this antenna really is.
They also have the Voyager that goes from 20 meters to 100 MHz of 160 meters, and this one works as good as the challenger.
You can put these is a very small area, especially the challenger, it takes 2 people about 10 minutes to put it up.
I am so darn happy with this antenna. If you want close in contacts, you will also need a NVIS antenna as the Gap antennas go from about 800 miles to the other side of the world, but not real close in, it has a very low take off angle, I think that is one of the reasons for the great DX.
As I said, no one thinks I could be using a vertical because with all the traps and the wire required to be put down, they just don't work that well. Most verticals are lousy on the 10 and 15 meter band, but not the Challenger and 40 meters is it's strongest, the distance and readability you'll get with it will put a huge smile on your face. It works better than my inverted V dipoles also.
There is no one ideal antenna, but for just over $300.00, you will not find an antenna that will work better on so many bands, that includes the expensive verticals also, it smokes them. I'm not as loud as somebody running full limit with a yagi at 70 feet, but I still get the same DX contacts that they do, who could ask for more. It will fit a very small area, so you should have no trouble putting one up.
I would have had more contacts, but towards the end, some LID was keying up with at least 1500 watts saying H E L L O. Many of the DX stations finally quit transmitting. Some people's children.
73's John
Last edited:
I too have had success with verticals. If you are in a confined situation, you *can* run with only one radial if it is elevated, the higher the better.
In this case, the vertical will now have directivity favoring the direction of the radial, and have a high angle fill-in - basically because it is not a true vertical antenna as commonly thought of. So while it won't be the best for ultra low-angle dx, it will work to make contacts!
And if you are space-constrained, and the radial is elevated, you can linear-load it by merely folding it back upon itself with an inch or two or three of spacing between the folded back wires. The far end of the radial merely gets folded back towards the feedpoint, and is not connected to anything, just left open.
Example - I don't have room for a full sized 40m vertical with a full radial set. So I'm using a Hustler 40m mobile antenna (fixed of course, not mobile), and only one elevated radial. BUT, that 33 foot radial is folded back on itself twice, resembling a very narrow S-shape with only about 4 inches between the wires. I don't like folding more than once, but sometimes you gotta' do what you gotta' do.
As long as I don't expect TRUE vertical performance from it, but as something quite different, even though it physically looks like a vertical, I'm happy. Raising the antenna higher would help, as the folded radial is only 4 feet off the ground. Not ideal, and used mostly for listening, but it is better than nothing!
Use a good quality feedline choke!
In this case, the vertical will now have directivity favoring the direction of the radial, and have a high angle fill-in - basically because it is not a true vertical antenna as commonly thought of. So while it won't be the best for ultra low-angle dx, it will work to make contacts!
And if you are space-constrained, and the radial is elevated, you can linear-load it by merely folding it back upon itself with an inch or two or three of spacing between the folded back wires. The far end of the radial merely gets folded back towards the feedpoint, and is not connected to anything, just left open.
Example - I don't have room for a full sized 40m vertical with a full radial set. So I'm using a Hustler 40m mobile antenna (fixed of course, not mobile), and only one elevated radial. BUT, that 33 foot radial is folded back on itself twice, resembling a very narrow S-shape with only about 4 inches between the wires. I don't like folding more than once, but sometimes you gotta' do what you gotta' do.
As long as I don't expect TRUE vertical performance from it, but as something quite different, even though it physically looks like a vertical, I'm happy. Raising the antenna higher would help, as the folded radial is only 4 feet off the ground. Not ideal, and used mostly for listening, but it is better than nothing!
Use a good quality feedline choke!
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the only thing I would re-word is change that "true vertical" to a 'shortened vertical'. There certainly is a difference in the radiation patterns between a 'full-sized' antenna and a 'shortened' one. If that difference is acceptable to you, then have at it. Of course, if it's the defference between having a 'compromise' antenna and no antenna, it' gotta be better, right?
- 'Doc
- 'Doc
Actually, the pattern, assuming a quality ground, is the same! The only difference is efficiency. Ie, if you look at the pattern between the two, the basic shape of the lobes is the same, just the gain differs. You just have a smaller set of mickey-mouse ears with the shortened vertical.
If it is at least .125 wavelengths long (half of a quarter-wave), and high-q, you won't notice the difference between a full quarter wave in general purpose use. The pattern remains the same, just the gain suffers a slight amount.
Many vertical installations may not have a truly effective ground system, and in the case of elevated radials, one or two may be carrying most of the current, unintentionally turning it into effectively a one-radial vertical near the ground! Slight differences in wire length and ground absorption can do this, and hence lose the low-angle lobe and have a high-angle fill in!
For instance, if you have a 4-radial elevated system, but the lengths are sloppy and unequal, or one of them is near a lossy object, much energy can be carried by just one or two radials, leading to disappointment. The vertical is actual working, it is the ground system that is the determining factor that can skew the pattern. In the one-radial case, that is done on purpose due to space limitations.
If it is at least .125 wavelengths long (half of a quarter-wave), and high-q, you won't notice the difference between a full quarter wave in general purpose use. The pattern remains the same, just the gain suffers a slight amount.
Many vertical installations may not have a truly effective ground system, and in the case of elevated radials, one or two may be carrying most of the current, unintentionally turning it into effectively a one-radial vertical near the ground! Slight differences in wire length and ground absorption can do this, and hence lose the low-angle lobe and have a high-angle fill in!
For instance, if you have a 4-radial elevated system, but the lengths are sloppy and unequal, or one of them is near a lossy object, much energy can be carried by just one or two radials, leading to disappointment. The vertical is actual working, it is the ground system that is the determining factor that can skew the pattern. In the one-radial case, that is done on purpose due to space limitations.
Last edited by a moderator:
Have you asked if you could place an antenna on the roof of your condo?
A vertical with two or more ground radials of the same length will not have any if much radiation from the ground radials because of (hopefully) equal and opposite current flow in the opposing radials.
A vertical with only one ground radial is basically an inverted V dipole on its side and should radiate from the ground radial, except its close to or on the ground an the antenna will suffer degraded efficiency and the pattern will be skewed.
I would always use lots of ground radials on a vertical and a bunch of short ones are usually better than a couple of long ones as the spacing between them at the ends partially determines how effective they will be.
For short verticals its usually better to use a large capacity hat on top of the antenna to reduce the amount of coil needed to resonate the antenna.
prcguy
A vertical with only one ground radial is basically an inverted V dipole on its side and should radiate from the ground radial, except its close to or on the ground an the antenna will suffer degraded efficiency and the pattern will be skewed.
I would always use lots of ground radials on a vertical and a bunch of short ones are usually better than a couple of long ones as the spacing between them at the ends partially determines how effective they will be.
For short verticals its usually better to use a large capacity hat on top of the antenna to reduce the amount of coil needed to resonate the antenna.
prcguy
I too have had success with verticals. If you are in a confined situation, you *can* run with only one radial if it is elevated, the higher the better.
In this case, the vertical will now have directivity favoring the direction of the radial, and have a high angle fill-in - basically because it is not a true vertical antenna as commonly thought of. So while it won't be the best for ultra low-angle dx, it will work to make contacts!
And if you are space-constrained, and the radial is elevated, you can linear-load it by merely folding it back upon itself with an inch or two or three of spacing between the folded back wires. The far end of the radial merely gets folded back towards the feedpoint, and is not connected to anything, just left open.
Example - I don't have room for a full sized 40m vertical with a full radial set. So I'm using a Hustler 40m mobile antenna (fixed of course, not mobile), and only one elevated radial. BUT, that 33 foot radial is folded back on itself twice, resembling a very narrow S-shape with only about 4 inches between the wires. I don't like folding more than once, but sometimes you gotta' do what you gotta' do.
As long as I don't expect TRUE vertical performance from it, but as something quite different, even though it physically looks like a vertical, I'm happy. Raising the antenna higher would help, as the folded radial is only 4 feet off the ground. Not ideal, and used mostly for listening, but it is better than nothing!
Use a good quality feedline choke!
- Status
