eHam

eHam Forums => DXing => Topic started by: AF3Y on January 08, 2013, 10:10:56 AM



Title: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 08, 2013, 10:10:56 AM
OK, here is your math problem for today.  

Ham "A" is in Key West, Florida, running 1500 Watts to a 1/4 wave vertical with 36 radials of varying lengths.

Ham "B" is down the street from "A", a few hundred yards. He is running barefoot, 200 watts to a Force 12 Tri-bander up around 100 feet.

Assuming both these guys want to work BS7, WHICH One is going to put the most power in the ears of the ISOTROPE on Scarborough?

Obviously, assume all prop, condx, etc. to be equal for the comparison.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N3QE on January 08, 2013, 10:31:35 AM
On 10, 15, and 20... Ham B will hear BS7 and work BS7. Ham A will be heard by BS7, but not be able to hear BS7.

Ham A can very likely get him by grey line on 40, probably 30 and 80 as well. If he had a receive loop and propogation was in favor, maybe even 160. Ham B cannot.

Tim.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 08, 2013, 11:20:36 AM
I was going to make a wisecrack about it being a trick question - that an isotropic radiator doesn't exist, but . . .

I agree with N3QE, and that the BS7H team wouldn't stay on those scaffolds long enough for the pileups to get anything less than massive. the competition would be HUGE. Even on the West Coast - with a Moxon and 800 watts I had a rough time getting one Q - only on 20M SSB. And BS7H is EASY from the West Coast. Anything in OC-PAC and Asia is easy. P5/4L4FN was very easy for me.

Even my 20M Moxon had 4 dBd gain over a dipole. The vertical has loss - from 3 dBi to [a lot more depending on which band you are using it on]. This means your 1000 watts of power going in will not be what is effectively going out. The yagi users take off angle would also cover the lower angles that your multiband vertical probably won't - and for Florida to BS7H, low angles would be needed - especially if it were (again) activated at the low part of a cycle.

Your vertical also has no F/B - so you will need decent filtering if they run the split only 2 Khz up.

NOW - if you phase TWO verticals using something like the PVS-2 from DX Engineering - you will have gain and directionality end fire and broadside. You will then be on par with something like a Moxon - at least end fire, and would compete well with the yagi users. You could perhaps get a PVS-2 for 20M and do some switching to switch it in or - out - since phasing renders the two antennas as a mono bander. If you have the bucks - Array Solutions has that multiband phase system - but its expensive.

I wouldn't count on the same conditions that happened with ZL9HR - they had a ridge and big hills and an inlet with antennas that favored the East Coast. BS7H is a clear water path to W6-W7, KL7, KH6, JA, VK/ZL, Asia.



Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W6DXO on January 08, 2013, 12:40:55 PM
Both guys hear the DX, but "B" get's in the log.

It's that whole "laws of physics" stuff I keep hearing about... ::)

73 de harry, W6DXO


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 08, 2013, 05:40:07 PM
I dont know guys....... ::)

Using these two stations and running VOACAP predictions to various areas yield some interesting results. But then again, I would never put my $$ on a VOACAP prediction, having seen it be "out of the ballpark" at times.

73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 08, 2013, 05:47:23 PM
there's always the ARRL Antenna Book and Array of Light for real "enlightenment"......


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: NU1O on January 08, 2013, 06:12:23 PM
Station A has about 8.8 dB of gain solely due to the big difference in power. A tribander has loss on 15 and 20 meters due to the traps. I don't know exactly how much gain one gets by moving from the average height of about 50 to 55 feet to 100 since much of that depends on the path. If both stations are on the East Coast I'd want as much gain as possible at low takeoff angles and station B should have a big advantage in that regard.

If the stations are on the East Coast I'd go with the tribander at 100 feet but if they are on the West Coast I'd go with the vertical and the big power advantage.

73,

Chris/NU1O


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 08, 2013, 07:42:19 PM
You will have a much more realistic idea of exactly how much gain you would have with each antenna if you use EZNec and HFTA to model them. Since you are on Flat terrain - EZNec could be used by itself to really know how much LOSS you have with your vertical (make sure you model with your radials). You could then subtract that loss from the gain the amp gives you to see how much less than 1000 watts you would have.

EZNec would also show you the takeoff angle of the vertical - and then you will see how much better it would be with a yagi up 100 feet. EZNec will show you the gain added by ground reflection at that height - and it is significant, possibly a couple dB. EZnec is better than guessing.

Trapped triband yagis have sub-optimal element spacing, and you could assume that trap loss is maybe 1 - 2 dB. On trapped tribanders, 20M suffers the most and it gradually gets better on 15 and 10M. Non trapped tribanders (Force-12, Bencher) do better more so because they use an interlaced design with sleeve coupling, and they have been designed using EZnec. There is no trap loss, but as you add each successive band - none of the bands in the tribander are really "like having 3 monobanders". Not exactly - but far closer than a trapped tribander with sub-optimal spacing. Each successive band degrades and causes at least some interaction. Which is exactly why I went with the 2X2 17M monoband stack - 7 dBd on 17M and 4 dBd on 20M, and a set of stacked rotatable dipoles on 15, 12 and 10 - maybe 2 dBd on each of those bands. No negative interaction between elements at all.

Now - the question didn't specify what bands, and I think most have assumed high bands. On 30M and down - if you can't get a horizontal antenna up 1/2 wl - or more - I would always choose the vertical. My 60' high 40M doublet is WAY better than my old 43' vertical, but when that doublet was only up 35', the vertical and doublet were about the same.
I prefer hatted verticals because they slightly compress the lobes and give you slightly lower take off angle - which from the East Coast - you will need for BS7H . . ESPECIALLY if it gets activated a the next bottom of the cycle - like it was this last time  ;D


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W2IRT on January 09, 2013, 05:48:36 AM
Personally, I don't buy the premise. If you can afford to put a triband Yagi up at 100' AGL you can probably also afford at least a kW amp if not legal-limit. And I'd also add that if you're putting a Yagi up that high, you're probably not using some POS trapped tribander, but rather something with some serious gain on 20 and 15 as well as good F/B and F/S rejection.

I can tell you that from my own experience with a C31XR up 70' it's fairly easy to get through with 200W if there isn't a huge pileup. If there is, that extra 7-8 dB out of the amp makes a huge difference. From my QTH, I needed my AL-1200 and the C31XR to get BS7 in the log in 2007.

But if I had to choose, from my QTH, I'd rather have the high Yagi and 200W since the combination of good receive gain to hear the BS7 (doubtful on a vertical), and F/B and F/S rejection to attenuate the lids as much as possible would beat the performance of a vertical like a red-headed stepchild. And since you're not specifying which tribander would be used, I'll pick a Force-12 C49XR (49' boom, 7.6dBd on 20, 8.2dBd on 15 and 9.4dBd on 10), which, if driven with 200W, would yield an ERP of about 1100W on 20m after Heliax feedline loss is taken into account.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N2RJ on January 09, 2013, 07:23:48 AM
I rarely turn on the amp for most of my DXing. The 100w and the MonstIR at 75' beats out a lot of guys running a tribander and 1.5kw.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W2IRT on January 09, 2013, 07:51:08 AM
I rarely turn on the amp for most of my DXing. The 100w and the MonstIR at 75' beats out a lot of guys running a tribander and 1.5kw.
Not to mention being 875' ASL and having a great takeoff angle over about 270 degrees.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N3QE on January 09, 2013, 08:10:08 AM
I dont know guys....... ::)

Using these two stations and running VOACAP predictions to various areas yield some interesting results. But then again, I would never put my $$ on a VOACAP prediction, having seen it be "out of the ballpark" at times.

73, Gene AF3Y

I too am dubious about VOACAP but...

I think that running VOACAP for the reverse path would be most useful here. The vertical is very unlikely to be able to hear BS7 above the noise on the high bands unless the BS7 has an enormously massive monobander stack.

The vertical in Florida could work quite well on 40/80 if the HYPOTHETICAL BS7 DXped did more than a token low band effort. I'd quote something about "two guys on the beach" but... what beach?!

Tim.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 09, 2013, 08:16:07 AM
I rarely turn on the amp for most of my DXing. The 100w and the MonstIR at 75' beats out a lot of guys running a tribander and 1.5kw.
Not to mention being 875' ASL and having a great takeoff angle over about 270 degrees.

The good old hills of Sussex County. Grew up there and graduated from Newton H.S. Worked in Franklin, NJ soldering military solid state tube replacement parts at a place called "Tymac Controls" during the summers when I first went to college - and before my family moved to the SF Bay Area - half way through college.

People don't realize how nice NJ can be . . .


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N2RJ on January 09, 2013, 08:19:13 AM
Shhhh don't tell 'em... ;)

Yes it is nice out here. But it still is NJ, so this means that you can adore the wonderful rolling hills and scenic countryside including the wildlife while you sit in your car and an attendant pumps your gas.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W5DQ on January 09, 2013, 08:34:11 AM
Bottom line .... you use what you have and hope for the best or 'invest' more $$$ and add capabilities.

With my vertical setup, I have found that by modifying my 6BTV by extending the main antenna mast above the 30M trap and adding a cap hat (DX Eng Hot Rodz setup and replacing the 80M Super resonator with the 40M Super) I can hear better on 80M and 40M with the vertical and results indicate that my TX signal has better presence since I am logging more Qs than before. The bandwidth is wider too, appx 100Khz on 40M and 50+khz on 80M - both tuned at the low end of the band.

I would really like the chance to try for BS7H on any band using my current vertical config against my Force 12 C3S at 13M high. Someday when I move to the retirement QTH, I plan on having some 'real' antennas :)

Gene W5DQ


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 09, 2013, 09:50:57 AM
I rarely turn on the amp for most of my DXing. The 100w and the MonstIR at 75' beats out a lot of guys running a tribander and 1.5kw.
Not to mention being 875' ASL and having a great takeoff angle over about 270 degrees.

The good old hills of Sussex County. Grew up there and graduated from Newton H.S. Worked in Franklin, NJ soldering military solid state tube replacement parts at a place called "Tymac Controls" during the summers when I first went to college - and before my family moved to the SF Bay Area - half way through college.

People don't realize how nice NJ can be . . .

Hmmm.... I almost married a lady from Franklin, NJ. (Then I wised up. hi )

Worked up there for a couple years. Best peaches I ever ate, and best Italian food ever at a sort of diner in Netcong(?). Cant remember name of the diner, but yeah, it was good.

73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AA6YQ on January 09, 2013, 11:10:19 AM
OK, here is your math problem for today.  

Ham "A" is in Key West, Florida, running 1500 Watts to a 1/4 wave vertical with 36 radials of varying lengths.

Ham "B" is down the street from "A", a few hundred yards. He is running barefoot, 200 watts to a Force 12 Tri-bander up around 100 feet.

Assuming both these guys want to work BS7, WHICH One is going to put the most power in the ears of the ISOTROPE on Scarborough?

Obviously, assume all prop, condx, etc. to be equal for the comparison.

Ham A's vertical is one-quarter wavelength for what band? Does ham A have a way to tune this antenna for multiple bands? If so, for which ones, and with what efficiencies relative to its primary band?


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N5UD on January 09, 2013, 12:28:30 PM
OK, here is your math problem for today.  

Ham "A" is in Key West, Florida, running 1500 Watts to a 1/4 wave vertical with 36 radials of varying lengths.

Ham "B" is down the street from "A", a few hundred yards. He is running barefoot, 200 watts to a Force 12 Tri-bander up around 100 feet.

Assuming both these guys want to work BS7, WHICH One is going to put the most power in the ears of the ISOTROPE on Scarborough?

Obviously, assume all prop, condx, etc. to be equal for the comparison.

Ham A's vertical is one-quarter wavelength for what band? Does ham A have a way to tune this antenna for multiple bands? If so, for which ones, and with what efficiencies relative to its primary band?


Well I was wondering when someone would ask that question ?
1/4 wave on which band ? Since it is Key West, is vertical mounted on the beach for saltwater effect ? Then we might ask, again depending on band, short path or long path ?

1.5 KW output sure is a lot of RF.

100 feet up with a yagi should get a low angle. Vertical on the beach should too. Is the Scarborough station using verticals ?



Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 09, 2013, 03:06:45 PM

Ham A's vertical is one-quarter wavelength for what band? Does ham A have a way to tune this antenna for multiple bands? If so, for which ones, and with what efficiencies relative to its primary band?


OK, lets say quarter wave for 40 meters, may be tuned for 80m thru 10 meters with auto tuner.

Antenna not near ocean, perhaps a couple miles away. IF you can get that far from the ocean in Key West.... (??)

That help you any? What efficiencies relative to the 40m band? I dont have a clue ::).
73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AA6YQ on January 09, 2013, 08:21:25 PM

Ham A's vertical is one-quarter wavelength for what band? Does ham A have a way to tune this antenna for multiple bands? If so, for which ones, and with what efficiencies relative to its primary band?


OK, lets say quarter wave for 40 meters, may be tuned for 80m thru 10 meters with auto tuner.

Antenna not near ocean, perhaps a couple miles away. IF you can get that far from the ocean in Key West.... (??)

That help you any? What efficiencies relative to the 40m band? I dont have a clue ::).


I suggest that you use an antenna modeling application to see what sort of pattern and gain results when using the 40m vertical on other bands. I suspect that you will be disappointed.

So the choice is a 40m vertical over a mid-range ground screen with 1500 watts vs. a competent tribander at 100' with 200 watts.

Your question was "which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7?" If your goal is to work BS7, that's the wrong question. As I posted in another thread, "you can't work what you can't hear". The right question is "which antenna will maximize my opportunities to hear the BS7 station?" When receiving, vertical antennas are susceptible to man-made noise. The tribander gives you gain, QRM and QRN rejection to the sides and back, the ability to exploit long-path openings, and all of this on three different bands -- at least one of which (20m) should produce good openings even when the solar flux is at the low end of its recent range.

I'd want the tribander.

     73,

           Dave, AA6YQ


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 10, 2013, 04:49:39 AM
Your question was "which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7?" If your goal is to work BS7, that's the wrong question. As I posted in another thread, "you can't work what you can't hear".
I'd want the tribander.

     73,
 Dave, AA6YQ

Dave, I understand what you have said above, and I basically have to agree with you, BUT..... for what its worth, right or wrong, my question was
"which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7?" (should have said, which station will produce the loudest signal at BS7?)

73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: WB3BEL on January 10, 2013, 08:11:57 AM
This is not a math problem...

I am not even sure the problem statement is defined clearly enough to give a single answer if there was one.

As I understand it:
Ham A ~30 ft vertical with 36 radials and 1500W.  Location = Key West but more than mile from ocean if possible...
Ham B Force12 Tribander at 100ft and 200W.  Location = within few hundred yards of A.

Outcomes:
Frequency of operation 14,21,28MHz.  Almost all of the time B will be louder at BS7.  Way louder and hear better as well.  How much louder may depend on the specific F12 antenna model and the actual band used.

Frequency of operation 18 or 24 MHz. A might be louder but probably would not hear as well.   Station A being louder requires the autotuner to be close to the vertical or some low loss transmission line system.  Might be a bit tricky at 1500W...

Frequency of operation below 14MHz.  I doubt this is the scenario, but if it is then most likely A is louder on 80,40 or 30 meters.  If B can load the tower as vertical on the lower bands and has a good ground system it might be close on 80m.  If the band was 160m, (unlikely) and B had tower fed as a vertical then B would be many dB louder.

But at the last BS7 activation most of the east coast QSOs were above 14 MHz.  Sunspots were lower then but 14MHz was a good choice.  Maybe if it was now, 15m might be stronger.  I'd still want the yagi at 100 ft...



Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N2RJ on January 10, 2013, 08:48:01 AM
BS7H was using a BiggIR vertical from Fluidmotion SteppIR.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W2IRT on January 10, 2013, 09:34:08 AM
BS7H was using a BiggIR vertical from Fluidmotion SteppIR.
One station was using a small yagi (A C3SS, I believe).


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 10, 2013, 10:12:39 AM
Frequency of operation below 14MHz.  I doubt this is the scenario, but if it is then most likely A is louder on 80,40 or 30 meters.  If B can load the tower as vertical on the lower bands and has a good ground system it might be close on 80m.  If the band was 160m, (unlikely) and B had tower fed as a vertical then B would be many dB louder.

The ham that can afford a 100 foot tower with Force-12 yagi would probably have 4 squares on 80 and 40M and even a decent vertical on 160M. Maybe even yagi's on 40 and 30M - up at least 1/2 wl.

Hams that go to that bother with 100 foot towers are WAY more OCD than I am about ham radio and DX-ing.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: WS3N on January 10, 2013, 10:23:32 AM
Yes, but Ruth hit 60 in only 154 games.  ;D



I don't have to check the cluster to know that there's not much on.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N4OGW on January 10, 2013, 10:58:57 AM

Hams that go to that bother with 100 foot towers are WAY more OCD than I am about ham radio and DX-ing.

I thought that too before I put up my 100 foot tower (and 66 foot tower) :) Actually, if you have the space, putting up
a 100 foot guyed tower is not hard. And you will find out that maintaining the tower and yagi takes MUCH less time
than say maintaining a collection of wire antennas in trees (what I did before and still partially do).

I did work BS7H on 40, 20, and 15 from here (MS). The 15m CW qso was really lucky and I still don't understand what the
propagation mechanism was. Remember in 2007 solar conditions were way down. Listening to the stations they worked on 15,
they were all in this general part of the country (MS, AR, LA, east TX). Normally if 15m is open to Asia, the W6's will crush us.
But I didn't hear them work any west coast stations- at first I thought it had to be a pirate. The beam heading seemed to be the
normal short-path direction.

Tor
N4OGW/5


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AA6YQ on January 10, 2013, 05:08:49 PM
Your question was "which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7?" If your goal is to work BS7, that's the wrong question. As I posted in another thread, "you can't work what you can't hear".
I'd want the tribander.

     73,
 Dave, AA6YQ

Dave, I understand what you have said above, and I basically have to agree with you, BUT..... for what its worth, right or wrong, my question was
"which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7?" (should have said, which station will produce the loudest signal at BS7?)


Which antenna will produce the loudest signal at BS7 will depend on propagation. When 10m is open, 50w can produce an S9 signal half way around the world. When the solar flux is in the toilet, not even 20m will be open, but a 40m grey line path can produce loud signals, with the 1500w compensating for absorption.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AA6YQ on January 10, 2013, 05:10:43 PM
Hams that go to that bother with 100 foot towers are WAY more OCD than I am about ham radio and DX-ing.

"Nothing so much needs reforming as other people's habits"

   Mark Twain.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 10, 2013, 06:44:53 PM
Hams that go to that bother with 100 foot towers are WAY more OCD than I am about ham radio and DX-ing.

"Nothing so much needs reforming as other people's habits"

   Mark Twain.

another way of saying "jealousy", and you better believe I'm jealous of a 100 AND a 60 foot tower.

Good one!


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W4VKU on January 10, 2013, 06:55:06 PM
I have tried everything from verticals with tuned radials, G5RV and Yagi's.
Like was mentioned, putting up a Rohn 25 for 100ft is no big deal, provided one has the real estate.

Hands down, the answer is a yagi. I would do the vertical for 80/160m. The yagi simply helps
hear better and esp in the keys with nothing around and a saltwater path in all directions, it would do
quiet well. The salt water effect diminishes after several hundred yards inland i think, well of course
unless there is a marsh nearby. So may not help the vertical much. A phased vertical will be good. But
a 3 element yagi will beat in forward gain as compared to a 4-sq. Atleast thats my observation
with a 2Ele yagi on 40m and a 4-sq. There is atleast 1 Sunit difference at the Dx location. In a pileup,
this will make a difference. Moreover, the 4-Sq is not completely steerable like a yagi. The yagi is less noisy.

The issue with the vertical is on the Rx. It ain't as good as the yagi. I won't even debate this issue.
I do an A/B/C switch here between the G5RV, Yagi and vertical on 40m.
Krish
w4vku


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 11, 2013, 03:43:02 AM
If I had a 100' tower, I would put up a stack of two multiband yagi's or two 20M 5 element yagi's - hi hi. I even have a 4 element OWA design that is similar to Tom's design in "Array of Light" - on 24' booms. I'd stack two of those . . .

But hey, I have a stack of two 2 element yagi's on 17M for 7 dBd gain - and am very, very pleased. (Full details on my QRZ.COM page, including a pretty picture).  ;D

That only required a 55' tower, and it also works very well on 20M.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W6GX on January 11, 2013, 02:15:24 PM
My choice would be the vertical.

A yagi could possibly put out the better signal but one needs to be reminded that a vertical near salt water will provide the biggest bang for the buck.  If you have a tower then you'll know what I'm talking about.  Erecting a tower is a huge financial investment.  And when you move you lose a big part of the investment.  And there's also maintenance costs due to age/sun/wind/ice, etc.

If I'm in a position of needing BS7 the smarter move would be to borrow a friend's 100 ft. tower for that one contact.  I'll be happy with just a vertical on salt water knowing that it could work almost as well as a yagi majority of the time (provided that the vertical antenna is over salt water).

73,
Jonathan W6GX


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N4OGW on January 11, 2013, 02:19:29 PM
One comment about the OWA designs: They look great on paper, but it is mechanically hard to stack the OWA's that are designed for shorter booms. For example 6 elements on 10 on a 24 ft boom, or 6 on 15 on a 36 foot boom. What you will find is that there is usually an element very close to the center of the antenna. This makes it very hard to mount and rotate them when mounted in the middle of a tower in a stack. The long-boom monster OWA's don't have this problem.

Tor
N4OGW




Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 11, 2013, 02:42:33 PM
My choice would be the vertical.

A yagi could possibly put out the better signal but one needs to be reminded that a vertical near salt water will provide the biggest bang for the buck.  If you have a tower then you'll know what I'm talking about.  Erecting a tower is a huge financial investment.  And when you move you lose a big part of the investment.  And there's also maintenance costs due to age/sun/wind/ice, etc.


73,
Jonathan W6GX

Yep, when I left the S.C. QTH, I gave my 60 foot tower away, along with a Force 12 C-3SS which was up top,  just to get it (and the foundation) removed. The people who bought my house on Lake Marion did not want the tower and antenna OR the foundation in their yard. I also gave him my homebrew 17 meter delta loop.

73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 11, 2013, 02:58:05 PM
One comment about the OWA designs: They look great on paper, but it is mechanically hard to stack the OWA's that are designed for shorter booms. For example 6 elements on 10 on a 24 ft boom, or 6 on 15 on a 36 foot boom. What you will find is that there is usually an element very close to the center of the antenna. This makes it very hard to mount and rotate them when mounted in the middle of a tower in a stack. The long-boom monster OWA's don't have this problem.

Tor
N4OGW




Interesting - thanks for the input. I guess stacking two over two is a simple and effective solution. As for a yagi on a tower I have a very simple answer.

DON'T BOTHER WITH A TOWER THAT REQUIRES A CONCRETE FOOTING  ;D

I have a 55' military mast that I rotate from the bottom and brought it home in the back of my BMW X3. See my QRZ.COM page for details.

I knew that I was going to retire in 10 - 12 years, and the AB-952 is going with me when I move.

The most gain comes from the first 2 elements anyway 4.1 dBd, and at my QTH, F/B wasn't nearly as important as forward gain. In fact, even 1 4 element OWA with a 24' boom on 20M was too top heavy for my mast system - so I went with the 2X2 stack.

I have modeled Moxon's with aluminum elements and wire on the sides, and might try that some day - just to get more F/B. It was just mechanically much easier to build 2 2 element yagi's.

I would not take a vertical over an AB-952 with a 2X2 stack. I had a 43' vertical here and it paled in comparison to the stack - or even just one 2 element yagi.

Gene said the vertical wasn't right on the water - and you don't have to go very far away from the water's edge to lose that advantage.

Now - a vertical on a dock over Tomales Bay would be a different story - then I would take a vertical over a tower any day.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: WD4ELG on January 11, 2013, 03:13:13 PM
Rich, who makes that mast of yours?


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: KY6R on January 11, 2013, 03:21:46 PM
Rich, who makes that mast of yours?

They are military surplus, and the models that are most popular are:

AB-952 - 4" diameter double walled aluminum in 5' interlocking sections
AB-577 - 5" diameter  "
AB-621 - 6" diameter  "

http://www.ontariosurplus.com/masts.htm

Sells them. They go very fast. They are getting expensive though - because they are so popular - but every now and then someone unloads one for cheap. Check the ham classifieds too.

I found mine - a 55' mast / tower for $800, which is a real steal - in "as new" condition. I found three floating guy rings and have it guyed in three places and I created a "plumbers special" way to lag bolt it to the side of my deck.

I easily rotate the stack by hand by walking 20 paces out of my shack - onto my deck, and voila! I'm "aimed".

Before the stack, I had an A3S up 45' with the G450 rotator on top of the mast - and it was fine through 50 mph winds. We hardly ever get wind and even our rain is only 21" a year - so its a very mild climate here. So - there is a limit to these.

I bought a C3S for $150, and some day might put it up instead of the stack, but because the stack works very well on 20M, and "good enough" on all bands higher than 17M - I'm not sure.

I like having one band where I have a killer signal . . . .


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: K0AP on January 11, 2013, 03:36:06 PM
In my opinion, on the HF frequencies 3el beam at 60' (let alone 100') over salt water will beat by quite significant margin your vertical over salt water almost any time/any day. The verticals over salt water work great but are no match to a 3el beam at 60' (let alone 100'), over salt water. Why do you think all these big contest stations in the Caribbean put all these towers and beam antennas. If this was the case, they would have easily go with verticals and save the money. If you want to be competitive and increase your chances of getting into the log of that rare DX and if money is not a problem, then tower and beam is the way to go for HF. In most cases people will use vertical by the beach because they cannot afford tower/beam, they have restrictions or they are on vacation and the QTH on the beach is not their permanent residency. Again, if you want to compete in the pileups and decrease your chances of not working that rare DX, then tower and beam should be essential part of your HAM shack.

73 Dragan K0AP


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N5UD on January 16, 2013, 10:54:07 AM
Gene, did you get a satisfactory answer ?

I would have to say the real factor is MUF, SFI. Maybe time of year. If we are talking SFI 70. Then 30M and 40M
might be the only chance. Then the 1500 watts with the vertical is the winner. I would bet even with a higher MUF, the vertical can make the QSO
on those bands.

However on higher than 20M, a yagi beats the pants off my mobile vertical. High power sure makes a difference too. Having the ability to hear equally
poor in all directions, I hear a lot pile up callers. Many times it seems the caller can not really hear the DX as the DX gives a report 3-5 times !

To be a bit fair, even at times I will miss a report due to QSB or intentional QRM. But to miss multiple times, it just doesn't happen.

Back when I had all the big gun stuff, I could work anything I could hear. I also could hear more than most. I only had a pair of 3-500s for the amp. This included 40 meter CW.
4+ element quad at 90 feet. The boom was extended to full 40M dipole. Also had 2 el 40M yagi mounted lower.

If 900 watts could do it, then today's 1500 watts sure should. 

Now up to about 280 DXCC mobile from Texas in 2 years. Sure hard to come by a new one now.
Still tough breaking east coast for HV and SV/A.

73 Tony N5UD


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: AF3Y on January 16, 2013, 02:23:56 PM
Sure, Tony.  They all were satisfactory, and most were somewhat informative, which was what I expected with an "Open-Ended" Question/post like that.

An interesting bunch of answers, and I appreciate them all. This group is full of some pretty sharp guys. Most of them put me to shame when it comes to antenna knowledge. I have just always put something in the air, and if it works, I left it up. If it did not work well, I took it down.
Even today, with only the vertical, it seems that "if I can hear em, I can work em". Obviously my vertical has rx faults, noisy and no ability to null out unwanted signals. But, I CAN tell you, it outdoes my friend's rotatable tri-band dipole at 35'.

The Force 12 C-3SS is/was the only yagi type antenna I have ever used. I also had the 6BTV and a homebrew 17 meter delta loop. All of these were at the S.C. QTH. I honestly did not do much better with my "mini antenna farm" there, than I have done here with only the 31' wire vertical. No other differences either, as I had QRO in S.C. as well. Plus, I was on a couple acres on Lake Marion, so very little QRN as compared to here in Florida. I think my DXCC count was around 295 when I moved here in Dec of 2010, so I have worked abound 17 ATNOs in a couple years. (Obviously better conditions, plus the numerous well-run expeditions have made that possible.) I wish I could stick a delta loop out behind the house. The one I had in SC really worked well!

73, Gene AF3Y


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N5UD on January 16, 2013, 05:51:32 PM
Sure, Tony.  They all were satisfactory, and most were somewhat informative, which was what I expected with an "Open-Ended" Question/post like that.

An interesting bunch of answers, and I appreciate them all. This group is full of some pretty sharp guys. Most of them put me to shame when it comes to antenna knowledge. I have just always put something in the air, and if it works, I left it up. If it did not work well, I took it down.
Even today, with only the vertical, it seems that "if I can hear em, I can work em". Obviously my vertical has rx faults, noisy and no ability to null out unwanted signals. But, I CAN tell you, it outdoes my friend's rotatable tri-band dipole at 35'.

The Force 12 C-3SS is/was the only yagi type antenna I have ever used. I also had the 6BTV and a homebrew 17 meter delta loop. All of these were at the S.C. QTH. I honestly did not do much better with my "mini antenna farm" there, than I have done here with only the 31' wire vertical. No other differences either, as I had QRO in S.C. as well. Plus, I was on a couple acres on Lake Marion, so very little QRN as compared to here in Florida. I think my DXCC count was around 295 when I moved here in Dec of 2010, so I have worked abound 17 ATNOs in a couple years. (Obviously better conditions, plus the numerous well-run expeditions have made that possible.) I wish I could stick a delta loop out behind the house. The one I had in SC really worked well!

73, Gene AF3Y

Doing as well or better than in SC. Right on better band conditions.
However I believe being in Florida helps too.
I was just down on Miss Gulf coast mobile.
Definitely better signals there than here in Texas. I notice it every time I go mobile down there.
40M mobile one evening: EY EX, ......   RX6LG and ER4DX both 59+ 20 or more and got on first call mobile.

73 and GL Tony


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: WA6MJE on January 17, 2013, 07:44:38 PM
I am stuck in HOA hell, and am limited to verticals, or attic antennas.  BUT, I recently bought a "vacation" condominium on the beach in Port Hueneme California, the first beach community north of Malibu.  It is also HOA hell, but I bought on the third (top) floor and have a patio with no physical restrictions stopping me from putting a 32 foot portable tripod vertical and elevated radials on 40 meters that goes out at night and back during the day.  Reading this thread intrigues me about the value of being near salt water.

When I started experimenting with hidden antennas I bought Buddipole equipment and there is a companion text that has a great deal dedicated to the value of a vertical next to salt water.  But, as I read more, the understanding I got was that I would have to actually be on the sand, within a few feet of salt water.  My condo is about 500 to 1000 feet from the surf.  But that is clear and unobstructed except for a couple of trees, and a public parking lot. So I gave up the idea, and chase DX from my more inland home.

I can work Europe, Japan and Russia, the typical easy stuff, but a lot of what I see in hamspots I cannot hear on JT-65.  But, I note that other hams in 6 land can hear what I cannot.  I am trying to focus on 40 M at night where I can put up a full size elevated vertical.  To hear better, I just bought a KX3 to replace my Icom 7000.  I work mostly JT-65 and they frown on more than 50 watts.  So I hesitate to just throw more power at improving my DX capability.  But as soon as Elecraft offers the 100W amp for the KX3 I will buy it as I am not a QRP purist.

So my question is this.  The comments above talk about salt water being useless at some distance from the station, but I would be interested in know how far.  I have not tried bringing my gear there, but since it is all portable, it would not be a big deal if it would be worth the effort.  I am going to be improving my antenna situation, and if that does not do the trick for me, I am running out of options other than to work portable from my condo, or I am even considering throwing the gear in my car, and just heading for a site on Pacific Coast Highway where I can park at the waters edge, throw up a full size vertical with elevated radials, and work until my batteries run out.

Or actually, there is a fishing pier directly across the street from my condo, and I have thought about bringing the KX3 and a Buddipole vertical out to the end of the pier which would put me about 1000 feet out over the salt water facing south, and using the vertical in a vertical dipole configuration dropping the counterpoise over the side of the pier toward the water. 

My preference is to stay in my home or my condo where I can spend more time on the air than I would do if I were outside, and got cold, hot or hungry.  But, when I see DX that I miss I become a desperate man willing to suffer :)   

It is fun nonetheless making slight improvements to my station over time, and slowly but surely my capability is improving. 


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: N5UD on January 18, 2013, 05:32:56 PM
As I understand it, to get the gain effect of vertical on salt water. You have to mount the antenna within 1/2 wavelength of the water, or naturally on it.

I operate mobile in one moderate hot spot at times. It is on a hill above a large fresh water lake. About 200 yards from the shoreline. I get a clear shot to the west across the lake, and to some hills about 5 miles away. I get a 10-15 mile clear shot north northwest down the lake. This location does make some difference in working DX for me. No gain I am sure. Also a rare quiet spot. Usually free of power line noise.

I will go up there fishing ! Some times I catch more DX.

73 Tony N5UD





Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: K1DA on January 24, 2013, 11:27:42 AM
I'd take a  100 feet of tower and turn it into a 4 square, then see what's what.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: ZENKI on January 25, 2013, 05:07:26 AM
Florida  is one of the best locations in the USA to put a station. When I traveled around on DX'peditions  in Africa and the Pacific, I could always hear stations in Florida when there were
no other stations on the band. Theres also a lot of retired hams down in Florida so you hear them  on the air at all sorts of odd hours when the rest of the USA is sleeping.

If Ham A is  right on the salt water or in a salt swamp he is going to keep up with the 100 ft tower and probably hear and work DX that nobody else is going  hear.
That thing called the brewster angle is what does it if you near saltwater and its  worth having. The real problem is that anything near saltwater is expensive in Florida. Then you have all
that noise from all those apartments and the vertical would be the worst antenna to have.  If you cant hear them you cant work em!

Then the next problem is that unless the ham is on a small saltwater island his signal  will only be good beaming over seawater.

If the Ham in FL is stuck way back from the coast and over poor ground conductivity the vertical is going to be owned by the 100ft tower.

I would take the 100ft tower because you can put together a nice single tower station using either Optibeams, Ultrabeams or Steppirs. For that matter a hexbeam up 100 ft would beat most stations in the city with lower beams

I used to work a station on the Westcoast in Suncity. I think he is a silent key now. He was in a retirement community. He had 3 Butternut vertical  that installed as a phased vertical array. He had 60 radials on each antenna.
He had an impressive signal on all bands from 40 through to 10 meters. Where he was the ground conductivity was not very good. His main competition on 40 meters was using the cushcraft 2 element beams. If I blind folded
you and you just listened you could not tell who was using the beam or the butternut phase verticals.  His phase verticals worked very well. He used a variable phasing system that was published in one of the ARRL compendium books.
So verticals installed properly can be competitive, just avoid using these no ground all band rubbish verticals.



OK, here is your math problem for today.  

Ham "A" is in Key West, Florida, running 1500 Watts to a 1/4 wave vertical with 36 radials of varying lengths.

Ham "B" is down the street from "A", a few hundred yards. He is running barefoot, 200 watts to a Force 12 Tri-bander up around 100 feet.

Assuming both these guys want to work BS7, WHICH One is going to put the most power in the ears of the ISOTROPE on Scarborough?

Obviously, assume all prop, condx, etc. to be equal for the comparison.


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: NK7Z on January 25, 2013, 06:08:34 AM
So verticals installed properly can be competitive, just avoid using these no ground all band rubbish verticals.
That is unless your vertical is a vertical dipole...  Then you do not need the extensive radial field...

73's,


Title: RE: Vertical & 1.5Kw VS Tribander & 200w
Post by: W1VT on January 25, 2013, 07:48:16 AM
How about a receive only phased array to solve the vertical's receive issues?

I'd go with the Yagi myself, but if I was stuck with the vertical on transmit, I'd augment it with receive antennas, as I'm doing with 80M right now.  Got a short terminated beverage up in the snow, now working on phased short verticals with JFET preamps.

Zack W1VT