If you've been licensed long enough to belong to the QCWA, then
you probably got your start in Amateur radio via the Novice Class
license.

What was your first antenna? If you were licensed in the '50s or
earlier, probably a doublet antenna, open wire line and a tuner.

But, from the mid '60s and later, you were probably sold a bill of
goods commonly referred to as a vertical antenna. You follow the
instructions, measure everything twice borrow an swr meter from
your Elmer, it's tuned up perfectly, but.... It just doesn't work.

How many prospective hams did we lose to this marketing trick?

I know what you're thinking, "Marketing trick?" Yes, consider the
salesman at the local radio store. The focus in sales is to maximize
profits. Which is going to contribute to the bottom line better. 65'
of #14 wire and 3 egg insulators or a 4-band trapped vertical, a
40' push up mast, 130' of #14 wire and 8 egg insulators?

Guess what folks, they're still at it pushing vertical antennas that
don't work.

"But I don't have room for a dipole"
Then you don't have room for radials either and your vertical won't
work.

"But so and so's DXpedition uses verticals."
Did you notice they were on the beach 3' from the ocean?

"I can hear all over the world, but I need an amplifier to transmit."
People get DXCC running 5 watts, there's something wrong with
your antenna if it takes 1 KW to be heard.

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi

On Sat, 9 Mar 2013 10:29:26 EST, Foxs Mercantile
wrote:

"But I don't have room for a dipole"
Then you don't have room for radials either and your vertical won't
work.

Tell that to my Cushcraft R-8 vertical, which after I sold it, was
well on the way to filling in the DXCC gaps of the new owner.

The only thing about it that didn't "work" was it wasn't a good NVIS
antenna for 80 metres, and that's where a wire 8 feet above ground
worked really well. Then again, Cushcraft specs the antenna as 40
metres and down.

The reason that I sold it is that there are limits on what I can put
up in the rental apartment complex here. Right now I only have 2 v/u
j-poles, 2 mag-mount 2-metre ground planes, a helical amplified HF RX
antenna made for SWL-ing, a sort-of-j-pole for vhf/uhf monitoring, and
a 30-foot "stealth" wire from a matching net on the porch out to the
trees.

Where there's a will there's a way.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

On Sat, 9 Mar 2013 10:29:26 EST, Foxs Mercantile
wrote:

"I can hear all over the world, but I need an amplifier to transmit."
People get DXCC running 5 watts, there's something wrong with
your antenna if it takes 1 KW to be heard.

When was the last time that you worked DX or a contest up against the
Kilowatt Kings? I refrain from both unless I'm operating a club
station with output power approaching the four digit range.

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

In article Foxs Mercantile writes:
If you've been licensed long enough to belong to the QCWA, then
you probably got your start in Amateur radio via the Novice Class
license.

What was your first antenna? If you were licensed in the '50s or
earlier, probably a doublet antenna, open wire line and a tuner.

Inverted V.

But, from the mid '60s and later, you were probably sold a bill of
goods commonly referred to as a vertical antenna. You follow the
instructions, measure everything twice borrow an swr meter from
your Elmer, it's tuned up perfectly, but.... It just doesn't work.

How many prospective hams did we lose to this marketing trick?

How many had it work, and be quietly successful in space where there
wasn't the opportunity to string a dipole at a reasonable elevation?


Guess what folks, they're still at it pushing vertical antennas that
don't work.

"But I don't have room for a dipole"
Then you don't have room for radials either and your vertical won't
work.

Well, not quite true. One may not have room at elevation because
supports for the ends of the dipole are impossible. The dipole may
be impossible due to proximity to power lines, or other obstructions.

The ground system of a vertical can be hidden on or slightly under
the apparent surface. Since it doesn't need to be supported by end
supports, it can be installed in lots of places where a dipole is not
possible.


"I can hear all over the world, but I need an amplifier to transmit."
People get DXCC running 5 watts, there's something wrong with
your antenna if it takes 1 KW to be heard.

This part is true. If your antenna provides 20 dB loss compared to
another, your receiver won't generally hear the difference on HF (which
is atmospheric noise limited). The S-meter will not go as far over,
and the AGC will adjust, but the signal/noise of the received stations
will be pretty much the same.

On transmit, however, your 100 watts would put out a signal equivalent
to 1 watt using the "good" antenna. At the far end, you are 20 dB lower
than the other guys. If they were delivering a 15 dB s/n, yours will be
-5 dB --- you won't be heard.

While I don't chase DX, once I learned this lesson, I was able to work
it with 5 watts or less.


Alan
wa6azp

The funny thing about all of this was Sputnik and the space race and the Geophysical year 1957 - 1958 when our government decided to get amateur radio involved.

There were no cell phones, there were no microwave ovens, there were no cordless telephones, there were no internet or personal computers.

Heck - Amateur Radio was about as high tech as you could get!

They got a lot of kids involved - remember old Gramp's Primos - W2OY and how he would tear on the new hams.
NO LIDS, NO KIDS, NO SPACE CADETS, NO BICYCLE RIDERS, NOO WET BOTTOMS - (WB IN YOUR CALL SIGN), because to him that ment you were a johnny come lately ( new ham) and not a real ham! And he didn't want you stinking up his airwaves! Especially where he operated!

AM was king and if you didn't have a big station or could work CW, you couldn't run with the big dogs and had to sit on the porch and listen.

People had to BUILD their own equipment back then, because either you didn't have enough money to buy what you wanted or you didn't have the room to put up what you needed and made due with what you had.

Any person that moves into a place that does not allow antenna's, is not a HAM! That is as moronic as anything that I have ever heard!

Don't come on here and tell me how you have been a ham for 50 years and that makes you something.
Tell me about how many emergencies you helped with?
The flood of 76', the tornado of 85' the big snow of '78....

Where were you when I was here on the air, doing my part, you were probably at work and or maybe rag chewing at night on 160 meters with your buddies. Were you a real ham? or just a ham in license only!

I have seen them come and I have seen them go....

On 3/9/2013 10:29 AM, Foxs Mercantile wrote:
If you've been licensed long enough to belong to the QCWA, then
you probably got your start in Amateur radio via the Novice Class
license.

What was your first antenna? If you were licensed in the '50s or
earlier, probably a doublet antenna, open wire line and a tuner.

But, from the mid '60s and later, you were probably sold a bill of
goods commonly referred to as a vertical antenna. You follow the
instructions, measure everything twice borrow an swr meter from
your Elmer, it's tuned up perfectly, but.... It just doesn't work.

How many prospective hams did we lose to this marketing trick?

I know what you're thinking, "Marketing trick?" Yes, consider the
salesman at the local radio store. The focus in sales is to maximize
profits. Which is going to contribute to the bottom line better. 65'
of #14 wire and 3 egg insulators or a 4-band trapped vertical, a
40' push up mast, 130' of #14 wire and 8 egg insulators?

Guess what folks, they're still at it pushing vertical antennas that
don't work.

"But I don't have room for a dipole"
Then you don't have room for radials either and your vertical won't
work.

"But so and so's DXpedition uses verticals."
Did you notice they were on the beach 3' from the ocean?

"I can hear all over the world, but I need an amplifier to transmit."
People get DXCC running 5 watts, there's something wrong with
your antenna if it takes 1 KW to be heard.

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi


Yup, I "fell" for the hype. Didn't quite get WAS (actually didn't try
that hard - I prefer rag chewing). But I worked Australia with 100W SSB
from Iowa, as well as much of Europe and South America with my Hy-Gain
18-AVQ. Spent a fair amount of time on the 75M Iowa SSB Net, also.

I wonder how I could have done if I had added some radials.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

In Foxs Mercantile
wrote:

But, from the mid '60s and later, you were probably sold a bill of
goods commonly referred to as a vertical antenna. You follow the
instructions, measure everything twice borrow an swr meter from
your Elmer, it's tuned up perfectly, but.... It just doesn't work.

Using my non-functioning verticals, never more than 100 Watts, and a
very desultory operating style, I've managed to do WAS a few times over
and have 235 countries confirmed.

What are you selling?

--
Bert Hyman W0RSB St. Paul, MN

On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 3:37:51 PM UTC-4, Bert wrote:


Using my non-functioning verticals, never more than 100 Watts, and a

very desultory operating style, I've managed to do WAS a few times over

and have 235 countries confirmed.


Once I was challenged by Roy Lewallen to do some quantative testing on ante
nnas during a discussion on the two types of antennas.

In my experiment, I made a switching arrangement between a Butternut HF6V v
ertical, ground mounted, with somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 buried ra
dials, and a 96 foot doublet at 50 feet.

Ahead of the switching arrangement was a pad, so that I could adjust the me
ter reading by switching attenuation in or out. Obviously I did not want
to transmit through the pad.

Most of my experiment consisted of listening to other hams, and switching b
ack and forth between the two antennas, then adjusting the signal strenght
until they were the same.

The results:

Some times the Vertical was best.
Some times the Horizontal dipole was best.
Some times which antenna perfomed best changed during the middle of a QSO.

Overall, the vertical was a little louder on recieve, and generally a littl
e weaker on transmit, although there were two things affecting this. And su
rprisingly enough, it wasn't always the take off angle. Some times it was I
MO signal polarity, but that's another experiment. The changes in signal st
rength that occured mid QSO were often noted by the people I was recieving
, and they usually attributed it to the band changing. I think it might hav
ebeen band changing and a shift in th epolarity of the recieved signal.

The other issue is that while it is common knowledge that a Vertical has a
lower take off angle and therefore "better" for DX, it must be remembered t
hat that lower take off angle needs to have more signal strength heading ou
t at that angle than an antenna with a more circular pattern has. And they
do not always.


So my conclusions about which is best between a vertical and dipole antenna
is a resounding and very convinced, Yes!

I believe that each has moments when it works better than the other, based
on Band, your QSO's distance from your station, and sometimes propagation e
ffects.

Most verticals need radials, and the radials must be installed properly 4 r
adials are not good practice. My 20 some radial setup was not ideal, but in
to diminishing returns. Since I installed them over time, I was able to not
ice that the signals were not getting any louder, a rough and ready test of
efficiency.

But verticals do work.

wrote

Most verticals need radials, and the radials must be installed properly 4
r
adials are not good practice. My 20 some radial setup was not ideal, but
in
to diminishing returns. Since I installed them over time, I was able to
not
ice that the signals were not getting any louder, a rough and ready test
of
efficiency.

But verticals do work.

Yes, they do, when properly installed and configured --- according to all I
have read. ;-) (I have never used a vertical on HF.) Wasn't it Jerry
Sevick who years ago experimented with raised vs. buried radials? My
recollection (not to be trusted) is that four *elevated* 1/4 wave radials
work well. But if you cannot elevate them and must lay them on the ground or
bury them, then you need... a lot of them. I forget if he used 96 or 120 of
them.... Of course there are diminishing returns, and Michael's 20-radial
arrangement should be plenty adequate - as he demonstrated. In any case, you
just have to get the near field to become highly conductive for a vertical
to perform as it should.

Howard N7SO

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:09:26 EDT, "Howard Lester"
wrote:

My
recollection (not to be trusted) is that four *elevated* 1/4 wave radials
work well.

2-meter vertical antennas intended for use on the top of masts use
only 3 radials, and they work well. Four elevated radials also should
work.

Dick Grady, AC7EL