Re: Portable vertical antenna suggestions
|
Yes. You are right about most of it. Especially C.
?I had built a mast holder that needed 3 tent stakes pounded into the ground. This worked for a few?POTA activations.
Then I got to ground that wouldn't keep the tent stakes in the ground. So much for that. So. I brought my heavy duty tripod.?
That worked great until I went to Deer Island with the wind blowing. I finally got it to stay up by digging holes to set two of the legs into the ground as far down as I could get them and setting the mast at a 45 degree angle against the wind.
Some parks I've been to, frowns mightily upon antenna lines in trees.
So my next POTA will be with ham sticks on a magmount on top of my car. Is it the best? No FAR from it? Will it work to get my 10? Probably.
One does what one can.
I just don't like to spend a lot of money, as a retired person, there's not a lot of that going around.
Jerry WF5W?
Hi Dan,
Your posts bring up a couple of factors that I see shaping portable operator's preference for antennas:
A. Ease of setup/take-down/transport. K4SWL has taken this to an art form! But it is dependent upon C below.
EFHW antennas are easy to unwind/wind but require getting either onto a mast, post or tree. A mast requires a mount of some type. A ground stake requires a permeable turf and permission to do so. (Some parks don¡¯t allow this.) A tree requires either a low branch or a way to get a rope up higher. A post will usually be a lower mount but there are exceptions.
I use either a tennis ball launcher or a cheap patio umbrella stand ($30 @ Academy Sports). Either is extra weight but no park official has refused the umbrella stand.
Ground mounted verticals require some mount although some are easy (e.g. Wolf River Coils tripod). Not very good efficiency with radials although Salty Walt (YouTube) uses a fiberglass mast for several verticals not requiring radials ¡ but he¡¯s often at the Atlantic sea water radial with one wire on a floater.
B. Effectiveness on the choice of bands. Verticals and wires vary but the doublet is indeed likely to be more efficient. With the sun spot cycle nearing its likely peak, portable ops rely on ¡°it works¡± right now and relish their success. Your doublet, among others, will be much more appealing, Dan, when the SSN is at a low point, ? I suspect a portable 20M Yagiwill have its place in POTA ops then. Mosely makes a version of their two element tribander for portable use (same price).
C. Turf and environment of the operation. This is mentioned above but it¡¯s a key issue that isn¡¯t often discussed. Having plentiful trees and the interest in getting a wire antenna up to the height above ground where the fundamental frequency is optimal makes having a launcher of some type (drone?) a useful choice. If one only wants to collect the 10 contact minimum for a POTA activation, perhaps not.
D. Antenna efficiency. Dan, my observation is that the ¡°it works¡± mantra drowns out the efficiency aspect when the SSN is high. This is just my observation from reading blogs, watching YouTube channels, listening to podcasts, and talking to other portable operators. Yep, it works provides some convincing justification of ¡°easy/cheap¡± antenna choice. Let¡¯s see how that might wane in a few years.
Good discussion here. Thanks Dan for your posts!
73,
Frank
K4FMH
---
Frank M. Howell, PhD
Ridgeland, MS
frankmhowell (at)
---
|
