L.B., Please pardon this intrusion, but I'm hoping you can provide some insight. I have been trying to decide which easy-to-deploy antenna is better for me to pack. I already have a 1/4 wavelength 80m wire with matching counterpoise wire. Bob Kellogg recommends something he calls the W3EDP antenna, which consists of an 85' wire with a 17' counterpoise. If one of these proves workable, I'll be using my MFJ-901B to tune it on all bands 80-10. While I already have 20m and 40m portable dipoles, these will be marginally more difficult to install than a single wire, and require that I carry feedline. The driving force behind this decision is a two week trip to Mediterranean France this coming June, where I'll want the easiest-to-install-and-use antenna I can get, because if it's too much trouble, I'll find myself sightseeing and enjoying the local culture instead. I would appreciate any thoughts you have on both of these antennas, concerning ease-of-loading, DX performance, etc. If you have time to model them, I will be in your debt. tnx, es 72, Eric From cebik@utkux.utcc.utk.edu Fri Dec 6 21:37:41 1996 Received: from utkux4.utcc.utk.edu (UTKUX4.UTCC.UTK.EDU [128.169.76.11]) by oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA06787 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 21:37:40 -0500 (EST) X-Received-x: from utkux4.utcc.utk.edu (UTKUX4.UTCC.UTK.EDU [128.169.76.11]) by oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id VAA06787 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 21:37:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost by utkux4.utcc.utk.edu with SMTP (SMI-8.6/2.7c-UTK) id CAA17116; Sat, 7 Dec 1996 02:37:36 GMT Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 21:37:35 -0500 (EST) From: "L. B. Cebik" X-Sender: cebik@utkux4.utcc.utk.edu To: William McFadden Subject: Re: W3EDP vs 65' wire In-Reply-To: <199612061409.JAA12155@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Eric, Let me play with them for a couple of days and will see if anything turns up. In the mean time, do not discard the one you know works. How do you lay out the counterpoise, height above ground, etc.? Also, is the antenna element wire going to be horizontal, sloping, etc.? LB From cebik@utkux.utcc.utk.edu Mon Dec 9 07:45:06 1996 Received: from utkux4.utcc.utk.edu (UTKUX4.UTCC.UTK.EDU [128.169.76.11]) by oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA00819 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 07:45:04 -0500 (EST) X-Received-x: from utkux4.utcc.utk.edu (UTKUX4.UTCC.UTK.EDU [128.169.76.11]) by oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (8.7.6/8.7.1) with SMTP id HAA00819 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 07:45:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost by utkux4.utcc.utk.edu with SMTP (SMI-8.6/2.7c-UTK) id MAA07101; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 12:44:40 GMT Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 07:44:40 -0500 (EST) From: "L. B. Cebik" X-Sender: cebik@utkux4.utcc.utk.edu To: William McFadden Subject: Re: W3EDP vs 65' wire In-Reply-To: <199612070313.WAA07525@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Eric, I modeled both the 85' and 65' slopers with a counterpoise of 17'. I put the counterpoise 1' off the ground so as not to violate the modeling rules. I sloped both versions up to about 35' Here is what I got. 85+17: overall gain, including low angle (20 degrees) is better with the counterpoise under the antenna rather than away from it. The impedance ran from 60 ohms R (C = under) to 90 ohms R (C = away) both with over -600 ohms reactance. The low angle gain is less than 0 dBi at 20 degrees. Essentially, this is a high angle antenna. 65+17: This combination does not care if the counterpoise is under or away from the antenna. Gain is about the same both high and low. Low angle gain at 20 degrees is about a full dB better than the 85' version, but still under 0 dBi (about the same as a 1/4 vertical without a groundplane). However, major radiation is still high angle. Feedpoint Z is about 500 -j1600 for both versions, perhaps a bit harder for the tuner to handle. These antennas will make contacts, but I would class them in the emergency field antenna category. A full size dipole for any band will outperform them, if one is feasible (assuming the 35' height used for the top of the sloper as the dipole height), and it is likely to beceasier to match. If fed with 300 or 450 ohm parallel line, it will work on bands above the fundamental. Hope this information is useful to you. -73- LB, W4RNL