[Antennas] 160 Inverted L 160 Radials

Mon Nov 14 20:37:20 EST 2005

When it comes to radials, more is better....If you cant get length, go for
mass or # or bend them back if you can or combo! Elevated radials are
better...you only need four radials compared to buried ones. Check Cebik's
web site...his take on 160mtr verticals and radials is great reading. I did
run an 80m Inverted L and only had a 6x6ft sheet of copper and a few radials
on it...and it worked great....
http://www.cebik.com/fdim/fdim10.pdf is an excellent article on Inverted Ls
Make the overall length 1/4wl and you should be able to match it to 50ohms
fine.
Cebik's main web site is www.cebik.com The primary link you want is
http://www.cebik.com/radio.html Scroll down and look for the articles on
the ground planes, etc. Here is an article on "your 1st 160m antenna" and it
discusses the Inverted L, etc in great detail:
http://www.cebik.com/wire/160new.html
Good luck and be looking for ya on Top Band :)
Chris
WB5ITT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: antennas-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:antennas-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of W3OA
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 7:06 PM
> To: antennas at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Antennas] 160 Inverted L 160 Radials
>> I'd like to put up a 160 antenna. I'm thinking of an inverted 
> L. The vertical section would be 54 feet and I have room for 
> a horizontal section up to 157 feet long. I am concerned 
> about the radial field - it's approximately square, about 90 
> feet on each side. Is this hopelessly small? Should I try 
> something like KE4UYP suggests at 
> http://members.tripod.com/~KE4UYP/80m_160m_Antenna.html? I'd 
> like to hear of peoples success, or failure, trying his design.
>> Thanks for any suggestions - Dick, W3OA