I am thinking of getting a beam.
I am limited to how high I can go.
My antron 99 is 45 ft.
Whats the lowest a beam can be?
Thanks
I am limited to how high I can go.
My antron 99 is 45 ft.
Whats the lowest a beam can be?
Thanks
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
Three element beam
- Thread starter Oldtimer
- Start date
High enough to allow it to turn. Of course the higher the better. Lower will also contribute more to TVI with the neighbors and such.
A general rule of thumb is a 1/2 wave of your operating frequency, which would be around 16-18 feet.
The 'best' height for any antenna is whatever you can manage to have. Too low is when you clothes-line yourself or have to be careful not to poke an eye out, or run over it with the lawnmower. Too high is when you can't see the @#$ thing anymore. Everything in between is usually good for whatever particular situation you happen to be in. Could it be 'better'? Probably, maybe, if you can manage it.
The other posts are right. Something on the order of 1/2 wave length is good because it lessens the variability of electrical things changing. Less height will work, but expect things not to be exactly 'right' all the time, sort of.
Also think about what else using a beam usually means. You're going to have a sort of 'tunnel vision' thing, won't 'see' all around you anymore. Gotta have some means of directing that 'tunnel vision', rotor. Gotta have something to hold all that stuff and not fall down, bend over a lot. Typically, it's all that 'other' stuff that makes a beam not so simple an idea.
Kind'a got away from the height thingy, but still something to think about.
- 'Doc
The other posts are right. Something on the order of 1/2 wave length is good because it lessens the variability of electrical things changing. Less height will work, but expect things not to be exactly 'right' all the time, sort of.
Also think about what else using a beam usually means. You're going to have a sort of 'tunnel vision' thing, won't 'see' all around you anymore. Gotta have some means of directing that 'tunnel vision', rotor. Gotta have something to hold all that stuff and not fall down, bend over a lot. Typically, it's all that 'other' stuff that makes a beam not so simple an idea.
Kind'a got away from the height thingy, but still something to think about.
- 'Doc
I like to run my antennas (at least) one full wave length high. For 11 meter band it should be 11 meters high or 36.1 feet to the antenna base. For ten meters - 32.8 feet, etc. I don't run 20, 40, 80 meters so the hams in the forum will have to recommend there
- 399
- 399
Last edited:
With communication being line of sight the higher the better. I have used a 3 element beam on a 30' push up pole years ago and it performed well. Of course when it went on top of the 120' tower it did way better. Then when the M 107 took it's place things got better all over.
Rotor?? Years ago in Jackson, MS there was a guy who had a 3 element Mosley on a push up....no rotor. We always figured he went outside to turn it. One day we were passing by and saw him reach out the window with a pipe wrench and turn the pipe. Almost ran off in a ditch laughing.
My daddy always said, "Poor man has got poor ways".
Rotor?? Years ago in Jackson, MS there was a guy who had a 3 element Mosley on a push up....no rotor. We always figured he went outside to turn it. One day we were passing by and saw him reach out the window with a pipe wrench and turn the pipe. Almost ran off in a ditch laughing.
My daddy always said, "Poor man has got poor ways".
HMMMM. If it isn't line of sight.........what is it? If the higher the better is true.......then why do folks insist on saying put it at 36 feet or a multiple of that for a "wavelength"? It's either one or the other. I don't hold too much for the wavelength theory in antenna placement. Years of experience at many different heights has shown me that "higher" is better. Granted to talk skip that might not be the case but straight talking, with no skip, height will beat the other any day.
You want an outstanding 3 element beam??? Get yourself a 3 element Gizmotchy there dual polarity (vertical or horizontal polarized) so you get the best of both worlds. Gizmotchy also now owns Maco but the Gizmotchy beams are beter beams they cost a little more but like I said when I bought my Gizmotchy you get what you pay for and if you do it right the first time your only going to have to do it once. There small and still they say they out perform the Maco 4 elements. That all has to do with the technical jargain element spacing ETC. Anyways its something to think about if you would like a sales reps number number PM me and I can help you out with that. Remember your going to get a better deal when not factory direct in most cases.
HF isn't ~AS~ line of sight as higher frequencies are. The lower you go in frequency the less line of sight. That's because lower frequencies tend to bounce off the various ionospheric layers much better than the really higher frequencies do (sort of just go straight through instead of 'bouncing', or 'skipping'<--look familiar??).
Higher antennas tend to be 'better' than lower antennas at HF because they can 'see' further (it's further to the horizon) before they start 'bending' or 'skipping' off that ionosphere layers. Just like you can see further from a high place than you can a low place. Light is a hugely higher 'frequency' than RF but still 'bends' a little, and does sort of 'skip' at times (where mirages come from, right?). What's the absolute bestest height for an HF antenna? Something like 2.5 miles. I'm still saving for that tower...
- 'Doc
Higher antennas tend to be 'better' than lower antennas at HF because they can 'see' further (it's further to the horizon) before they start 'bending' or 'skipping' off that ionosphere layers. Just like you can see further from a high place than you can a low place. Light is a hugely higher 'frequency' than RF but still 'bends' a little, and does sort of 'skip' at times (where mirages come from, right?). What's the absolute bestest height for an HF antenna? Something like 2.5 miles. I'm still saving for that tower...
- 'Doc
...Ah yes, an 'Armstrong rotor', remember them well!
Prepare for 'Picky'!
HF isn't line of sight. That's good, otherwise it wouldn't work very far.
- 'Doc
Man,am i ever glad HF is NOT line of sight. I live in a hollow and when I stand on my lawn I have to look up the road to my left and up the road to my right. I also have to look up over the hill in front of me and after looking a little bit down behind me I have to look waaaay up again.
For strictly local talking,no skip, the higher you can get an antenna the better. For talking skip it all depends on the distance and a lot of other things you cannot control. Differant heights respond better to differant skip distances so unless you have a really tall tower with your antennas on an elevator to control the heights or have multiple antennas at differant heights just go with the highest you can safely get it. Don't worry if it isn't high enough. They never are.