Thanks for sharing this! 🙂 This is exactly the information that I am interested in most as I am forced to operate outdoors when I really want to do interesting DX (due to my living situation), so I am looking for the most efficient wire antenna for outdoor operation. By the way as of now with being into the hobby a few months only, I am trying to go for verical wire antennas which is feasible as I am using most 15/17/20 m. And as you mentioned - I would have expected the advantage of the dipole to be a bit more obvious. 73 de DL1HNR
@@CrazyChekov Until now, I was not really sure if this approach makes sense as it is merely what I as a newbie understood so far from radiation patterns and everything that goes with it, so it is good to see that you confirm my conclusion to go for a vertical for that purpose! This help me, thank you.🙂
"The directivity of end-fed antenna is very strong" In what direction? How is it different from a dipole arranged in the very same configuration? My understanding is that it is nearly exactly the same. It is the shape and placement that primarily determine directional or elevation characteristics. If the current node(s) is/are at a significant height relative to wavelength, the angle of radiation will be low and visa versa for low heights and NVIS radiation.
Proof that a dipole is a dipole, regardless of how it's fed...
I've found end fed half wave works very well, especially low to ground NVIS propagation.
@@HowardKlein1958 Yes, I thought the difference to a center fed dipole would be bigger. these transformers seem to work very well.
Thanks for sharing this! 🙂
This is exactly the information that I am interested in most as I am forced to operate outdoors when I really want to do interesting DX (due to my living situation), so I am looking for the most efficient wire antenna for outdoor operation. By the way as of now with being into the hobby a few months only, I am trying to go for verical wire antennas which is feasible as I am using most 15/17/20 m.
And as you mentioned - I would have expected the advantage of the dipole to be a bit more obvious.
73 de DL1HNR
thx a lot!
Yes for DX and 15-20m I would also chose a vertical antenna.
73!
@@CrazyChekov Until now, I was not really sure if this approach makes sense as it is merely what I as a newbie understood so far from radiation patterns and everything that goes with it, so it is good to see that you confirm my conclusion to go for a vertical for that purpose! This help me, thank you.🙂
@@CrazyChekovI did, actually
The directivity of end-fed antenna is very strong, so it is meaningless to pay attention to directivity when comparing horizontal antennas.
"The directivity of end-fed antenna is very strong" In what direction? How is it different from a dipole arranged in the very same configuration? My understanding is that it is nearly exactly the same.
It is the shape and placement that primarily determine directional or elevation characteristics. If the current node(s) is/are at a significant height relative to wavelength, the angle of radiation will be low and visa versa for low heights and NVIS radiation.
better to have it equal for both antennas in a comparison imo. removing one variable from the test.
Thank you. I appreciate the methodology and the data. It’s very illustrative. KO6DEV
@@user-yh7mv7jd1l thank you!