Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] k9yc pdf

To: <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] k9yc pdf
From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.qozzy.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:41:18 -0500
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 12:45 PM
To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] k9yc pdf

On Tue,1/13/2015 4:03 AM, Jim Thomson wrote:
This pdf is very well done..and a real eye opener.   It also assumes you
are in the middle of a wheat field in Kansas.

Not really -- what I've tried to do is show what matters, the effects of height and ground on both horizontal and vertical antennas. Those graphs showing the value, in dB, of antenna height, on 80, 40, and 20M. Yes, it assumes "flatland", but not infinite real estate. If you have irregular terrain (I do), you'll also need to use HFTA to get a handle on antenna height. But it does answer the question, "If I could somehow rig a 40M dipole between trees or a tree and a building at 60 ft, how much better is that than at 30 ft?"


I thought those basics were well understood and published back in the 1930's. Nothing since has disproved them. Fill ins for in between heights and different
grounds has been around since the 70's when commercial/military software was
"leaked" in ham publications, the YCCC or other contest clubs.

90' has always, since I can remember going back to the mid 60's, been the all
around magic height for 20M DX with 80-100' being the general range used.
Of course higher is often best for some long haul paths and so is lower at times. When I had HB 4 el monobanders with multiple switching options at 40/80/120/160' and all independently rotatable the differences were very noticable and the lower pair was often used for Western Eu and the upper pair for the next hop east or deeper into Russia or Asia. The hilltop modified the best heights quite a bit but TA took care of that and about 10 years of ARRL/ CQ, DX and WPX wins were pretty
standard (-; Then it got boring and I concentrated on VHF to microwave.
On 10 and 15 similar stacks were used at lower heights and on 10 it was possible to null G's, F, EA and boost DL, SP, UA, etc just by switching pairs. Oft times all 4 are in use became a flamethrower to the target area. This is readily shown in Deans regular contest predictions and as the band opened or shifted running 2- 4 different
directions paid off well.

HFTA has been a boon to show how real world enviroments affect the theory.

Ive known Dean, N6BV, since he was a fresh minted EE out of Yale and was hired by National Radio back around 1967 or so; He then had XYL problems and moved to CA and in the 80's he moved back East and became an almost neighbor on another hill in the next town. We were always running antenna tests and the fact I was continually beating him on 10-20M (my 1200W LK500ZC to his 1500W AL-1200) led him to develop the original Terrain Analyzer which was included in later versions of Brian Beezley's, K6STI, antenna modeling software using my hilltop as a model. My terrain rolloff was quite different than Deans and showed how well it boosted "gain" at elevation angles most important for
chasing DX and winning contests.

Anybody want a 5A hilltop QTH in Southern NH (Im 2 miles from MA) in 3-6 years or so let me know.

Carl
KM1H



_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>