[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Higher VS Lower

Subject: [CQ-Contest] Higher VS Lower
From: bjk@ihug.co.nz (Barry Kirkwood)
Date: Fri Jan 12 16:42:49 2001
On elevated locations:
I do not have terrain analysing software, but I think these points are
(1) There have been extremely successful stations operating from elevated
locations. (eg. ZL2QH)
(2)  In any situation, foreground is important. Generally the first priority
is to get the radiator in the clear and away from other objects.
(3) There is opinion held by many that vertical radiators may not perform
well from elevated sites. I would certainly try a horizontally polarised
antenna at the site before judging the site bad.
(4) My own qth is at 90m overlooking the sea. My subjective impression is
that the site advantage may be as much as 10-20dB over my former qth at a
town house on a moderately elevated site in the central city.
(5) There may be little advantage in having a horizontal antenna on a tall
mast on top of a hill, especially for the higher bands.
I am sure there are others on this reflector with better knowledge of these
matters than me, and I would be interested to hear from them.

Barry Kirkwood PhD ZL1DD
Signal Hill
66 Cory Road
Palm Beach
Waiheke Island 1240
----- Original Message -----
From: Clive Whelan <clive_whelan@btinternet.com>
To: Hammond, Rob EU-Pencoed <Rob.Hammond@eu.sony.com>;
Sent: Friday, 12 January, 2001 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Higher VS Lower

 > Hi Rob
 > There is virtually nothing to be gained from operating from a
 > mountain top on HF, and the opposite may  be the case here in
 > GW.
 > We have little to no soil on our mountains in GW which does
 > nothing for ground reflection. Of course you need a good take
 > off, and avoiding the 1800 ft hills of Gwent is desirable as you
 > have found! Possibly the very best location will be an island
 > with salt water on all sides but that's hardly realistic. You
 > may well find that your present QTH is as good as anywhere.
 > I agree with your other respondent that doing the best you can
 > from your present QTH is the way to go. There is nothing like
 > having one of the weaker signals to develop your skills,
 > frustrating as though it can be at times.
 > Aim to improve with every contest entry, whether this be honing
 > your own skills or developing the effectiveness of your modest
 > station..
 > Forget the chicken wire for your vertical, that's too much work.
 > If you really feel you need radials, bury a few now at a depth
 > of just a couple of inches in the lawn, so that when ( if?)
 > Spring arrives, the grass will quickly cover the scars, the XYL
 > need never know! Your HF6V will work just fine, mine does from a
 > hole in the ground to the South of you!
 > To be successful at contesting, you need to work hard and have
 > luck, and you may find that the harder you work, the more luck
 > you get. Oh yes there's another way to improve your placing with
 > low power- although you may not wish to hear this- , *use CW*.
 > And one last thing, don't bother much with loft antennae, their
 > only advantage is invisibility, but otherwise they will be poor
 > performers,however if needs must they *will* work. Concentrate
 > rather on unobtrusive vertical antennae, although on 80 and 160
 > you will need something better of course. If you can't get on
 > all bands do SOSB on say 10 or 15 while the sunspots last.
 > 73
 > Clive

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

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