[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Are_higher_HF_antenna's_really_better?

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Are_higher_HF_antenna's_really_better?
From: (WL7M)
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:07:49 -0900
I heartily concur with Mike.  Being a "one antenna guy", my Mosley Pro57B 
is at 40 feet, as high as I can reasonably place it given my extreme 
weather conditions (125 mph gusts and very heavy icing).  With this 
placement, I've worked 296 countries in about 24 months.  I yield 
(temporarily at least) to Mike (below), who has 297 countries.  In my case, 
I also live on the side of a mountain overlooking the ocean at 1200 
feet...and that helps too!  ;-)


At 04:40 PM 11-01-02, Michael Watts wrote:

>I, for one, do not doubt that lower antennas are at times better than high 
>ones.  I have done
>experiments with my crankup tower that have convinced me.
>But that doesn't seem like the relevant point unless you are able to put 
>up lots of different
>antennas.  For the "one or a small number of antennas" crowd, isn't the 
>relevant question for any
>given antenna height:  "What percentage of the time will I have the best 
>performance to the places
>in the world that I most care about?"
>If a lower antenna is better only in some small percentage of cases, then 
>it's not wise to advise
>a one antenna guy to put the antenna lower.  There seems to be substantial 
>agreement that higher
>antennas perform better a larger percentage of the time than lower 
>ones.  Is this not true?  If
>you had only one antenna, would you put it lower or higher?

Where do you get ICE bandpass filters & beverage matching boxes?  The
same place that pays for the hosting of this list:  The eHam Store.
Order online at

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

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