[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Are_higher_HF_antenna's_really_better?

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Are_higher_HF_antenna's_really_better?
From: (
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 21:59:33 -0600
N4KG response inserted below.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2002  Michael Watts <> writes:
> 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?"
        Is 4 to 6 hours of Europeans on 10, 15, and 20
        during mid day enough?  How about the
        African multipliers?   Or even the JA's
        when solar activity is high?

> 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.  

        HELLO !  I'm not advising to put ONE antenna low,
        I'm advising the ONE TOWER guy to put a second
        antenna at 35 to 40 ft to fill in the NULLS from his
        higher (60 to 80 ft) high antenna.  Even a low DIPOLE
        will be stronger than the biggest Yagi in it's NULL.
        OK?   Why so much resistance to a second small
        antenna on the same tower that can do nothing but 
        improve your performance?   N4KG

> There seems to be  substantial 
> agreement that higher antennas perform better a larger 
> percentage of the time than lower  ones.  Is this not true?  

        The arrival angle data published by ARRL in the
        Antenna Book is NOT representative of most
        DX station antennas.  How many of your DX
        contacts are using the 100 ft high antennas
        on 80 through 17M as modeled by N6BV?
        Or the 60 ft high antennas on 15, 12, and 10M?

        There is NO data for the optimum angles 
        originating from LOW DX antennas.

>If you had only one antenna, would you put it lower or higher?

        If I had a 40 or 50 ft tower I would have only ONE
        high band antenna.  If I had a 60 to 100 ft tower, 
        I would have at least TWO high band antennas. 

        I don't know how well low antennas play in California,
        but everywhere East of the Rockies and in Alaska,
        I have reports of low antennas being better than high 
        antennas for significant periods of time.

        Tom  N4KG

Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:

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>