----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Parsons" <ve3zi@yahoo.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 6:22 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk] Verticals and Vertical Dipoles
> I have not tried a vertical dipole on 40m, but can
> report somewhat similar results with a 40m quarter
> wave vertical versus a horizontal dipole at about 40'.
> The vertical was in the clear and had about 60 radials
> - that should lead to over 90% efficiency.
>
> The vertical was consistently 1-2 S-points worse than
> the dipole at any distance and in any direction.
> Then I moved the vertical so that it is now amid some
> trees about 50' from a reasonably sized lake (~12miles
> x 0.5mile) - it had previously been about 400' from
> the lake. It is now at least the equal of the dipole
> at any distance and in any direction, and distinctly
> better for DX.
>
> I can sort of understand that the vertical now has a
> better ground plane extending over many wavelengths
> which presumably improves its performance. I can't
> understand why that is still true in February when the
> lake is frozen to at least 5' down and ice is a very
> poor conductor.
If the ice that poor of a conductor, it won't be that lossy ,and it's still
over the remaining liquid water, which IS a good reflector. It's more like
you raised your antenna 5 feet.
>
> For some reason the XYL does not seem to think that a
> whole row of antennas along the edge of the lake would
> be beautiful....
Think of disguising them like they disguise cell phone towers. Would your
wife object to conifers or aspens along the lake side?
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|