Trees are absorbtive, metal is reflective. At least with the metal,
your signal goes somewhere.
On 12/27/2011 8:04 AM, Eddy Swynar wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> I guess I'm just plain stupid or something, I don't know...
> ...But whenever someone tells me that a tree is death to the radiation
> emitted from a nearby vertical antenna, I immediately ask myself the
> question, "Then what would be better than having a tree nearby...? A grounded
> metal post, perhaps...?"
> Think about it: a tree supposedly detracts from the effective radiated power
> of an antenna...correct? Then what does a metal post do, if not directly
> bypass said radiated power directly to ground, with considerably reduced
> resistance...? Which s "better" for the signal, a "semi-conducting" trunk of
> wood, or a better-conducting metal bypass...?
> Or ask yourself this question: you have a vertical antenna---is it better
> that the vertical be located in the middle of a grove of trees, or in the
> midst of urban sprawl, with steel-framed structures the same height of your
> "...And in 25 words, or less, explain why." Hi Hi
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
> TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk mailing list