EP Swynar <gswynar@durham.net> wrote:
>Do I understand it correctly that it's far, far better situation to have a
>GROUNDED STEEL TOWER in the immediate proximity of a radiating vertical
>antenna, rather than a LOSSY TREE...?
I have a small backyard. Can't put up towers and only have a few trees. A few
weeks ago I put up a coaxial inverted L. The tallest tree in the backyard is
supporting the vertical section up to 55ft. The "horizontal" section slopes
down at 45 degrees and is attached to the house at 16 feet or so. Right now I
have only 4 x 130ft radials on the ground which will increase over time. Even
though the antenna covers the complete band within the 2:1 SWR points (due to
the largce conductor size), it's far from ideal. Without the tree, I have a
bunch of wire on the ground, and no signal in the air. With the tree, I have a
bunch of wire in the air and also some sort of a signal. So I'd say that my
trees provide me with a tremendous amount of gain. :-) I'll be the last one
accusing my tree of being lossy. ;-)
I guess what I'm trying to say is, in what context are we worrying about these
things? If your antenna system is close to ideal for your situation, then sure,
you may worry about these things. But if you haven't put up the best antenna
you can yet and squeezed out every percentage point of efficiency out of your
current antenna system, then don't worry if the sap in a nearby tree might be
heated up a bit on a cold winter night. :-)
73,
--Alex KR1ST
http://www.kr1st.com
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|