On 9/3/2019 11:14 AM, jimlux wrote:
So, while that mountain top site overlooking the Pacific Ocean may be
attractive for working JA (or P5<grin>) building a big tower may not be
possible.
Anyone who has done much operating from a mountaintop knows that a tall
tower is not important for most ham activity. The mountain itself is a
VERY tall tower, and the terrain falloff provides additional advantage
at HF (as modeled by N6BV's HFTA software for horizontally polarized
antennas, free with the ARRL Handbook). N6BT has shown a similar
advantage for vertically polarized antennas positioned at the edge of a
dropoff in the direction of the dropoff.
I've been part of a Field Day team led by K6MI that has operated QRP
from a 5,000 ft peak about 50 miles east of Monterey, and have done the
same with W6GJB and W6JTI from other peaks. We've often won 1A battery
for the entire contest. During my first year with K6MI, I was running on
15 during the last hour of FD with a rate of almost 70.
W6JTI's own station is on a small peak near his home in the Lost Coast
of northern California. He operates almost entirely QRP (LP on 160) and
regularly places in the top three in major contests. In all of these
operations, none of the antennas have been higher than 30 ft above ground.
IMO, the only good reason for a tall tower on a mountaintop is for line
of sight VHF/UHF coverage.
As to the permitting process in the west -- I have no cell coverage,
thanks to the "tin-hat brigade's" vocal opposition to radiation that
might fry their ignorant brains. It cost K5RC hundreds of thousands of
dollars and several years to successfully fight opposition to the W7RN
super-station SE of Reno, NV.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|