Maybe....if money is no object. A winning setup could be had with the right
location and two or three 60 foot towers. That won't happen on flat land.
Stan, K5GO
Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 1, 2015, at 9:46 PM, ScottW3TX@verizon.net <scottw3tx@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> Is there an argument to be made for favoring plain vanilla flat land in all
> directions, instead of a hill or mountaintop, so that the TOA's can be
> optimized for all bands by antenna height/stacking for all important
> directions?
>
> Best regards,
> Scott w3tx
>
> On Jan 1, 2015, at 8:25 PM, "Ed Sawyer" <sawyered@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Go with the hilltop. The oceanfront is great if you have unobstructed low
> angle in a few favored directions. But oceanfront with low angles cut off
> is not a good compromise.
>
>
>
> Spend A LOT of time with HFTA after carefully detailing the terrain within
> 1000ft of the antennas. My best antennas are all 25 - 30 ft to Europe off
> the side of my hill to Europe.
>
>
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|