>> feet) and the elimination of radials since the antenna functions as a
half
> wave dipole (not a vertical).
>
> Obviously this antenna is a compromise (as all 160 meter antennas on small
> lots must be) but I wonder if it might perform better than my present
> inverted L
It isn't possible to predict what will happen, when one unknown system is
compared to another, but I can tell you what I would do if it was my system.
I'd keep the inverted L and do everything possible to get in as much
grounding as I could. I'd ground to the plumbing, fences, heating systems,
and even the neighbor's broken car if it ever sat in one place long enough.
People like to pretend linear loading isn't lossy, and with a low dipole
ground loss goes away, but isn't really how it works.
You want the straightest vertical area carrying current, and the best ground
and most height of that vertical area you can get. That's the bottom line.
73 Tom
|