> I'm afraid you may be misled by some "over stated" gloomy
pronouncements
> concerning the lack of effectiveness of big horizontal
loops on 160, and other
> bands for that matter. Rather than argue theory, or make
any "feel good"
> statements, I would like to give you some results of
loops I have used.
Barry and all,
I can work similar DX with a dipole at the same height, and
dozens of others have done the same with a large variety of
similar cloud warmer antennas starting with W2EQS way back
in the 60's. While it is nice to work DX, using what we work
as evidence of performance is like the old Gotham vertical
antennas used to do....selling something on meaningless
data.
I worked 200 countries in just over a year with a 1/4 wl
vertical. What does that prove? Only that I was on the air a
lot, and so were the DX stations.
One fact is a low horizontal loop does have maximum
radiation straight up. Does that mean you CAN'T work DX? Of
course not! It just means you have to wait longer to have
your turn, and some DX might not even hear you.
Another fact is a low loop has essentially the same gain and
pattern as a low dipole. With the same gain and pattern, you
can expect the same or very similar results receiving or
transmitting. There just isn't anything magical going on.
No one is saying (or said) a person *can't* work DX with
cloud warmer antennas, just that they are essentially the
same as a dipole. Heck, I wish everyone in the USA used low
horizontal loops. I just hope the DX stations use verticals.
:-)
73 Tom
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|