Edward Swynar wrote:
> This discussion raises its head every year at around this time, and every
> year I scratch my head in wonder about it all.
>
> Just what IS a good alternative to supporting a wire antenna anyway, if
> trees are all so nasty & evil...? Is it a steel grounded tower, maybe...? Or
> perhaps a helium-filled balloon...?!
>
Yes. :-)
> What is it about a tree that makes it so undesirable anyway...? The fact
> that it's lossy at RF...? A metal tower firmly imbedded in the ground would
> surely have far less loss in that regard than a tree---but I'm reminded here
> about all of the old admonishments regarding the placing of extraneous metal
> objects in the field of any antenna...
>
A metal tower firmly imbedded in the ground makes a great antenna fed
with a gamma or omega match, or used as part of a folded umbrella
(folded unipole).
> Y'know what...? Mother Nature put the arbor glen on my property for more
> reasons than simply to admire, as I see it...so I'm with Herb: to heck with
> the tests! I have "green" / natural sky-hooks on my property, and I fully
> intend to keep on using them.
>
Go for it!
> Amen! Hi Hi
>
> ~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
>
>
73,
--
Ken K4XL
k4xl@arrl.net
*** BoatAnchor Manual Archive ***
On the web at http://bama.sbc.edu and http://bama.edebris.com
FTP site info: bama.sbc.edu login: anonymous p/w: youremailadr
_______________________________________________
160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
|