Off top my head, it would seem the slant wire would work to create a
directional effect of one sort or other, depending on the specifics, but I
have no clue why the FCC dissed that one. They usually attach some
technical explanation to rulings. You have access to the specific
proceedings? I could come up with a dozen speculations about it, but
that's all they'd be.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Herb Schoenbohm <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 5:03 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> > The 120 comes from the watershed 1937 Brown Lewis and Eppstein study now
> > found in the IEEE journals. There were distinct characteristics to 120
> > times 0.4 wl (actually 115) that improved results even vs. 60.
> > That a deficient radial system on one side has any significant reduction
> > that direction alone VS THE OTHER DIRECTIONS is a fairly well debunked
> > idea. That the missing radials reduce radiation in all directions, due
> > diminished efficiency, is not disputed.
> > 73, Guy.
> What about the slant wire cause at least some directive component in the
> direction of the slant wire?
> Herb, KV4FZ
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK