I am thinking the modeling does suggest the vertical has
a bit lower take off angle than a low slug dipole (which for
most of us is the best we can do...) but they overlap
considerably. It is one reason I opted for my new big
monopole vertical IN ADDITION to my dipoles.
We (My Elmers and I) reasoned that European DX might
be coming into my QTH (SW Michigan) at somewhere
between 15-20 degrees where the vertical was expected
(modeled) to shine, and the State-side signals would be
coming in at around 20-24 degrees, favoring the dipoles.
But the models suggested a large bit of overlap.
In PRACTICE ... at least so far... this is working out
exactly as expected.
I can now reach Maine, Calif, Oregon, Wash, BC in Canada,
with ease - something the old sloper (now replaced) and my
low slung dipoles did not do on. Medium distance stations
in the US are about equal on each... again what the modeling
might suggest. I cannot say on the really short - close in
US stations as I have not worked the vertical long enough
to comment... yet.
So my vertical seems to be proving the modeling correct,
and I am happy that I now have two options to work with.
* Note - these are early subjective assessments, only, not
scientific proof of any kind. Nevertheless, the low angle
expectation on the vertical seems to be panning out in
practice. And I am thrilled with it! I have finally been the
bigger signal in many QSOs where I could hardly be heard
before.
===================== K8JHR ====================
Roger (K8RI) wrote:
> As for the modeling results, they do not mirror my experience with
> verticals
============================================
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|