[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: raised radials

To: Tom W8JI <>
Subject: Re: Topband: raised radials
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 08:44:29 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <">>
AMEN Tom, He Just is like the "Energizer Bunny". He keeps going on and on and 

73 and Happy Holidays Price W0RI

> Or the person on here who went from an extensive radial system to a full 
> screen 
>claimed a 5dB improvement but now denys the possibility. Its in the TB 
>from 1998.


Please try to stop that silly disappointing long-time practice of re-writing 
what other people say just to start a fight.

I ****NEVER**** said I didn't measure a 5 dB change, or that some system 
can't produce a 5 dB (or even a 30 dB) change when someone does something 
terribly wrong in a system. What I am saying is:

1.) Your claim you felt you had a ~10 dB change, based on your feelings of how 
much a signal must change busting a pileup, when you added some screen to a 
system is pretty silly. It is a test at least days apart on sky wave with no 
data reference at all. It is typical junk science of the worse kind. If your 
original ground system did not have severe issues, the imagined "10 dB" would 

2.)  Broadcast stations use a screen as a connection point and mechanical 
convenience, NOT to improve signal or effiency. The screen allows people to 
near the tower base without falling over wires, and it allows connecting boxes, 
fences, posts, and other things into the radials no matter where they are 
located near the base. They also usually use stone at the base, and we can't assume everything they do is for "signal reasons".

If you take some time to read FCC guidelines, the screen is actually optional. 
If you read Lewis, Brown, and Epstein, instead of misreading Topband archives, 
you will see they ALSO said the screen does not when a adequate number and 
length of radials is present.

Please stop the silly childish misrepresentations.

73 Tom 
Topband reflector -
Topband reflector -

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>