Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 158, Issue 20

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 158, Issue 20
From: Patrick Greenlee <patrick_g@windstream.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:56:10 -0600
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
It would be reasonable to assume that you are more likely to have a high conductivity soil condition inside such a designated area rather than in an area mapped as low conductivity but undepicted exceptions could exist. Still, if you are going to pan for gold, it is best to pan where the known gold is rather than depend on an anomaly to fortuitously present itself for your benefit.

Now regarding Beverage antennas... Please excuse my ignorance (The cowboy philosopher Will Rogers said, "We are all ignorant, just about different things") but could someone please give me a little detail on Beverage antennas being poor performers in areas of higher soil conductivity? I have the real estate (160 acre 1/2 mile by 1/2 mile black Angus ranch) and have looked forward to experimenting with Beverage antennas after a couple tower projects are finished. I am also interested in shielded magnetic loops and now wonder how or if their performance is modified by soil conductivity. So much to learn, so little time.

Patrick        NJ5G

On my own land, I think the FCC map has it right.  Verticals work
great, and beverages barely play.

Rick N6RK
_______________________________________________


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

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