[CQ-Contest] Contest QTH

[N7mal]

Jim it's to bad all those smart guys didn't read the last sentence of the 
original posting. The saltwater is not a factor in this equation,,, it's the 
FT5XO callsign that made the antennas look like they were doing well. Trying 
to make antenna judgments and saltwater effect when your call is FT5XO is 
just pure silliness. If those guys want to make real/meaningful saltwater 
tests go about 400 miles North of me to the Great Salt Lake, use my call and 
see how effective your predictions are.....

""""We had salt water near us, surrounded by a smallish land mass engulfed 
by the South Indian Ocean at FT5XO and the verticals seemed to play pretty 
well.""""

p.s. TKS Jim for all those ZD8Z contest contacts
73


MAL
N7MAL
BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
http://www.n7mal.com
Everyone in the world is
entitled to be burdened
by my opinion


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jim Neiger
To: Bill Tippett ; cq-contest at contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 00:49
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest QTH


It's a good thing I didn't know all of this before plugging  into all of
those horizontally polarized antennas 20 ft from the edge of Ascension
Island.  Just think how much louder my puny signal would've been with
verticals............

Jim Neiger      N6TJ   ZD8Z

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bill Tippett" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 4:31 AM
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Contest QTH

>> W4ZV:
>>
>>> While salt water is definitely good for verticals, but it
>>> doesn't help horizontally polarized antennas like Yagis.
>>
>>
>> Not true. Even horizontally polarized antennas gain from the salt water.
>> Besides enhancement from the ground, reflection conditions in the
>> immediate vicinity of the array, signals at the salt water edge are
>> enhanced regardless of polarization.
>
>        EZNEC shows minor improvement for horizontal polarization over
> salt water but it's at high angles...not low angles as is the case for
> vertical polarization.  At 14 degrees TOA, there's a 0.51 dB
> advantage, at 7 degrees a 0.26 dB advantage, at 3.5 degrees a 0.16 dB
> advantage.  The reason for this is that ground conductivity has less
> reflectivity effect as the incidental angles become very low.
>
>        Isn't this discussion déjà vu of déjà vu?
>
> http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-01/msg00022.html
>
>                                     73,  Bill  W4ZV