Topband: Elevated Radials

[Howard K2HK]

I have hesitated to jump in here to relate my own personal experience since it flies in the face of accepted theory.  Further, I have no objective measurements to support my observations. The only thing I can offer is my own observations based on  52 years of operating. Pete's last sentence," if you have good ground conductivity, a relatively sparse radial field can work better than a really extensive  radial field on lousy ground" is what prompted me to stick my head on the block.At one time I had as many as 30 full size radials attached to my 160 meter shunted tower but over the years attrition eg.,mowers, animals and nature have reduced this to a motley mess of 2 or 3 radials and various pieces of copper wire strewn randomly around the area under the tower. My results have been far better than I would ever expect based on physics but the fact remains on a comparative basis it gets  out very well. If it didn't do that well I would probably get off my butt and lay some radials but don't see the need right now. My reason for mentioning this to encourage others that may not have the possibility of a having a good theoretical radial field to jump in and give it a shot. You may be surprised. 
73,Howard..K2HK


> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 07:11:01 -0500
> From: n4zr at contesting.com
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Elevated Radials
> 
> The other rule that seems to apply, based on a number of pretty serious 
> articles, including K3LC's NCJ series in the mid-2000s,is "they that 
> has, gets."  By which I mean, if you have good ground conductivity, a 
> relatively sparse radial field can work better than a really extensive 
> radial field on lousy ground.
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR