Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question

[Jim Brown]

Carlos,

Note that I referred to "horizontally POLARIZED" and "vertically 
POLARIZED" antennas. My comments on, and analysis of, the Waller Flag 
were based on my model of a vertical Waller loop.  A horizontal Waller 
Flag at a height great enough to have useful sensitivity is not even 
close to being practical for me.

Also, that tutorial I cited on horizontal and vertical antennas is 
specifically oriented toward TX performance, where the primary objective 
is usually gain in the direction and elevation of DX rather than RDF.

73, Jim K9YC

On Mon,9/7/2015 5:41 PM, JC wrote:
> The concept of horizontal dipole is just a name for a wire parallel to the
> ground. If you change the description from TOTAL Field on EZENEC and use
> Horizontal and Vertical field your results won't be the same. On low bands
> Total Field is just one dimension. Horizontal and Vertical  makes all the
> difference in propagation and signal to noise ratio.
>
> JC
> N4IS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
> Sent: Monday, September 07, 2015 5:32 PM
> To:topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: [WARNING: A/V UNSCANNABLE]RE: Waller Flag Question
>
> On Mon,9/7/2015 1:05 PM, K1FZ-Bruce wrote:
>> >Thanks Jim,  There are new hams that do not know how horizontal
>> >antennas patterns change over ground.
> Right. In general, horizontally polarized antennas only care about height,
> while vertically polarized antennas care SOME about height, but mostly about
> soil conductivity. I gave a talk at Pacificon and to a couple of ham clubs
> on this based on an extensive NEC modeling study.
> Slides are here.