[TowerTalk] Vertical vs. Low Beam?

[Hank Kahrs]

>Return-Path: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>From: Doug Brandon <dab@kaiwan.com>
>Subject: [TowerTalk] Vertical vs. Low Beam?
>To: towertalk@contesting.com
>Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 10:07:20 -0800 (PST)
>Sender: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>X-Sponsor: N4VJ / K4AAA, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C
>
>
>I've been using a roof mounted HF6V vertical (at about 16') for the 
>past 5 years with reasonable results.  I'm currently looking into putting 
>up a tower, but in the meantime I'm curious if a roof mounted beam
>(say a Force C3/C4 or Cushcraft A4) at around 20' - 25' would do any
>better than the vertical.  
>
>I know the rule of thumb with beams is "higher is better", but what is 
>the minimum height at which I can expect reasonable results?  or at
>least better results than the vertical?
>
>Comments appreciated,
>
>  73 de Doug, N6RT

Doug,
Dont think of antenna height but instead think wavelengths.  Dig in to the
ARRL Antenna Manual and find the table with the elevation patterns of a
horizontal dipole as a function of  wavelengths.  Add to that the gain of
the yagi and you will see it's all a function of wavelength.

73, Hank/K2UVG
k2uvg@gnt.net


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Sponsored by:             Akorn Access, Inc. & N4VJ / K4AAA