At 02:28 PM 3/23/98 -0500, Ron DeBry wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Mar 1998 14:05:11 -0500, Pete Smith wrote:
>
>>Alternatively, consider trying the K3LR lazy-vee wire parasitic array
>>described in 8/94 QST before you spend all that money. Modeled, it's
>>within 1 dB of a 4-square with average ground characteristics (NEC-2,
>>high-accuracy), has virtually the same vertical pattern, and has as good or
>>better F/B. In real life, I suspect it may even have more gain, because it
>>is not dependent on the ground plane for current return.
>>
>
>So why does K3LR now use a 4-square? I'm not trying to be
>argumentative, I'm just curious.
Don't know. Actually, the answer probably is that he wanted that 1 dB, was
willing to spend the money for the verticals, and figured to put down a
good-enough ground plane to get the current return so that the gain figure
would be real. I look at cost-per-db pretty hard, and love my lazy-vee,
which cost <$100.
By the way, I didn't mean to post that message to the reflector, because
there is no way to establish who's right and who's wrong, nor do I care to
have an argument. My solution works for me, and Tim's, clearly works VERY
well for him.
Jefferson County TeleCenter
"Keep the Job -------- Lose the Commute"
(304)728-3051 fax:(304) 728-3068 e-mail: welcome@jctc.org
On the Web: jctc.org
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search