[TowerTalk] Inverted L for 160 meters

[Jim Brown]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 08:57:45 -0400, jeremy-ca wrote:

>With 32 radials 12' high I never waited in pileups very long. 

What you have is a conventional radial system that happens to be 12 ft 
off the ground. My 160 vertical currently has 40 radials that are 70 ft 
long, and it works fairly well too. A true elevated radial system can be 
effective with as few as four radials. 

There's nothing WRONG with having radials 12 ft off the ground on 160, 
but they are not "elevated" radials, they act just like they were laying 
on the ground, because AS A FRACTION OF A WAVELENGTH, they are nearly on 
the ground. 

>Belrose and others have published also and believe that 12' is adequate
>on 160 in many cases. 

I've read some pieces by Belrose and by the late Carl Smith on the 
subject, none of which say that 12 ft high radials can be considered 
"elevated" on 160.

>BC band engineers have proven that an elevated 
>system delivers the same field strength OR BETTER than a classic 128
>buried radials at the same site. 

Perhaps you might cite the specific references in the literature that 
say that. The ones I've read don't say that. 

73,

Jim Brown K9YC