[TowerTalk] Vertical in pond

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

I don't have any proof either but my tower/antennas in Colorado sits in an
area where we have a small creek running through the property.  We have
water constantly in a pond so there is always water close to the ground.  My
station in Montana sits next to the Yellowstone river and we are on top of
the Yellowstone Aquifer and the static water level in our well is 23-27
feet.

Both stations get out exceptionally well for having towers under 70ft and
wire antennas for the lowbands.

The Yellowstone water is moderate on sediment but there is some salinity in
the water in the area.  Most everyone of the "experts" have said it doesn't
make any difference.

Montana adds a few DB on its' own.  Think loud be loud?      


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or  67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin 



-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Roger Parsons
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:52 PM
To: ve3zi at rac.ca; towertalk at contesting.com; Pete Smith
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical in pond


I really don't know the reason - my experience is purely anecdotal. I do not
however think it is much to do with the conductivity or otherwise of the
water. The water is pretty pure (drinkable without processing although we do
process it :-), and from December until April it is frozen to a depth of
well over a metre - and I understand that ice is quite a good insulator. The
lake is about 25m deep if that makes any difference. What may be important
is that I have a clear northerly takeoff over the lake from west through to
east which is rather fortunate.

I have found antenna placement to be quite anomalous in other ways. I had a
40m vertical and a separate 30m vertical about 20m apart a few years ago
(away from the lake). The 30m one was excellent and the 40m was useless,
even though they were identical except for the radiator length. I adjusted
the lengths and changed their use over - the 40m was still useless and the
30m excellent. Still haven't worked that out and still haven't got a good
40m antenna....

73 Roger
VE3ZI


--- On Tue, 17/3/09, Pete Smith <n4zr at contesting.com> wrote:

> From: Pete Smith <n4zr at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk]  Vertical in pond
> To: ve3zi at rac.ca, towertalk at contesting.com
> Date: Tuesday, 17 March, 2009, 9:24 AM Isn't it more likely that the 
> ground characteristics in that location are more favorable than in the 
> previous one?  I can imagine ground well saturated with fresh water as 
> having a sufficient quantity of ions in solution to improve its 
> conductivity considerably.
> The fresh water itself,
> on the other hand, probably doesn't matter.  Or does it?  Anyone have 
> anything beyond anecdotal experience to pass on?
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> 
> At 09:20 AM 3/17/2009, Roger Parsons wrote:
> 
> >Jim
> >
> >I'm not sure that this is exactly analagous, but I have
> a tri-band
> >vertical mounted right at the edge of a reasonably
> large lake (~0.5km x
> >20km). I found that that dramatically improved its
> performance compared to
> >mounting it 100m away. The improvement was at least
> 10dB which changed it
> >from being a waste of time to a useful second antenna -
> and the radial
> >system (lots) was identical in each case.
> >
> >73 Roger
> >VE3ZI
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >TowerTalk mailing list
> >TowerTalk at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
> 
> 


      
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk