[TowerTalk] How Helically Wound Verticals Really Work (was : Vertical dipoles)

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

Dan Zimmerman N3OX wrote:
>
> I don't see anything in there that is a reason for implicit mistrust of the
> model.  A helical is better than a high Q base loaded vertical.  Helical
> winding is worse  than a lumped mid-loaded antenna.    Doesn't seem
> particularly strange to me.  It's somewhere in between.  The effective coil
> height *IS* higher than with base loading, so you get a more favorable
> current distribution.    It's non-optimum in terms of wire length (and hence
> loss) but there's no reason to assume it's going to be worse than ***all***
> possible lumped loading coils in various locations.

The point about HWV's is not "do they work?" but "are they worth the 
trouble to build?".  If you can cover the entire antenna with windings,
you can just a well, with a lot less work, cover the center 1% with 
windings and have a center loaded vertical.  So we have shown that it
is easier to make a center loaded vertical than a HWV.  We agree that
the center loaded vertical is at least as good and probably better.
Can anyone present a "value proposition" to justify the HWV?

Rick N6RK