[TowerTalk] Why radials improve radiation!

[Eddy Swynar]

On 2011-05-24, at 9:34 AM, Jim Lux wrote:

> The former does things "because we've done it that way in the past and it 
> worked".

Hi Jim,

I fear that that very same mantra seems to prevail now re. radials, only in reverse...

Specifically, "...Put in as many radials as you can. PERIOD." Well, to a newcomer, just how many is "as many"...? And what's the best length for what you put in...? 

So many EZNEC-armed experts to-day have come to embrace the very thing they espouse to deplore, i.e. they've come to "...Doing things (LAYING RADIAL FIELDS) because we've done it that way in the past (AS MANY AS POSSIBLE. PERIOD) and it worked (I'M #1 IN THE ARRL DXCC STANDINGS FOR 160)."

All I'm saying---rather poorly, too, obviously!--is that there are actual quantitative measurements to be seen/had as a guide to newbies...simply stating that "...put in as many radials as you can!" just doesn't cut it anymore, and is short-changing guys who are just beginning to explore this facet of the antenna world.

There ARE viable alternatives, and if one is willing to accept the consequent compromises, good results can still be had, and a lot of fun experienced. This stuff isn't black magic---and a lot of guys have taken the trouble to document incremental improvements to radial fields to assist us, IF we are willing to take the trouble to dig such gems out of the noise being generated by the nay-sayers...

~73~ de Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ