[TowerTalk] Fan Dipole

[Jim Thomson]

Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 17:26:31 -0700
From: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws at triconet.org>
To: towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fan Dipole

<It's a hobby . We get to choose our own metrics.

<I do find it interesting that my metric of DXCC countries worked is bogus in 
your mind while equally subjective experiences of yours are more valuable.? Did 
you compare your antennas on a calibrated range operated by skilled people?

It's a rhetorical question; no need to answer.

On 10/1/2017 6:15 AM, john at kk9a.com wrote:
> I am surprised that people still do not realize that working DXCC countries
> is no indication of antenna performance. The poor desert ground may be
> helping your inverted V however why would an inverted V be your only option?
> I have used various 160m antennas from a number of locations in the US and
> Caribbean and found a low inverted V to be very inferior to a top loaded
> short vertical even without an extensive radial field.
>
> John KK9A
>

###  DXCC  vs ant performance ?   Thats like comparing a  tribander vs a 20m monobander..
on 20m.   You will works loads of dx with a tribander..or any yagi for that matter.... on 
40-30-20-17-15-12-10m.   So John is correct in stating DXCC  totals  is no indication of ant performance.

##  However on 160m, dxcc  totals probably is  a good indicator of  ant performance..at least using normal modes like
cw  or ssb. 

##  City lots, RX noise, counterpoise, and 160m dont belong in the same sentence.    TX is not the issue, its RX. 
I cant figure out how to possibly get enough separation between a TX..and a RX ant.   Next problem  is.... surrounded 
by noise on 160m.   Orient the dedicated 160M  RX  ant to say ZL land.... and its also pointed at a noise source. 
Now what do I do ?    I see no solution.... except for maybe using a remote RX....or perhaps using some esoteric mode. 

Jim   VE7RF