[TowerTalk] FCP on 160

[Ignacy Misztal]

W8JI writes that inv L with short radials is similar to a low bent dipole.
Low dipole has a high angle of radiation.

While the accuracy of modeling horizontal antennas is high, those of
vertical antennas is less so because of great dependence on ground
characteristics and software deficiencies in modeling elements close to
the ground. For instance, modeling reflects a 1 db difference but the
reality is 8 db. So FCP may be a great choice in some QTH and less so in
others. The best way to find out in a specific QTH is to experiment by
having another antenna for comparison.

Even lousy antennas make DX under good conditions. I worked VK6HD with a
80m dipole even though it was some 10 db below an inv L.

Ignacy NO9E



On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 11:35 PM ARTHUR BERNSTEIN via TowerTalk <
towertalk at contesting.com> wrote:

> I’ve had correspondence with Guy, K2AV and have downloaded his web site on
> the FCP. I really wonder if W8JI’s contention that an FCP will have poor
> low angle pattern. Could this be from its proximity to lossy ground which
> would  appear to alter the lobes at more acute angles to ground, especially
> lossy ground. I don’t recall what K2AV told me about the effectiveness of
> this ground system at low angles. It’s true he has a very good signal
> Stateside (which would be moderate to higher angles) but for long haul DX,
> I don’t know. Then again many people using ground level fed Inv-L ( like me
> ) who don’t have the real estate for elevated radials and on ground
> counterpoises are a non resonant maze of whatever wire you can put on or in
> ground, will likely have a very compromised radiator and an FCP might be an
> improvement.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>