To: | <topband@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: Modeling "Ground" and losses |
From: | "Richard Fry" <rfry@adams.net> |
Reply-to: | Richard Fry <rfry@adams.net> |
Date: | Mon, 2 Mar 2015 05:35:41 -0600 |
List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
Is it conventional to compare the surface wave fields at a distance so near the Radial length and the wave length? I chose a horizontal plane distance that would be just a bit into the far field radiation of that system, so as to minimize groundwave propagation loss. Greater distances would show lower fields, but their ratio would still be the same as at 0.1 km -- as would the difference in radiated power. R. Fry _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Topband: [Bulk] Improving low angle reception DX Eng 8 ele Circle RCV Array, W0MU Mike Fatchett |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Topband: Inverted L height vs. length., Yuri Blanarovich |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: Modeling "Ground" and losses, Bill Aycock |
Next by Thread: | Topband: DXCC Program Integrity, Larry Burke |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |