Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Why radials improve radiation!

To: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Why radials improve radiation!
From: Eddy Swynar <deswynar@xplornet.ca>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:53:12 -0400
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
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

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>