To: | "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: Question - optimum number of radials |
From: | "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com> |
Date: | Fri, 14 Feb 2014 10:45:58 -0500 |
List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
While Tom touched on the subject yesterday the subject of an individuals
ground conductivity has to be stressed, continuously it seems. The FCC maps
arent perfect and hams usually dont have the options of perfect siting for
their verticals as do many of the BC stations.
Home developers often remove all of the good topsoil and sell it. They back fill with rocky sand and whatever else is cheap or worthless and finish with a skimcoat of real topsoil just thick enough to grow grass. My own attempt with 60-65 quarter wave radials 30 years ago at another home were dismal since the "ground" was pure sand left behind by the glaciers with a fresh water table about 4' down. Great for mixing concrete and drainage only. After I installed a 2X4" fence mesh around the base and out 50' could I reliably work DX. Going to elevated radials here on a granite hill in the same town saved a lot of work and works very well. CarlKM1H _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Topband: Question - optimum number of radials, James Rodenkirch |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Topband: Palomar R-X Noise Bridge, Carl |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: Question - optimum number of radials, Tom W8JI |
Next by Thread: | Re: Topband: Question - optimum number of radials, Charlie Cunningham |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |