> On Jul 24, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Steve Ireland <vk6vz@arach.net.au> wrote:
>
> If you have losses in the far field from poor soil conductivity, all the
> radials in the world and a full-size vertical can’t fix this. ;-)
Anyone care to hazard a guess as to what soil conductivity numbers might define
“poor soil conductivity” for low band vertical antennas/polarization losses?
Here in central Texas with arid rocky poor soil I suspect the soil conductivity
is pretty low as determined from the table in Low Band DXing.
With many years of using a 78 ft shunt-fed tower with 12-16 on ground radials
on 160m I have no complaints with my results. I suspect it’s a pretty
inefficient 160m radiator with high far field losses. However, with using an
amp for xmit on 160m my limiting factor for success has been effective
receiving.
As the same time while I’ve never used an inverted V/dipole on 160m there are
160m DX’ers in this region who have been very successful using inverted
V/dipoles at moderate heights also running QRO.
73 Phil NA4M
-. .- ….- --
Phil Duff na4m[at]suddenlink[dot]net
philip-duff.pixels.com
tinyurl.com/Philip-Duff-Alamy
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|