<kq2m@earthlink.net>
>I think that's pretty fatalistic. I don't want to make my antenna
>decisions based on hope. I trust science and actual experience
>over hope.
>Bob KQ2M
>> i installed my 160 vertical in the woods 25 years ago. it worked fine.
>>
>> four years ago, we logged the forest significantly reducing the number of
>> trees in the "near field."
>>
>> it still works fine.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's actually realistic, not fatalistic
There's way too many variables to make sense of:
Types of trees
Size of trees
Number of trees
Geometry of trees
Moisture of trees
Time of year
etc etc etc...
...to actually model something that would be useful (in your or my lifetime,
anyway).
In this case one could doodle ones self to death on paper, with the liklihood of
not coming up with any useful analytical model, or break out the slingshot
and wire, and get on the air.
My anecdotal observations are, the antennas I have in the trees work just fine.
My scientific, measureable observations, are that the antennas I have in the
woods
work 100% better than the antennas that exist only on my notepad.
73
John K5MO
<kq2m@earthlink.net>
>I think that's pretty fatalistic. I don't want to make my antenna
>decisions based on hope. I trust science and actual experience
>over hope.
>Bob KQ2M
>> i installed my 160 vertical in the woods 25 years ago. it worked fine.
>>
>> four years ago, we logged the forest significantly reducing the number of
>> trees in the "near field."
>>
>> it still works fine.
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|