To: | "peter.voelpel" <peter.voelpel@t-online.de>,<towertalk@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Inverted Vee |
From: | "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com> |
Date: | Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:24:41 -0700 |
List-post: | <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com> |
> Verticals are much more ground sensitive then dipoles, so it is quit often > that even the low dipole on a hilltop or in the desert outperforms a > vertical due to the poor ground. If your dipole seems good compared to a vertical on 160m, it is more likely because the vertical is poor than because the dipole is good. Rick N6RK _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk |
Previous by Date: | [TowerTalk] Roof Climbing Safety, Eric Rosenberg |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [TowerTalk] Note of Appreciation, NØATH |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Inverted Vee, peter.voelpel |
Next by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Inverted Vee, doktorij |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |