A friend of mine just sent me a note pointing out to me in a private
email that KS8S isn't "in the middle of the 15mS/m" FCC zone as I had
claimed. Turns out if you look at the detail maps carefully, Deshler
Ohio is really in the 8mS/m zone just west of the 15mS/m zone. Dean did
have a high water table, however, so maybe he was in a localized high
conductivity area that was "averaged out" by the low-resolution of the
FCC map.
Sorry for getting all these facts wrong. With all the B/S I've been
spewing here on Towertalk, I am beginning to think I should give up on
my science based career and switch to something less dependent on
factual accuracy - selling male enhancement perhaps (everyone is talking
about "Smiling Bob's" big new antenna system).
73, Mike W4EF.....................
Michael Tope wrote:
>CRAIG CLARK wrote:
>
>
>
>>My 160 vertical is located in a fresh water swamp. The key to it's success
>>has been the thousands of feet of radial wire I have laid down.....not on
>>the water. I located it there as it was away from the house and out of sight
>>
>>
>>from the wife and the road, not for any perceived benefit from location.
>
>
>>Fresh water is not a good conductor.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I don't think anyone is disputing that, Craig, but neither is dry rocky
>soil a good conductor (trust me, I have first hand experience with lousy
>soil). Seawater is clearly superior to either of these two by several
>orders of magnitude (about 3 in the case of average soil). The relavent
>questions are whether rain soaked soil or fresh water lakes are
>significantly better than average or poor soil. I suspect the answer is,
>yes, but I don't have hard data to back that up.
>
>I think I remember reading that W8JI had some data for a fresh water
>proximate BC sight that suggested the lake was somewhere between 15 and
>30 mS/m, but I may be misremembering. I would be real happy with 15 to
>30 mS/m compared to what I have now. I recall that the KS8S/AD8P contest
>station in Deshler Ohio (Northwest region of state) was right in the
>middle of a 15mS/m zone on the FCC conductivity map. From what I
>understand you could dig down a few feet into Dean's yard and hit water.
>It seemed like you could shunt feed a piece of spaghetti there and do
>well on 160.
>
>BTW, even if the muck in your fresh water marsh has improved
>conductivity over dry soil, I wouldn't expect that to obviate the need
>for a good radial system. Copper is still a many many orders of
>magnitude better conductor than even saltwater. I would expect the main
>benefit of the mucky soil to be a positive impact on the psuedo Brewster
>angle.
>
>73, Mike W4EF.............
>
>
>
>>With all due respect to other posters,
>>most of the comments have been anecdotal in nature and do not reflect any
>>scientific measurements of performance.
>>
>>I have done any number of searches from Terman to Laport and Google and can
>>find nothing that touts locating an antenna in fresh water to enhance
>>performance.
>>
>>73 Craig
>>
>>
>>Craig Clark K1QX
>>Radioware
>>PO Box 209
>>Rindge NH 03461
>>603 899 6957
>>
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|