Hi Jim,
Again- I am not trying to create trouble here but see computer modeling
software improved.
Yes- do have poor performance with verticals, but you mentioned that you
live in a heavily wooded area. Verticals work poorly in heavily wooded areas
so
I don't believe that's a fair environment to compare verticals to
horizontals.
Our club once operated Field Day with verticals on 40-10m. in a heavy wooded
area. The shade was wonderful for keeping us cool but the verticals worked
terrible even on distances over 1,000 miles. Computing modeling should try
to take the environment more into effect... I wouldn't be surprised if a
heavily wooded area attentuated a verticals radiation by as much as 20dB.
73,
Dick- K9OM
In a message dated 4/5/2009 3:45:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jim@audiosystemsgroup.com writes:
My comments comparing verticals and dipoles are on the basis of BOTH NEC
modeling
and on the air comparisons during contests on a LOT of signals. I have yet
to find
any significant disagreement between NEC models and what happens on the air
with
MY antennas.
73,
Jim Brown K9YC
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|