I'd say it looks like ARRL in QST at least, is publishing anything.
QST is become a more non-technical publication, but I nevertheless
found that "vertical beam" article irresponsible to publish for I
think it conveys the incorrect impression that this method of
directivity is superior to an elevated vertical with a good
omnidirectional ground system. Further, in my opinion, too much
reliance is placed on modeling however the author did attempt field
strength measurements (but in a flawed way). None of this gets
around the fact that the lack of field strength in the arc where there
is no ground system is due to ground loss because the ground
resistance is not returning current to the feedpoint. That will show
up as reduced field strength. That is not the same thing as efficient
gain however.
73
Rob
K5UJ
<<<
In the past 2 months, I have seen two different articles in ARRL
publications that say a vertical with 1 radial has gain in the direction of
the radial. One said 3 db. Evidently Eznec confirmed this.
Why the heck do I bother putting down all those radials under my verticals??
According to one article, 1 radial is best because it gives the antenna a
real wide bandwitch, SWR is close to 50 ohms, and has gain in the direction
of the radial. Seems like those symptoms would give loss not gain.
Is this true, or is the ARRL just publishing anything now? Sure is
different from anything I've ever known about verticals.
>>>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|