Ed wrote:


I have two nice 100'+ trees between which it would be quite easy
to
install a dipole..... whether it be folded or standard depends on the

comments I receive from you guys on the low noise characteristic I am

questioning.

Ed K7AAT

Myself, I would just build the standard dipole. As far as any far field

noise, I consider the two types the same in performance. The main
difference being the impedance step up on the folded version. As
Richard
mentioned, there may be lightning advantages to the folded version, but
for general HF noise, I don't think it would matter. You have to
consider
what noise is. It's RF. Your antenna is *supposed* to be able to
receive
noise. If it doesn't , it's defective as far as I'm concerned. Many
build
antennas that they claim to be low, or lower noise, but myself, I'm of
the
opinion they are usually building lower efficiency antennas which
naturally pick up less noise. To decrease the pickup of far field
noise,
you can change polarization, directional pattern, or efficiency. Being
as
your proposed dipoles will have the same polarization, and pattern, the
only thing left to reduce noise pickup is efficiency. Do you *really*
want to lose efficiency in order to reduce far field noise pickup? I
sure wouldn't...There may be an advantage as far as static buildup with
the folded dipole, but do you
actually have a static buildup problem? I don't have that problem here
in Houston. It's hardly ever dry enough around here.. Any common mode
noise problems are dealt with using baluns, chokes, etc...
To make the best decision, you need to know what noise? you are trying
to cut.
If it's general far field noise, you are chasing a dream that doesn't
really exist, unless you want to degrade your antenna system, or make
it directional, etc. I *want* my antennas to pick up noise, if it's
there to be picked up.
Lets me know they are working...:/ MK