On 14 Mar 2005 00:47:11 -0800, (Kristinn Andersen,
TF3KX) wrote:

Thus, your suggestion that my inv-V (horizontal antenna) is
simply gaining advantage from its height (and in some cases azimuthal
directivity) is a viable explanation. Keep in mind that the inv-V is
supported by an aluminum pole with an apex 6m (18ft) above my metallic
roof, and the roof itself is at 8m (24ft) above the surrounding ground
- thus the apex point is at 14m (42ft) above ground.

It just struck me that even the "supposedly best" verticals (5/8 wl,
using good connections to the metal roof as a counterpoise) are
consistently substantially weaker on reception on 40-10m than the
inv-V. The difference varies from zero to 7-8 S-units. I would have
expected the vertical to be better in at least a few cases - but it's
not.

But, OK - the inv-V dipole is gaining further from its height. Any
other suggestions, anyone?

Hi Kristinn,

It is rather simplistic to describe the inverted V as being a
Horizontal antenna. It has a significant Horizontal preference, yes,
but only broadside (and there subtends perhaps only a third of the
antenna's total response). It also has a minor Vertical preference
over the Horizontal response for a third of the total field along the
antenna's axis. For the remaining third of the total field, the
inverted V is roughly equal in Horizontal and Vertical response.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC