On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:22:25 -0600, "David G. Nagel"
wrote:


Owen;

Given the expertise that Bill has accumulated over the years and the
good advise he has given to anyone who asks I think that your attitude
needs modification. When you were in school did you challenge your
teachers this way? I think not. If you diagreed you kept it to your self
or checked it out on your own.

Dave,

I don't agree, I have never had a teacher worth his salt who responded
to polite questions as Bill did.

No, I don't believe something just because I read it on the 'net, I
would like to know why.

For what it's worth everything that I have read tends towards placing
the radials on the open ground, usually staked down so as to prevent
tripping or getting caught in a lawn mower.

Yes, I see lots of web articles describing that in ham stations, but
it is not the only approach that I see documented and talked about.

In my limited experience, I have not seen commercial HF installations
with radial / ground wires laid above ground in preference to being
buried. The only cases I can recall were because of rock.

Whilst there are articles around about the performance of shallow
buried radials, I have not seen any that deal quantitatively with
radials laid on the ground, or pinned to the ground as you describe,
and the effects of those different installations on antenna
efficiency. That is what I was asking about.

Equally, there a plenty of articles where the author insists that
radials cannot work near the ground and they need to be some distance
above, some stating a quarter wave above.

They can't all have "better" efficiency, the only way to know is to
seek reasons why a configuration is better.

Bill proposed a "better" configuration and declined to explain why /
how it is better.

Owen
--