Interesting stuff

I wonder however if you have any hard data on the merits of using
one
polarization over another in an electrically noisy environment. For
years I have believed (but never seen proof) that on average
horizontal
is better for this.

Any comments? If it is horiz, why? Is it indeed the high radiation
angle
missing local noise makers or something else..?

Cheers Bob VK2YQA

Reg Edwards wrote:
There is much discussion about the relative merits of the simple
vertical versus horizontal dipole antennas.

==========================================

Local noise is stronger in terms of milli-volts per meter than distant
noise for obvious reasons. It is nearer and man-made.

Local noise is vertically polarised and comes in via the groundwave
and at low elevation angles.

Therfore, a vertical antenna which is most sensitive to vertical
polarisation and to signals and noise coming from low angles produces
greater low-angle signals and low-angle noise in the receiver.

Whereas, distant noise comes in from high angles via the ionosphere
and is randomly polarised. It is weaker than local noise. It depends
on lattitude, the sun, day or night and season of the year.

Therefore, a horizontal dipole which is most sensitive to signals and
noise coming in from the higher angles produces greater high-angle
signals and high-angle noise in the receiver.

Now carry on from there. Compare a dipole receiving a low-angle
signal with high-angle noise coming in from all directions, with a
vertical antenna receiving a high-angle signal with low-angle noise
coming in from all directions.
----
Reg.