The effect of a tree is hard to predict. If it's wet, and if it contacts
your antenna at a high impedance point, then the tree will become part
of the antenna. It's going to be a pretty lossy conductor, so chances
are that it will rob the antenna of some signal by dissipating it. But I
can see situations, though unlikely, where it could conceivably improve
things.

Few of us can put up the ideal antenna, so they're all compromises of
one kind or another. We just do the best we can under the circumstances.
You have to weigh the nuisance of center feeding or other modifications
against the possible benefits, and make your choices. But if you want to
improve your reception, something is going to have to change.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Nick C wrote:
Roy,

Yes, thanks. That confirms most of what I already knew.

About that tree question though... that one threw me. I thought for sure,
if the tree was wet (which will be about 99% of the time from now on)...
would 'remove' the energy from any signal hitting the wire..? The reception
quality with aspect to it's wavelength makes sense, and I understand that.

And yes, I have thought about using a dipole, but you clarified one point --
that it's not multiband. Although there are a few vendors who sell these
SWL type antennas. Most are end-fed, but there are a few that are
center-fed. Center feeding would be a lot harder for me to set up -- a lot
more coax cable to run to my rig!

PS. My coax is actually pretty horizontal. I have to fling it over some
other objects, so it actually stays about 90% horizontal. My
computers/tv/video don't seem to affect it too much with coax. My old set
up -- with just plain incoming wire... was really bad with QRM -- as
expected.


Thanks
-Nick
n7zya