Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
There is a large skew with a 1/4 wl vertical over two 1/4 wl radials,
and it gets worse at higher elevation numbers.

Who said anything about two radials?

Actually YOU did. Several times as a matter of fact.

I am reporting
the standard model with four radials. I was away
from my computer for four days over the holidays
and may have missed the two radial discussion, if
there was one.

The radial radiation cancellation that I earlier
described was based on four radials, certainly
not on two.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Here is what you said on this very thread:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Tom Donaly wrote:
If you can bring yourself to think in terms of
current directions and far field superposition of waves, this
behavior shouldn't be that hard to understand.

It's pretty easy to understand. Any two radials,
180 degrees apart and high enough, should theoretically
cancel each other's radiation in the far field.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Maybe reading one of your own posts will jog your memory a bit. In it
we see you VERY CLEARLY stated two radials would cancel each other's
radiation.

73 Tom