Some of the best reasons are empirical. Numerous studies have shown
that the clutter return from the sea surface is considerably higher in
horizontal polarization. I am on vacation, so I don't have my Skolnik
handy to say exactly how much. Anyway, this favors a vertical polarization.

Similarly, practical considerations make vertical polarization the best
for mobile applications. The 1/4 whip is the simplest antenna structure
on a mobile platform. While base stations could as easily use
horizontal or vertical, any mobile horizontal antenna will require extra
structure to implement.

In both of these applications there is nothing be gained by going to any
other polarization than vertical for these uses. In cases where
horizontal polarization has an advantage, there is no reason to go
partly vertical. So that is why the world end up either being vertical
or horizontal for the most part. Where it doesn't, polarization usually
doesn't matter or is less of a concern than other reasons (see inverted
vees and sloping dipoles).

Erich
KA6AMD

Jimmie D wrote:
"art" wrote in message
oups.com...
On 27 Mar, 15:12, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art wrote:

"I have his (Kraus`) second edition (Antennas) and I find no mention of
radiation from the beginning where current is applied onward."

I think I have that edition too. If you review the chapter on "Point
Sources" you`ll find: power patterns, a power theorem and its
application to isotropic sources, rediation intensity, source with
hemispheric power pattern, unidirectional cosine power pattern, etc.,
etc..

The new, now available 3rd ed. of "Antennas" by Kraus, Marhefka, and a
host of others is greatly expanded and improved. It is worth the
investment.

Being uncertain of what Art really wants, doesn`t stop me from advising
him to start by having a look at the famous Sommerfeld formula on page
804 of Terman`s 1955 opus.
It predicts 1 kilowatt will produce 186 mv per m at a distance of 1 mile
from a short vertical transmitting antenna given a certain ground
conductivity and other conditions.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI
Richard, I have lots of books but as yet have not found the answer
even tho many have posted none appear to really have an answer other
than to throw stones. You apparently have found the answer! Could you
quote from the books that you are refering to the angle of radiation
relative to the radiator, thats it ? If you can't understand that then
relay to me the angle of a radiation front relative to a radiator, I'm
sure some other people are interested in what you found. Even better,
let me know the TOA of a dipole in free space and how much it varies
to that of the same dipole over a perfect ground. Use a computor
program if you like, anything that sheds light on the matter . The
books say that a horizontal "v" antenna should be tipped for max gain,
doesn't that raise your interest about the reasoning and mathematics
behind this? Jimmie D asked me to state this angle but I have only a
expensive computor program that doesn't give the math with the answer.
Please read off the angle and the specifics so we all can move on, I
don't want a 160 thread postings some thrust upon Walt
Art

The V antenna is a terminated traveling wave antenna the dipoles that you
have been refering to are standingwave antennas. You are comparing apples
and oranges. The best I can tell is that all other references you made to
tilt have been perpedicular to the direction of the wave front. The V
antenna is tilted in the direction of the wave front, more apples and
oranges. Throw in some grapes and pineapple and we will have fruit salad.

Jimmie