On Feb 15, 12:52*pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
AI4QJwrote:
I suspect that the EZNEC program is not designed for taking into account
such "rare" phenomena as "ground wave propagation". So much for EZNEC
analysis at 75m.

* * * * My own experiments with vertical vs dipole led me to the conclusion
that they both work better than the other, and they both work worse than
each other.

I based my analysis on signal strength using a db pad to match for the
weakest signal vs the strongest one. You can't do this one with just the
S-Meter, they aren't very accurate.

* * * * Sometimes the vertical "worked" better, and sometimes the horizontal
did. And while a generalization could be made for distance, therefore
"take off angle" *between the two antennas, the reception could change
in the middle of a QSO, favoring one other the other.

Comparing one antenna against another is quite difficult - at least to
say which one "works" better.

* * * * And I'm curious - where is the propagation function in EZNEC?

* * * * *- 73 de Mike N3LI -

There is none, of course. You would have to construct the lobes on an
asimuth chart but this is only useful for take-off angle and skywave
propagation. EZNEC information tells you nothing about ground wave
propagation.