Thread
:
Radials
View Single Post
#
3
April 5th 14, 08:25 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Ian Jackson[_2_]
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Radials
In message ,
writes
Fred McKenzie wrote:
In article ,
Wimpie wrote:
I know the "classical" definition, but we live in 2014, and when the
scope of some definitions changed over the last 20..30 years, it is
good to know how they changed to avoid misunderstandings. Visit some
antenna manufacturer's websites and see what changed over the years
(that doesn't mean that I agree with them).
1. There are industry standards, but some antenna manufacturers use
numbers and definitions to make their products more attractive. That
has not changed over the last many years.
2. The feature that defines a ground plane antenna is the ground plane,
not the vertical element.
3. Ground is relatively flat. Drooping radials to approximate a sleeve
dipole is stretching the definition of a ground plane!
The Radials of a ground plane antenna work entirely differently than the
sleeve in a sleeve dipole, drooping or otherwise.
I would question 'entirely'. In my simplistic ignorance, I would have
thought that as you increase the angle of dangle, one kind of morphs
into the other.
--
Ian
Reply With Quote
Ian Jackson[_2_]
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Ian Jackson[_2_]