RadioBanter - View Single Post

Jerry Stuckle · October 13th 14, 08:44 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna

On 10/13/2014 3:21 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 10/13/2014 1:05 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 10/12/2014 4:29 PM, wrote:
Ralph Mowery wrote:

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message ,
writes
Like I said, there is no difference in free space between a V and an
inverted V.

There are slight differences when close to ground.

Assuming it's a halfwave dipole, I would have thought it was better to
concentrate on getting the centre (where the current is) as high as
possible, rather than the ends. [Obviously this depends on whether you
have a suitable sky-hook available for and at the centre.] However, I
believe that there is at least one commercial loaded dipole (essentially
for portable use, I think) that has a short mast, and the ends of the V
are up in the air.

In free space I would not think there would be much of any differance.

Near the ground where most of us are is what we have to live with. In my
back yard I have enough room to string wire dipoles for 80 meters and
shorter. I don't have a way to support the antennas in the middle. I can
go up about 60 feet or so at the ends.

60 feet is good for 30M, marginal for 40M, and crap for 80M and below
for a dipole.

I'll argue with that. I got WAS on 75 meters with an inverted vee with
an apex of 50'. I was in Iowa at the time - but had a pretty good
signal across the continental U.S. late at night.

There are many things to consider, and blanket statements like yours are
pretty much worth what people pay for them.

The only "blanket statements" in there is that 1/2 lambda is the OPTIMUM
height for an antenna. Above and below that height a good deal of the
patten goes to warming clouds.

Note the word "optimum"; that means that antennas at other heights do work,
just not as well as they could.

"60 feet is good for 30M, marginal for 40M, and crap for 80M and below
for a dipole."

I have proof that is not the case. If the antenna were not crap, how
could I work both Alaska and Hawaii on 75 meters with an inverted V
having an apex at only 50'?

What part of "optimum" is it that you did not understand?

If your point is that you disagree with what I said about 60 feet,
run a NEC analysis for 60 feet versus 1/2 lambda for the bands mentioned
and show me the error of my ways.

You didn't say "optimum". You said it was "crap". What part of "crap"
don't you understand?

You think an NEC analysis is the slickest thing since snot on a
doorknob. But what about HAAT or ground conductivity, for instance?
You have considered neither when telling me my antenna was "crap" -
which it provably was not.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================