On Nov 6, 6:05 pm, (Rick) wrote:

My point was, a lot of people think that if they put up a vertical, even
taking care to put a good radial field under it, and they get a low angle of
radiation, they have the ultimate single element DX antenna. In fact, when
you take losses into consideration a simple inverted vee beats it at all angle
over 10 degrees and equals it below 10 degrees. I think that is a pretty
significant statement.

Rick K2XT

The only thing is 16 radials is not really what I'd call a good radial
field.
After what I saw here, I don't even consider 32 radials as a very
good
radial field..
But when I elevated the antenna I did the see good DX performance.
It greatly lowers the ground losses to the point just a few radials
will
do the job.
It smoked my dipole on long paths. And as Roy says, I use mainly the
receiver to check, and also I do use an A/B switch..
But I also got plenty of checks on my signal, and of course they
matched the margins I saw on receive. My dipole was not at 60 ft,
but at 36 ft. But to VK land the GP always beat the dipole by
4 S units. And I really doubt raising my dipole to 60 ft would have
been
enough to even the score.
In theory, the ground losses of my GP at 36 ft with four radials
should
have been appx equal to a ground mount with 60 radials.
This on top of the decent ground conditions.
But I also have the advantage of having a clear shot at the horizon
with no clutter in the way. I know the ground/space wave greatly
increased when I elevated the vertical. I could work ground wave on
40m
about 90-100 miles or so. Nearly half way from Houston to San Antonio.
I'd be lucky to do 20 on the dipole.
But another thing... And this may surprise you.. My 40m mobile antenna
is better than my 36 ft high dipole at night if the path is over
800-1000
miles.. Tested it many times to make sure it wasn't a fluke.
I don't know how it would fare on 80m to dx vs the dipole..
Never really tested it. I really don't work that much dx on 80m for
some
reason.. I'm usually working NVIS..
MK