![]() |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
The interesting question then: Is the improved performance of vertical antennas over horizontal dipoles on 75 meters at DX distances due to a combination of direct radiation plus radiation from the ground in the area of strong ground wave strength out hundreds of meters? Is the ground wave leakage providing additional low signal strength in both transmit and receive? Gary - N0GW That's always interesting - and usually without a good explanation. I don't know how many times I've switched from one anntenna to another just to have the quote"inferior in theory" antenna get better results than the "better" antenna. Antennas are magic. There may be a metal building or some near-but-out-of-sight tv antenna mast or tin roof or aluminum-foil-lined insulation giving some directivity. |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:33:04 -0500, "AI4QJ" wrote:
But I am a heretic for not having mindlessly bowed in adoration at the altar of the EZNEC god in blind faith as you and others have done. Hi Dan, Heretic? More Arthur's heathen love-child. Heretics, afterall, reject the scripture they've studied to present alternatives. Heathens' marginal knowledge is a limited skill for making soup from missionaries. Run out of missionaries and heathens starve; at least a heretic can scrounge up a meal by holding out a hat on a street corner. Do you claim to have a hat? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
On Feb 15, 7:33 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
But I am a heretic for not having mindlessly bowed in adoration at the altar of the EZNEC god in blind faith as you and others have done. However, those fanatic evangelists who live by blind faith alone have wisely plonked me so as not to let their blood pressures rise at the spectre of the EZNEC god being angered. 73 I'm confused... Art, is that you? MK |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
"AI4QJ" wrote in
: 2. EZNEC is not a propagation modeler as its users are well aware; If it cannot predict take-off angle then what good is it? It doesn't matter if we warm the clouds directly above? You may have issues with Roy, but it is pretty unprofessional to deride his program on that account. It does predict the angle of maximum radiated power. "Take off angle" is a great term for those who believe that the energy exits the antenna as a blob, all in one place, and no energy elsewhere. It isn't a propagation tool, it's a design tool, and as such propagation is not at issue. Apples/Oranges. But you're a smart fellow, so I guess you are pulling our collective legs here.. 8^) - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
|
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
Richard Clark wrote in
: Heretic? More Arthur's heathen love-child. Heretics, afterall, reject the scripture they've studied to present alternatives. Heathens' marginal knowledge is a limited skill for making soup from missionaries. Run out of missionaries and heathens starve; at least a heretic can scrounge up a meal by holding out a hat on a street corner. Do you claim to have a hat? Not even a banjo, I'll bet. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
|
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
Mike Coslo wrote:
"AI4QJ" wrote in : 2. EZNEC is not a propagation modeler as its users are well aware; If it cannot predict take-off angle then what good is it? It doesn't matter if we warm the clouds directly above? You may have issues with Roy, but it is pretty unprofessional to deride his program on that account. It does predict the angle of maximum radiated power. "Take off angle" is a great term for those who believe that the energy exits the antenna as a blob, all in one place, and no energy elsewhere. It isn't a propagation tool, it's a design tool, and as such propagation is not at issue. Apples/Oranges. But you're a smart fellow, so I guess you are pulling our collective legs here.. 8^) - 73 de Mike N3LI - Watch it, Mike, he may plonk you, a fate worse than running out of beer. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
AI4QJ wrote:
"Richard Clark" wrote in message ... On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:37:55 -0800 (PST), 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. ... EZNEC information tells you nothing about ground wave propagation. Two things wrong with this: 1. EZNEC does provide information about the radiation characteristics along ground at any distance on an infinite, flat plane and at any elevation above it; Really? Can it follow the curvature of the earth from say, Illinois to Germany? Is there some part of "infinite, flat plane" that you fail to understand? 2. EZNEC is not a propagation modeler as its users are well aware; If it cannot predict take-off angle then what good is it? It doesn't matter if we warm the clouds directly above? EZNEC provides horizontal, vertical and 3D radiation patterns. Is there some other dimension you are interested in? 3. EZNEC models the 100M work of Brown, Lewis, & Epstein quite closely. There is nothing in the body of RF literature to suggest that the nature of radiation shifts suddenly in 7/8ths of a megahertz. Yes, there is no abrupt shift at 75m (most obviously). Quite simply, as you approach larger wavelengths, skywave characterstics lessen and groundwave characteristics increase. Which are functions of propagation, not antenna modeling. But I am a heretic for not having mindlessly bowed in adoration at the altar of the EZNEC god in blind faith as you and others have done. However, those fanatic evangelists who live by blind faith alone have wisely plonked me so as not to let their blood pressures rise at the spectre of the EZNEC god being angered. No, you sound more like someone with a grudge mixing apples and oranges. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Vertical Antenna Performance Question
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:04:45 -0500, "AI4QJ" wrote:
defend yourself when I begin highlighting the things that EZNEC CAN'T do Hi Dan, "EZNEC can't whiten my teeth" sounds like so much of your naive whining; why would ANYONE put any effort to "defending" against that kind of boorish trolling? Well, obviously I do. When technical content is so lacking in your complaint, all that is left are the humorous gaffs like: EZNEC does provide information about the radiation characteristics along ground at any distance on an infinite, flat plane and at any elevation above it; Really? Can it follow the curvature of the earth where the distance between "flat plane" and "curvature" are separated by only eleven words - a netzheimer's record for cognitive fading. After all, as you are one of my groupies, you were trolling for this response weren't you? ;-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com