Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"I`m just reporting conditions at my QTH."

Every installation is unique, but horizontal power lines are often long
in terms of h-f waves. At a distance, one receives radiation from the
wires which tends to make a zero sum. This happens even though the h-f
is likely common-mode on the wires.

Every power pole is supposed to be grounded. Radiation induced and other
spurious currents in the power lines drains to the earth through this
multitude of earth connections. Though the phase of these currents to
earth varies in the various ground wires, you are often closer to one
than the others. Radiation phase from that particular ground wire is
usually not a jumble at a given frequency due to limited height of the
pole. Your proximity to one pole often derives from being served with
electricity from that pole.

As horizontally polarized signals don`t propagate via ground wave and
suffer extreme attenuation due to cross-polarization when sweeping
vertical wires, inducing little energy in them, and due to vertically
polarized radiation from vertical wires on power poles, vertically
polarized radiation is all you get from the poles.

For an Idea of r-f currents in the ground wire on a power pole, explore
close to the pole the signals it radiates with a transistor battery
operated portable radio. They can be intense.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

One thing to keep in mind is that vertically polarized waves can
propagate by ground wave, while horizontally polarized waves can't.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


True, but at close distances in which we have our man made noise sources, and
power lines contributing to conduct arcing, there is not that much of
"propagating" going on (almost near field). Our antennas "see" the noise
sources in their full "beauty" of "all kinds" polarization. Major factor is the
radiation pattern of the vertical (main lobe close to horizon) and its height
(lower to ground - "looking" straight at the noise sources).
Snooping with AM radio with ferite antenna can be very revealing in seeing the
polarization at particular point. Broadband noise source (spark transmitter)
can be very "ingenious" in producing and propagating the arcs over the wires
and air.

Back in Toronto I was plagued by 90% of the time with 20 over 9 from HV power
line noise. On 160 and 80 m, even from horizontals the "background" noise was
around S8. But having vertical whip stuck at the beach at Cape Hatteras, NC,
allowed me to hear rare DX at the opening and closing of the bands and getting
reports like "only or first NA station" with barefoot TX. Simply amazing. Oh,
and background noise is just non existent, S-meter needle sits at ZERO except
when static crashes.
One has to consider and select antenna systems based on requirements, geography
and noise situation. If local noise masks the signals, then fuggetabout it.
Some gadgets like noise cancellers can help in certain situations (single
source, phasing) also by positioning nulls in the antenna pattern at the noise
source can help, but it is royal pain in the butt especially for the contester.
I am willing to travel to no noise territory to enjoy hearing the band breathe.

So, saying that verticals are no good because they pick noise, is like saying
that Ferrari is no good to haul manure :-)

Yuri, K3BU, VE3BMV

Roy Lewallen wrote in message ...
Well, 50 feet of RG-58 has about 3/4 dB loss at 14 MHz. And when it's
old. . . I've got RG-58 that's well over 20 years old, and can't measure
the difference in loss between it and new cable. If it's damaged, it
might create an impedance bump, which you might or might not notice. But
that's true of larger diameter cable, too.

I'm bemused to find that today's hams have somehow gotten convinced they
all need BIG cable for a BIG signal. Maybe they've been listening to the
same ads that sell people on monster audio cables and SUVs. But I sure
hate to see this misleading concept being passed along to newcomers.
They'll fall for the ads soon enough without help.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I don't think I've really promoted the cause of excess loss in thin
coax, but it is worse than thick cable. By damaged, I mean waterlogged
generally. There are not too many other ways to damage it to make it
overly lossy. I've seen some old thin coax that was pretty bad as far
as loss. Quite noticable on 10m anyway...Maybe not 20m as much. I do
prefer larger coax any day of the week, but thats mainly to reduce the
losses when I have a fairly large mismatch. IE: warc band use with
tuner, etc. Also less loss on higher freq's. In this case, I only
mentioned it in case the tuner ends up not being the problem. The coax
needs to at least be considered. But I think the tuner is the likely
culprit. MK

W5DXP wrote in message ...
Mark Keith wrote:
It's simple. Cecil did not use enough radials for the low height he
mounted the vertical.

I used *twice as much wire* for radials in the vertical as I used for
the entire horizontal antenna. :-)

Unfortunately, that was not enough.

In addition, the top of the vertical
was 15 feet higher than the horizontal and was a lightning rod.

The top of mine was nearly 70 ft in the air. It was never struck once
the whole time I had it up, and went through some radical t-storms.
Funny part? After I took it down, I've had that mast struck twice,
with much less height.

In
addition, the RG-213 cost three times as much as ladder-line.

You are a retired injuneer. You should able able to afford it. :/

Anyone
need a 33 ft aluminum tubing vertical? Come haul it away.

I would, if I were closer. Then I could put up two of them, phase
them, and really kick some butt. I'd take that overpriced 213 off your
hands too. MK