On 1/25/2014 11:10 PM, wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 20:46:48 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/25/2014 8:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 18:54:24 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

Not necessarily. Above ground, the radials provide only a (very low)
capacitive link to the ground. Below ground, they provide a direct link
to the soil. The effect creates a better ground plane for the antenna(s).
(...)
But an even more important point here is maintenance. It's very hard to
cut the grass when radials are above ground.

Not everyone agrees. See item #4:
http://lists.contesting.com/_topband/2002-04/msg00010.html

I'll go with the experts, instead of some amateur posting on the web.

Reminder: This is an amateur radio specific newsgroup.

AM radio stations wouldn't go to all of that expense if it weren't
worthwhile. And they have professionals advising them; ones with EE
degrees and years of experience.

Elevated Radial AM Antenna Grounding System by Nott Ltd
http://www.nottltd.com/amgroundsystems.html

A Closer Look at Vertical Antennas With Elevated Ground Systems
http://rudys.typepad.com/files/eleva...al-version.pdf

Perhaps there's another reason why AM stations bury their radials?
http://www.thebdr.net/articles/ops/xmtr/NewThreat.pdf
http://www.thebdr.net/articles/steel/gnd/FLAP1.pdf

But once again, you show your ignorance. Typical.

Claiming that I'm wrong (or ignorant) does not automatically prove
your point.

Welcome to the club; he does that with anyone on any group on any subject
when someone has the audacity to disagree with something he has said.





No, just when someone is ignorant.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

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