This analysis should be done in free space, not over ground. Propagation
to the moon should avoid reflection from the ground, and in any case
EZNEC's flat, infinite-extent ground model isn't representative of what
the signal would encounter in real life.

One other comment. As a dipole gets longer, the lobes move closer and
closer to the direction of the wire. Bending the dipole into a vee shape
aligns pairs of the lobes so they point in the same direction, i.e.,
along the vee axis. That's why the optimum angle becomes less and less
as the wires get longer, and why a dipole model isn't necessarily
representative of what a long vee will do.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Richard Clark wrote:

For this particular design (except mine is elevated 5 wavelengths), I
pushed for 1 degree resolution, with a split source, with tapered
segments (1023 all told) and I still fall short, but also well ahead
of my earlier reports:
18.5dBi @ 3 degrees w/3 degree lobe width

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 05:49:08 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

|On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:24:01 -0700, Wes wrote:
|
|Here are the results I obtained from a quick MultiNEC (NEC-2)
|analysis. This at 144 Mhz with height = 20', Sommerfeld Gnd, with
|average dirt. #12 AWG Al wire, 20 segments/WL, elevation angle = 4
|deg. Source on the middle of a short (3 segment) wire.
|
|Len. (WL) Ang. (deg) Gain (dBi)
|
|20.193 20 21.97
|
|Hi Wes,
|
|For this particular design (except mine is elevated 5 wavelengths), I
|pushed for 1 degree resolution, with a split source, with tapered
|segments (1023 all told) and I still fall short, but also well ahead
|of my earlier reports:
| 18.5dBi @ 3 degrees w/3 degree lobe width

Keep trying, you're getting closer [g].