FBMboomer wrote:

snip

Very good reply. Well stated. However, I do not take the advice of those
who use what are supposed to be antenna modelling software that consider
all variables. They never do. I take the advice of hams who have spent a
lifetime experimenting with antennas and know which ones work and which
ones do not. 100 miles from me is a ham with 90 acres. He has many
different antennas up. He can switch between an inverted vee with the
apex at 200 feet or a double bazooka at 75 feet. He can switch to a
vertical loop with a reflector. He tried just about every thing
including a sterba curtain over the last 57 years. I live in the middle
of a small town. I have lots of QRN. He told me to put up a horizontal
loop. It worked wonders over my dipole for noise. I fed it with 450 ohm
window line. He told me to use home made 600 ohm line. I could not see
how that could make it better. I finally put up that 600 ohm feed line a
couple of years after putting up the loop. I kick myself now for not
doing what he said immediately. Somehow, the 600 ohm line works
significantly better than 450 ohm window line. He does not know theory
either. He just knows what works and what does not work. I will take
advice from empirical experiments any time over mathematical modelling.

Yep, and it only took him 57 years to figure it out.

While modeling may not be perfect, it shows you in minutes what can
take days, weeks or even months with empirical experiments.

Every antenna I have modeled and built has performed as the model predicted
to the accuracy of the ham grade test equipment I have.

And I have avoided spending time trying to emperically get something
to work which modeling shows in minutes is a waste of time.

It is your life, spend what time you have doing what you want to do.


--
Jim Pennino