Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 21st 14, 11:16 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default Dipoles, why height matters

Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!


Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis


--
Jim Pennino
  #2   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 01:21 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Dipoles, why height matters

In message ,
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!


Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis

Thanks, I'll certainly have a good read of those articles. But
regardless of what they say, in a typical amateur scenario, I still
reckon that at (say) 300 miles, an 80m signal from a dipole at 100' is
likely to be stronger than one from one at 20' (or even at 60').


--
Ian
  #3   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 06:06 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default Dipoles, why height matters

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!


Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis

Thanks, I'll certainly have a good read of those articles. But
regardless of what they say, in a typical amateur scenario, I still
reckon that at (say) 300 miles, an 80m signal from a dipole at 100' is
likely to be stronger than one from one at 20' (or even at 60').


As 300 miles is at the upper end of NVIS and the lower end for skywave,
it would be a crap shoot.

NVIS distance is typically 30-400 miles.

--
Jim Pennino
  #4   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 07:41 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Dipoles, why height matters

In message ,
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,

writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!

Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis

Thanks, I'll certainly have a good read of those articles. But
regardless of what they say, in a typical amateur scenario, I still
reckon that at (say) 300 miles, an 80m signal from a dipole at 100' is
likely to be stronger than one from one at 20' (or even at 60').


As 300 miles is at the upper end of NVIS and the lower end for skywave


NVIS IS skywave - only that it's more straight up-and-down than at an
angle. It's only a matter (literally) of degree, and there's no real
point at which NVIS becomes 'normal' skywave.
,
it would be a crap shoot.

NVIS distance is typically 30-400 miles.

OK, let's make it a bit less - say 50 or 100 miles. I still feel that,
in practice, a dipole at 100' would be unlikely to be less effective
than at 20'.

On the other hand, if you only want to lay down a signal out to less
than 400 miles, there's no point in going to the trouble of putting the
dipole at 100'. Apart from cost etc, this would also unnecessarily cause
QRM to reception outside your intended target area.


--
Ian
  #5   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 09:58 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default Dipoles, why height matters

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,

writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!

Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis

Thanks, I'll certainly have a good read of those articles. But
regardless of what they say, in a typical amateur scenario, I still
reckon that at (say) 300 miles, an 80m signal from a dipole at 100' is
likely to be stronger than one from one at 20' (or even at 60').


As 300 miles is at the upper end of NVIS and the lower end for skywave


NVIS IS skywave - only that it's more straight up-and-down than at an
angle. It's only a matter (literally) of degree, and there's no real
point at which NVIS becomes 'normal' skywave.


NVIS is generally defined as aiming the power straight up and the S
in NVIS stands for "Skywave". So if you want to be pendatic, you are
correct.

However, if you look at the links above, the real world DOES make
a distinction between NVIS and skywave.

it would be a crap shoot.

NVIS distance is typically 30-400 miles.

OK, let's make it a bit less - say 50 or 100 miles. I still feel that,
in practice, a dipole at 100' would be unlikely to be less effective
than at 20'.


The experience of all the world's militaries and those others who have
done actual measurements come to a contrary conclusion.


--
Jim Pennino


  #6   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 10:33 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 757
Default Dipoles, why height matters

On Saturday, November 22, 2014 4:01:08 PM UTC-6,
NVIS is generally defined as aiming the power straight up and the S
in NVIS stands for "Skywave". So if you want to be pendatic, you are
correct.

However, if you look at the links above, the real world DOES make
a distinction between NVIS and skywave.


I'll have to read through them, but myself, I consider any signal
which is reflected off the ionosphere back to the target receiver, as
being skywave, no matter if the angle is 90 or 10 degrees.
If it doesn't use the ionosphere, it's not skywave. Sometimes you can
have a mix of path modes. IE: being able to receive both the skywave,
but also the ground or space wave. In most cases like that, the NVIS
path will overwhelm the ground or space wave unless the two stations
are very close together.



  #8   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 08:58 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 14
Default Dipoles, why height matters

On 11/22/2014 7:21 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ,
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

snip

Despite the obvious theory, and over 50 years in amateur radio, I still
find it hard to believe that, in real life, an 80m dipole at (say) 20'
ever really outperforms (at any distance) one at (say) 100'. Given the
choice, I know which one I would choose!


Try reading these:

http://www.qsl.net/wb5ude/nvis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_ve...idence_skywave
http://www.w0ipl.net/ECom/NVIS/nvis.htm
http://kv5r.com/ham-radio/nvis-antennas/
http://www.arrl.org/nvis

Thanks, I'll certainly have a good read of those articles. But
regardless of what they say, in a typical amateur scenario, I still
reckon that at (say) 300 miles, an 80m signal from a dipole at 100' is
likely to be stronger than one from one at 20' (or even at 60').



Yes,

intuitively it certainly seems like the higher antenna will perform
better. However, I have a chart about loop antennas that rates the 75
meter loop highest in NVIS gain at 25 feet high. I included the pdf file
if it comes through. Mine at 33 feet makes a pretty good NVIS antenna.
Will never know what it would do at 100 feet.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All tax related matters and International tax matters. Jacquelyn Lopez Boatanchors 2 June 24th 10 04:37 AM
All tax related matters and International tax matters. Jacquelyn Lopez Scanner 0 June 10th 10 04:56 AM
Israel's Identity: It Matters! Al Patrick Shortwave 20 May 7th 05 12:10 PM
ISRAEL'S IDENTITY: IT MATTERS! Al Patrick Shortwave 0 May 3rd 05 12:03 PM
Antenna height vs roof height Thierry Antenna 4 July 22nd 04 05:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017