Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard Clark" wrote
"Richard Fry" wrote: It is also clear from the above values how much better the low freq MW broadcast channels perform. Hi OM, You have a remarkable capacity to find controversy where there is none. Again, what is the contention that is your point? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC _______________ You quote only a part of my post with which you happen to agree, and then say I find controversy when there is none. The point of my last post on this subject, and our real controversy here relates to which characteristic of sea water is responsible for its lower groundwave path loss, as developed in the thread. You wrote that the reason is because sea water is a good reflector. I wrote that it is because of its good conductivity. This difference in our positions should be evident by reading the thread. RF |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |