"Cecil Moore" wrote
in message ...
Jack Painter wrote:
Is it appropriate to apply the above discussion to two random-wires,
end-fed
(coax) from a 4:1 Balun were one half of the Balun output is directly
connected to ground?

I'm sorry Jack, I don't understand the question. If the two wires
are equal length and the currents are flowing in opposite physical
directions, the far fields will tend to cancel.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Sorry Cecil, I'll be more clear:

I have a random wire antenna, it has one coax-attachment (feedpoint) from
which two different length wires start from a 4:1 Balun on a ground rod, up
to a Pine tree about 60' in the air. The shorter 42' wire terminates via
insulated connector and non-conductive line to the main 76' wire that
continues skyward (about a 45 degree angle) until it terminates at an
insulator before the support line finally connects it to the high tree limb.
Some folks call this a "fan" arrangement.

A Radio Works 4:1 current-type Balun has two output connectors, and both
random wires start at one of those connectors. The other connector (normally
intended for the other half of a dipole) is shorted to the ground rod the
Balun is mounted to. This is a noise-limiting design from an old Fine Tuning
"Proceedings" article.

My question is, if I added a long radial (on the ground) from that ground
rod, all the way under the sloping antenna wires, would there be any benefit
in the transmitting pattern? How about two radials, 180 degrees from each
other (one under the antenna, the other 180 degrees away from it)?

I sounds kind of like creating an 1/2 underground dipole, which you and
others well explained is a non-starter. But the antenna also has
characteristics similar to an inverted-L, and I believe those can benefit
from radials. The antenna has been easy to manually tune via an MFJ-962D,
and an MFJ-994 ATU makes quick work of any thing I have loaded it with.
Could radials improve this "random wire(s)" antenna, or just soak up more
power?

Thanks a lot,

Jack