made a 1/4 wave vertical (on the ground) for 40 m. (40 radials 1/4 wave)
and made a dipole at abt 45 feet high for 40 m.

I live on the countryside and my vertical is abt 15 feet from my house and
all other sides are clear.

The dipole is in 99.9 % better then the vertical in 99.9 %. A few times the
same. The dipole is abt 25 feet above the house and all other houses in the
village.

I only listened e.g. yesterday a YB station was 5-8/9 on the dipole and the
vertical was 4-6 with a lot of noise.

I am a fan for verticals but that the dipole worked so good I did not expect
that.

Did U.

73 pa3glf

D/C Hoogerwaard wrote:
I only listened e.g. yesterday a YB station was 5-8/9 on the dipole and the
vertical was 4-6 with a lot of noise.

That matches my experience at my QTH.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"D/C Hoogerwaard" wrote -
made a 1/4 wave vertical (on the ground) for 40 m. (40 radials 1/4 wave)
and made a dipole at abt 45 feet high for 40 m.

I live on the countryside and my vertical is abt 15 feet from my house and
all other sides are clear.

The dipole is in 99.9 % better then the vertical in 99.9 %. A few times
the
same. The dipole is abt 25 feet above the house and all other houses in
the
village.

I only listened e.g. yesterday a YB station was 5-8/9 on the dipole and
the
vertical was 4-6 with a lot of noise.

I am a fan for verticals but that the dipole worked so good I did not
expect
that.

========================

On another band, at a different distance, in another direction, at another
time of day, the vertical will be better than the dipole.

Don't throw anything away until you have listened to several hundred
stations, over a period of 6 months, at random times of day, on random
bands, using the same receiver, and have performed a statistical analysis.