Tom: I agree with you on the 160/80m explanation for the better
performance of the vertical than the inv-V.

Generally it is assumed that polarization of arriving HF signals is
randomly oriented and constantly changing - which I have no grounds to
refute. Thus, your suggestion that my inv-V (horizontal antenna) is
simply gaining advantage from its height (and in some cases azimuthal
directivity) is a viable explanation. Keep in mind that the inv-V is
supported by an aluminum pole with an apex 6m (18ft) above my metallic
roof, and the roof itself is at 8m (24ft) above the surrounding ground
- thus the apex point is at 14m (42ft) above ground.

It just struck me that even the "supposedly best" verticals (5/8 wl,
using good connections to the metal roof as a counterpoise) are
consistently substantially weaker on reception on 40-10m than the
inv-V. The difference varies from zero to 7-8 S-units. I would have
expected the vertical to be better in at least a few cases - but it's
not.

But, OK - the inv-V dipole is gaining further from its height. Any
other suggestions, anyone?

73 - Kristinn, TF3KX


"TOM" wrote in message news:7P%Yd.1796$oa6.1254@trnddc07...
HF signals are usually not predominantly polarized more horizontal or
vertical.

The effect that you are seeing is due to the effective height of the dipole
above ground. On 40,20,15,10 the dipole is high enough (in terms of
wavelengths)
that it develops a good pattern at lower angles of radiation (or reception).

On 80 and 160 meters, your dipole is too close to the ground for it to have
a
good low-angle pattern.

Thus what you are seeing is that the signals you want to listen to are
arriving
at an angle lower than what your 80/160 meter dipoles are effective at. The
vertical
antenna has a lower angle of reception on these bands than the dipole.

If you listen to signals out to ~300 km on 80 meters, you may find that your
dipole
outperforms the vertical because those signals are arriving at your antenna
from a
fairly high angle.

-- Tom



"Kristinn Andersen, TF3KX" wrote in message
om...
I have an inverted-V, approximately resonant on 40, 20, 15 and 10m.

I have tried numerous verticals for comparison, but on these bands the
inverted-V always receives signals on these bands better or equally
well, at best. The verticals have been well grounded (using a "large,
good quality" metal sheet roof as the ground) and I have done my best
to minimize losses. The verticals have been anywhere from 1/4 to 5/8
wavelengths long. But they are always outperformed by my inv-V on
these bands. Only on 80 and 160m are the verticals better.

Now, this leads me to wondering if the radio waves arriving at my QTH
tend to be largely horizontally polarized on the higher frequencies?
Or can there be any other explanation that "good" verticals, even 5/8
wavelengths long are never better than the inv-V. Any thoughts?

The verticals and the inv-V were all mounted on the metal roof of my
house. The house is located in a poor-quality ground area (rocks,
shallow vegetation), the direction to Europe is across a low hill
approx. 1/2 mile away while the direction to America is across the
open sea approx. 1/8 mile away from my house.

73 - Kristinn, TF3KX