Richard Harrison wrote:

Mike, KB3EIA wrote:
"The main reason I ask, is that I thought I heard here some time ago,
that a dipole would perform better over a good ground system."

It may not.

At a distant point, the received signal is probably composed of two
parts that started their journey as an incident ray and a ray which was
the incident ray`s reflection off on a tangent from the surface of the
earth.

If by good fortune these two rays happened to arrive at the distant
receiving point in-phase they would present a stronger signal than the
direct ray alone, and certainly a stronger signal than a combination of
two out-of-phase signals.

Unfortunately, the incident wave`s reflection is always out-of-phase
with the incident wave which produces it at the reflection point. A
perfect reflector would ensure the reflection was equal in magnitude as
well as out-of-phase to the incident ray.

Unless you get a difference in path length between incident and
reflected rays to invert the phase of one of the rays as compared with
the other, they will tend to cancel. You might be better off without the
reflected ray.

The ground connection in a vertical antenna system is entirely
different. Half the antenna system is the antenna`s image in the earth.
The connection to the earth or to a capacitive coupling to the earth
(elevated radials or ground-plane) carries the r-f current to the earth
side of the system. Any resistance in your gtound system directly adds
to loss in the system.With the usual vertical antenna system, radials
are essential.for efficiency..

This was a long-winded way to say you don`t need radials with a
horizontal dipole for r-f efficiengy. You do need a ground connection
for electrical safety and lightning protection. Radials work well for
these too.

I'm beginning to think that what makes an antenna "good" is the time at
which a person uses it!

- Mike KB3EIA -