Buck wrote:
. . .
Thank you Gary, I have been looking at it a bit. I decided the best
way to get an accurate reading for the highest gain is to look at the
elevation and then set the azimuth elevation to the TOA.

But what you're probably really interested in is the gain in the angle
you'll be using for communication. Who cares what the maximum gain of
the antenna is if that gain only occurs in directions (azimuth or
elevation) you're not using for communication?

First, decide what elevation angles will be used for communication. One
way to find that is by using a propagation program like W6ELProp (which
is free). Look at the gain at those angles with EZNEC. The elevation
angle at which the gain is maximum is of very little practical use --
EZNEC reports it only because a lot of people wanted it (for reasons
which remain mysterious to me).

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:19:58 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Tsk tsk.


EZNEC reports it only because a lot of people wanted it (for reasons
which remain mysterious to me).

Don't you know that the customer is always right? [grin]

The elevation
angle at which the gain is maximum is of very little practical
use --
EZNEC reports it only because a lot of people wanted it (for reasons
which remain mysterious to me).

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

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

Roy, good to see, at last, you've got rid of this popular
misconception.
----
Reg.

Wouldn't this 'gain' be useful in figuring out just where you could dump
your maximum signal somewhere in the world? It might not be where you
want, but at least you might have an idea of where you would stick a loud
signal using max gain at some elevation angle? Or is this a totally useless
idea? I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about here, but it seems
logical that by using this type of data it would help you figure out where
you were going to put in a stronger signal.

Shields up!

Jer

"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
The elevation
angle at which the gain is maximum is of very little practical
use --
EZNEC reports it only because a lot of people wanted it (for reasons
which remain mysterious to me).

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

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

Roy, good to see, at last, you've got rid of this popular
misconception.
----
Reg.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:44:15 GMT, "Jer"
wrote:

Wouldn't this 'gain' be useful in figuring out just where you could dump
your maximum signal somewhere in the world? It might not be where you
want, but at least you might have an idea of where you would stick a loud
signal using max gain at some elevation angle? Or is this a totally useless
idea? I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about here, but it seems
logical that by using this type of data it would help you figure out where
you were going to put in a stronger signal.

Shields up!

Jer


From the remarks I see on this forum and others, there appears to be a
number of people who only consider how an antenna works for DX. There
are many of us who don't just chase DX. I hunt counties and need
antennas that will cover much smaller skip than someone trying to
operate with russia from here. On late night nets, I need signals
that drown out the 40 meter sw stations and so I can hear my regional
QSOs. Other times, I would love to be able to pick out that rare DX
in the midst of a pileup of multi-kw amps and beams that have more
acreage than the average home.

If someone needs 10-20 deg TOA for a signal, then they need to know
how to maximize their antenna for that angle, that is true. I want to
know the characteristics of the antennas to know how they will work
for various purposes.

No shield needed



--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

I'm another Ham that could care less about DX! I just want to use the
proper frequency depending on the time of day/night to communicate with some
friends located around the west coast. Very few DX stations will hold a rag
chew, just slam bam, thank you mam, i.e. 599 OM !... ugh..

At any rate, if I knew more about my antennas characteristics I might could
figure out the band/end location where it would be loudest at any given
time. Is this all wet, and TOA wouldn't help in that at all?

Jer


"Buck" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:44:15 GMT, "Jer"
wrote:

Wouldn't this 'gain' be useful in figuring out just where you could dump
your maximum signal somewhere in the world? It might not be where you
want, but at least you might have an idea of where you would stick a loud
signal using max gain at some elevation angle? Or is this a totally
useless
idea? I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about here, but it seems
logical that by using this type of data it would help you figure out where
you were going to put in a stronger signal.

Shields up!

Jer


From the remarks I see on this forum and others, there appears to be a
number of people who only consider how an antenna works for DX. There
are many of us who don't just chase DX. I hunt counties and need
antennas that will cover much smaller skip than someone trying to
operate with russia from here. On late night nets, I need signals
that drown out the 40 meter sw stations and so I can hear my regional
QSOs. Other times, I would love to be able to pick out that rare DX
in the midst of a pileup of multi-kw amps and beams that have more
acreage than the average home.

If someone needs 10-20 deg TOA for a signal, then they need to know
how to maximize their antenna for that angle, that is true. I want to
know the characteristics of the antennas to know how they will work
for various purposes.

No shield needed



--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:56:41 GMT, "Jer"
wrote:

At any rate, if I knew more about my antennas characteristics I might could
figure out the band/end location where it would be loudest at any given
time. Is this all wet, and TOA wouldn't help in that at all?


The TOA will help in any QSO. A low TOA will tend to open you up to
DX QRM such as on 40 meters, but an NVIS with near vertical TOA will
manage more regional communications than DX. You might not even be
bothered by the 500kw SW station in Germany. Of course, the station
you talk to will also have to deal with that station.

Knowing the TOA is as beneficial as knowing where the nuls are on your
beam.




--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Buck wrote:

The TOA will help in any QSO. A low TOA will tend to open you up to
DX QRM such as on 40 meters, but an NVIS with near vertical TOA will
manage more regional communications than DX. You might not even be
bothered by the 500kw SW station in Germany. Of course, the station
you talk to will also have to deal with that station.

Knowing the TOA is as beneficial as knowing where the nuls are on your
beam.


That's a good and perfectly valid point. Knowing the TOA would be useful
in determining what range of distances you're most likely to encounter
QRM from.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Jer wrote:
I'm another Ham that could care less about DX! I just want to use the
proper frequency depending on the time of day/night to communicate with some
friends located around the west coast. Very few DX stations will hold a rag
chew, just slam bam, thank you mam, i.e. 599 OM !... ugh..

At any rate, if I knew more about my antennas characteristics I might could
figure out the band/end location where it would be loudest at any given
time. Is this all wet, and TOA wouldn't help in that at all?

The TOA isn't the way to get that information. What you need to do is,
first, find out what elevation angle will be used for communication on
each band at the time(s) of day of interest. Again, something like
W6ELProp is good for doing that. Second, since you're interested in
having the strongest signal, look at the signal strength reported by
W6ELProp or other propagation program at each of those times. Next, use
EZNEC to look at the gain of your antenna at the elevation angles you
found with the propagation program. Finally, add the antenna gain to the
signal strength reported by the propagation program at each band and
time. The largest number will give you the best signal. This of course
comes with the caution that propagation prediction is generally much
less accurate than antenna pattern calculation, so there can be a lot of
variability in the accuracy of the results.

I think that if you go through this exercise a few times, you won't find
much correlation between your results and the TOA.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:38:18 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Jer wrote:

I think that if you go through this exercise a few times, you won't find
much correlation between your results and the TOA.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Of course, he could just check to see which antenna hears the station
the best with the least QRM.

From what I understand, the TOA of a DX station changes over time. It
may come in at a low angle and then rise a bit or visa versa. Or it
may never get high enough for a particular antenna

--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW