wrote:
I *never* wanted to receive on my dipole
if I was working long haul off the vertical. Would be like shooting
myself in the foot.

Sounds like your dipole was not a very good dipole. With
the same height limitation, EZNEC says the vertical will
NEVER be 4 S-units (24 dB) better than the dipole's broadside
performance at any angle.

At http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/dipvsver.htm is a comparison
of my 130 ft. dipole at 40 ft. with my 33 ft. vertical
with the feedpoint at 20 ft, both on 40m. There's only a
tiny sliver where the vertical beats the dipole broadside
and isn't even close to 24 dB.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Sounds like your dipole was not a very good dipole...

A dipole is a dipole. You can't go by what eznec says.
My modeling didn't match my real world either unless I
cranked the ground quality up in the modeling program.
My GP was *always* about 4 s units louder than the
dipole to VK. Every time I compared. I had a regular
sked over there 3 times a week. The GP was
always 2 S units louder to the west coast than the
dipole. Every time I checked. The dipole was at
36 ft. The base of the GP was at 36 ft. There are
factors in comparing the two antennas in the real
world, that I don't think modeling takes full account of.
Also, my ground is better than yours too. My GP was
higher than your last one by nearly double. Don't
confuse what you saw with your last one, with what I
saw on mine. Mine was a good bit more efficient as
far as radial number vs height in wavelength vs the one
you ran last time.
Of course, S meter readings mean zip as far as actual
db improvement, but there is no doubt my GP smoked
my dipole on long paths. Day and night...And the difference
was reciprical xmit/rcve in almost all cases.

Suit yourself, but any serious DXer will tell you there are times when
one dB of S/N ratio would make the difference between QSO and no QSO

Sure, but the actual signal level increase on a long path is
almost always stronger than any increase in noise. I never
once felt the need to use my dipole for receive in place of the
GP. Would be stepping backwards. Now, on the low bands
like 80/160, a beverage, etc, might be better for rcve, but I don't
use those on 40m.
MK

wrote:
The dipole was at 36 ft. The base of the GP was at 36 ft.

Well, there's the problem. You stopped your dipole where
your vertical started so any comparisons are bogus. Your
dipole was an NVIS antenna. :-) It's not a fair comparison
since the vertical was given a 2x height advantage. (That's
like putting my three foot six inch grandson up against
Shaquelle O'Neal in basketball. :-) Put the dipole at 70
feet, like the vertical was, and see what happens.

The top of my vertical was at 53 ft. and my dipole was
one of its upper guy wires at about 50 feet so the two
heights were essentially opposite yours.

Which brings up another question. If the top of a vertical
is at a certain height, what height of dipole would be a fair
comparison? It is certainly unfair to compare feedpoints
at the same height, like you did. It may also be slightly
unfair to compare them at the same maximum heights, like I did.
It seems a fair comparison might be made when half the vertical
is lower than the dipole and half is higher than the dipole,
i.e. the height of the dipole is at the midpoint of the
monopole?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Well, there's the problem. You stopped your dipole where
your vertical started so any comparisons are bogus.

Bogus? How so?

Your
dipole was an NVIS antenna. :-)

And I want it to be.

It's not a fair comparison
since the vertical was given a 2x height advantage. (That's
like putting my three foot six inch grandson up against
Shaquelle O'Neal in basketball. :-) Put the dipole at 70
feet, like the vertical was, and see what happens.

I mounted both as high as they would go. I don't consider
the GP as having quite twice the height advantage due to
the current distribution.

The top of my vertical was at 53 ft. and my dipole was
one of its upper guy wires at about 50 feet so the two
heights were essentially opposite yours.

No , just different..

Which brings up another question. If the top of a vertical
is at a certain height, what height of dipole would be a fair
comparison?
Dunno...But max current on the GP as at the base..

It is certainly unfair to compare feedpoints
at the same height, like you did.

No, it isn't. I can compare any setup I like. I'm not
trying to be fair. I don't want both antennas to act
the same.

It may also be slightly
unfair to compare them at the same maximum heights, like I did.
It seems a fair comparison might be made when half the vertical
is lower than the dipole and half is higher than the dipole,
i.e. the height of the dipole is at the midpoint of the
monopole?

I don't think it matters a whole heck of a lot. I never intended
for my dipole to be a dx antenna. Thats the whole purpose
of putting up the GP. The dipole is for NVIS and medium
range. The GP is for long range.
MK

wrote:
I'm not trying to be fair.

Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:

I'm not trying to be fair.


Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-)

24 db *when* for all that matter. I would note that my vertical *is*
indeed about 2 S units noisier than my dipole. And some signals come in
stronger, and some come in weaker. My guess is that it depends on where
the signals originated from, smarter people may know the real reason.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-) ........

Well, of course, I've never said any such thing.
But...It is often a large noticable difference.

Mike sed...
My guess is that it depends on where
the signals originated from

Thats exactly it. In general, the farther away, the
better the vertical vs the low dipole.
If you don't work long haul dx, the vertical user
may never see much advantage. At night on 40m,
if the distance is less than 1000 miles, often the
dipole and vertical would be about the same.
In my case, I had to get over a 1000 miles to see
much vertical advantage. At 1500 miles, it's fairly
obvious. "appx 2 S units worth". In the long hauls
to VK, JA, etc, often 3-4 S units worth. That will
be a larger increase than your 2 s units noise increase.
Modeling won't tell the whole story in a case like
this. Just ask W8JI about his 300+ feet dipoles
on 160m. In theory , they were supposed to beat his
vertical towers. But , they usually don't on long
paths where the angle is very low.
I once yakked with this guy in Tokyo for a while.
On the dipole at 1kw, I'd be S 8-9... On the
GP with 1 kw, I'd be a solid 20 over 9. And it's
reciprical as far as xmit/rcve. So I'd always be
listening on the vertical if I wanted to see the same
increase on my end.
The only exception would be if I had something
better like a beverage, etc, but that applies more
to 80 and 160, than 40.
Thats the real point of my comments,
not which is better. To me, installing a good vertical
for dx, and then listening on a low dipole to same is
kinda silly being the benefits are reciprical.
Also...Building a good vertical, but not using it for
long hauls is kinda silly too... :/ It's the wrong tool for
working 500-800 miles away. If it's never better than the
dipole in that case, don't fret too much, as it's perfectly
normal.
MK

wrote:
Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-) ...

Well, of course, I've never said any such thing. ...

Please note the smiley face.

In the long hauls to VK, JA, etc, often 3-4 S units worth.

Well, of course, you just said it again. :-) The standardized
S-unit is 6 dB. Therefore, "4 S units" over a dipole is 24 dBd
gain for your omnidirectional vertical monopole. (That's ~17 dB
more gain than a three element Yagi has over a dipole.)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:

It's not a fair comparison
since the vertical was given a 2x height advantage. (That's
like putting my three foot six inch grandson up against
Shaquelle O'Neal in basketball. :-) Put the dipole at 70
feet, like the vertical was, and see what happens.

I mounted both as high as they would go. I don't consider
the GP as having quite twice the height advantage due to
the current distribution.

The top of my vertical was at 53 ft. and my dipole was
one of its upper guy wires at about 50 feet so the two
heights were essentially opposite yours.

No , just different..

Which brings up another question. If the top of a vertical
is at a certain height, what height of dipole would be a fair
comparison?
Dunno...But max current on the GP as at the base..

There's no "fair" comparison between two such different antennas, if
your goal is some sort of generalized conclusion about which kind of
antenna is "better". The only valid comparison would be a vertical at
whatever height you can put it at vs a dipole at whatever height you can
put it at. Then, with your particular ground conditions and azimuth and
elevation angles of interest, you can decide which is better. Any
general binary conclusion about whether a vertical or dipole is "better"
is nonsense, so there's no point in making rules for comparing them.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL