As Ken mentioned, height is an important factor in a horizontal or semi-horizontal antenna. There's limited "gain" in any direction at low angles unless the radiator is 1/2 wavelength above ground. That's why most of us have to live with little directivity on the lower bands.
The option is to consider verticals. Unless you are living on salt water (or atop a sheet of copper), or can make the vertical a full 1/2 wave high, the vertical won't be as efficient as doublet or dipole, but a vertical will produce typically much better signals at lower angles of radiation than a horizontal antenna (under 1/2 wave high) and doesn't require a huge 'footprint'. Also you can phase multiple verticals for directivity and even design them so you can use them for supports for horizontal wires on the higher bands. You've probably noticed that 45 foot verticals are being heavily promoted these days. That's an old design that is very handy for limited space. It provides low angles of radiation on all bands up through 20 meters where it's 5/8 wavelength high (on bands where it's more than 5/8 wavelength the angle of the main lobe rises from the horizontal and minor lobes appear at high angles). Down on 80 meters it's just a bit shy of 1/4 wavelength. With a good ground system it can produce excellent results down there and even on 160 - especially when compared with the short, low (in wavelengths above ground) antennas most of us are forced to use on those bands Ron AC7AC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
