On Fri,2/13/2015 12:29 PM, Grant Saviers wrote:
At TX5D (FO-A), I was able to instant A/B a 15m vertical (two elevated
radials) at high tide line vs a crankIR tuned on 15m about 70' from
high tide. US stations (5k to 7k km) reported 1 to 2 S unit
improvements with the antenna nearer to the la
At TX5D (FO-A), I was able to instant A/B a 15m vertical (two elevated
radials) at high tide line vs a crankIR tuned on 15m about 70' from high
tide. US stations (5k to 7k km) reported 1 to 2 S unit improvements
with the antenna nearer to the lagoon salt water. Received signals were
at least
That describes my situation: I've got essentially a hybrid of a 160M
sloper & INV-L due to my salt marsh antenna wires held up in the
trees. I'm guessing my highest point is 45' and the antenna slopes
upward to touch the first branches 40' away. With that, I worked one
of the Caribbean stations
Higher angle skip, which is what the map of '
http://s20.postimg.org/f1z0o2e7h/WFAN_Skywave.gif ' represents within the
contour for WFAN, would be affected by ground conductivity in a very minor way
at best.
Lower angle skip, such as WFAN being received in Europe, Africa, Caribbean,
etc. would
The link below shows the transmit site used by WFAN (which is diplexed with
WCBS into the same vertical monopole). The site is located on a small
island in Long Island Sound.
The horizontal distance along the surface of this island on the ENE radials
reaching the sea water of Long Island Soun
Whoops! That link only shows a small portion of that discussion (total of
91 posts). Better to visit
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//cgi-bin/namazu.cgi?idxname=Topband
and search for "vertical on a beach" (including the quotation marks).
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//cgi-bin/namazu.c
Here's the thread:
"Modeling the proverbial 'vertical on a beach'"
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/2014-08/msg00048.html
This is another one that showed up in my search:
"Hill vs. Ocean QTH - response summary (long)"
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Topband/1996-11/msg
Rich,
Based a number of others' experiences that I've read, a vertical that is
very close to the ocean has a significant advantage to paths over the
ocean, vs. a similar antenna installation that's only a mile (or less)
inland. I forget the details, but this was discussed at length on this
reflect
Low band hams are very aware of "sea gain" minimum salt water
attenuation at low angles.
The signal will not produce a perfect circle as the posting shows.
73
Bruce-K1FZ
www.qsl.net/k1fz/beveragenotes.html
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:35:28 -0500, Bill Whitacre wrote:
Perhaps FCC models don't tak
Perhaps FCC models don't take account of 'sea gain?' ITU models do, as I
recall.
Bill Whitacre
Alexandria, VA
---
> On Feb 13, 2015, at 7:43 AM, Richard Fry wrote:
>
> From my reading of posts on many "ham" boards, the prevailing thoughts are
> that the nighttime skywave field intensity rec
From my reading of posts on many "ham" boards, the prevailing thoughts are
that the nighttime skywave field intensity received from a vertical monopole
is dependent on earth conductivity -- as well as on frequency, radiated
power, path length, and atmospheric conditions.
The plot linked below
11 matches
Mail list logo