As a 160 meter DX'er who is also active on EME, a similar debate of the
virtues of CW -vs- JT65 (The CW competitor mode at that time) raged rather
violently within the community a few years ago. So much so that long time
ham friends stopped talking to each other even to this day. That was a
very
Suggest that for Hawaii or other locations where you want specific
soil data, contact local small AM or walk in and ask to talk to C.E.
Big corp. owned stations will give corporate hq. run around.
>>#1 As far south in the country as possible due to better propagation.
bzzt, sorry but South =
If we could turn the clock back to the 1950s we'd hear exactly
the same arguments from the AM DXers.
If we turned the clock back to the early 1920s with the discovery
of 40 and 20 meter DX you'd hear the same arguments from the
200 meter operators.
The clock is not going to turn back
There was a QEX article in 2016 that examined ground mounted verticals.
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/QEX_Next_Issue/2016/March-April2016/Zavrel.pdf
According to the plots in the article, over average ground the signal is still
pretty strong at an arrival angle of 80 degrees above the horizon
This is easy to model an inverted V to see the actual pattern. I am sure
that whatever configuration / direction you use will be inferior to a top
loaded vertical.
BTW two weeks ago I used a 300' high inverted V as PJ4/KK9A.
Unfortunately I could not hear on it so I did not make enough top band
Great news!
http://www.arrl.org/news/lotw-support-for-cq-worked-all-zones-waz-award-goes-live
--
73, Victor Goncharsky US5WE/K1WE (UW5W in VHF contests, ex UB5WE), P.E.
UARL Technical and VHF Committies
DXCC Honor Roll #1 (Mixed, Phone), 9BDXCC, 8BWAS
DXCC card checker (160 meters).
