Hi Wes, I have also always had the highest regard for 99.9% of anything that W8JI has stated.
However, I feel exactly the same way about K2AV (and, of course, Rudy too). In this particular case, I am inclined to listen to Guy and the others here who have discussed and used the FCP. Probably, the FCP is a little inferior to either lots of radials or a few (two or more) elevated radials (like I have, which I assume is what is meant by "gull wings"). But for those who do not have the room for the said radials, K2AV's FCP is ab-so-lute-ly the way to go, isn't it? Not to pick on Tom, but he posted his page about silicone dielectric grease as a rebuttal to what I said about it, based on my particular experience with the brand of grease I used at the time. That and his article about the FCP are the only two times that I disagreed with him. :-) I was very lucky indeed to have him as one of my elmers. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 2:01 PM Wes <wes_n...@triconet.org> wrote: > Personally, I would and do, avoid a FCP antenna. W8JI has done some > analysis on > these and I value his insight. > http://www.w8ji.com/fcp_folded_counterpoise_system.htm There is simply > too much > handwaving going on to suit me. > > As to gull wing radials, Rudy Severns has looked at these too: > https://www.antennasbyn6lf.com/files/antenna_ground_system_experiment_5.pdf > Rudy's work is a treasure trove and I think I have everything he's written > in a > folder on my hard drive. Believe me, considering how difficult it is to > lay > radials in my cactus patch, if I thought gull wings would be useful I > would have > used them. I don't. > > Based on these and other resources, personal modeling and experiment and > physical constraints, I opted for a ground-mounted 55' vertical, > Inverted-L fed > against 18 (so far) 55' insulated, on-the-ground radials. By serendipity > the > radials are resonant at about 1.85 MHz although that was not a design > goal. > Instead, I chose radial length be the same as the vertical height and I > could > get nine, 55' radials out of a 500' spool of wire with negligible waste. > > Wes N7WS > > On 7/25/2019 10:04 AM, Mark K3MSB wrote: > > This kind of goes with the other thread that has morphed into the FCP > > topic, but is a bit different. > > > > With an FCP feeding the INV-L, the bottom of the INV-L will be at least > 10 > > feet off the ground. With my existing trees I can barely get up 50 > feet > > from the ground. So, the INV-L will have 40 feet of vertical radiator. > > > > Using a pair of resonant gull winged radials feeding the INV-L at the > > base, the vertical part will be 50 feet. > > > > From what I’ve read, the FCP is a better solution over a pair of > resonant > > gull wing radials, but I’ve also read that vertical length of an INV-L > is > > important. So there’s a tradeoff to be considered. > > > > Comments? > > > > Due to real estate considerations, I can put up only 2 one-half > wavelength > > resonant radials > > > > Mark K3MSB > > _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector