For a literal "pair of radio wave glasses":
Given the vertical gain of a practical 160 dipole is pretty much cloud
burner and a decent 160 vertical is pretty much low angle, IF you know
the actual real gain patterns, then it is possible to compare signal
amplitudes (probably real time considering QSB) and deduce approximate
arrival angles.
At least one analysis of 80m arrival angles on the West Coast from EU
was derived this way.
Grant KZ1W
On 12/11/2020 06:38, Artek Manuals wrote:
OR
The propagation mode on 160 is not what we have popularly come to "Accept".
There is a growing body of evidence that particularly at gray line that
signals often arrive at a higher angles. This is often attributed to
"ducting" . Maybe a lot more of 160 intercontinental propagation isĀ due
ducting rather than the more commonly thought of low angle earth to F
layer hop/multi-hop stuff seen at higher frequencies?
Where do i get a pair of those glasses that lets me look at radio waves
so I actually see them arrive
Dave
NR1DX
On 12/11/2020 8:58 AM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
Guy I have ALWAYS thought that the various Computer-based modelling of
Ground and its effect on Antennas is WAY off . . .
And surely the errors are MOST significant on 160m, not just because
Antennas are near the ground (in wavelength terms) . . . but also because
even the ground 130 ft deep is still going to have an effect . . . and
there
is no way EZNEC can possibly take that into account, even if you KNEW
what
was underneath your topsoil !
In my particular case it's not the effect on Verticals on 160m that
interest
me . . . it's the effect on a Low Dipole.
Any DX stations I work on 160m will confirm I put out a pretty
respectable
signal . . . my signal reports around the world and more recently I am
able
to compare my RBN Reports across NA and they tend to be very similar
to the
other British DXers.
However, most people are surprised to discover that for the last 50
years I
have always used a Horizontal Half Wave dipole on 160m, at around 50ft.
BUT I believe that EZNEC plots showing that most of the RF is just
very High
Angle is WRONG . . . that's because in practice the Ground underneath
it is
rubbish . . . so the Dipole's effective height above Ground is much
higher.
And in fact, it seems that most people who have Dipoles on 160m
mounted over
or near a very comprehensive Radial system DO get poor results using them
for DX . . . but that goes to confirm my theory (which is all based on my
actual experience on Top Band)
Roger G3YRO
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector