Index Thread Archive Apr-2000 Archive Send
 Main index   Previous in threadNext in thread   Previous in archiveNext in archive   Index by Subject for Apr-2000Index by Author for Apr-2000Index by Date for Apr-2000   Index by Subject for ArchiveIndex by Author for ArchiveIndex by Date for Archive   Reply to messageNew message 

Subject: 40m at 50' (Island QTH)
Author: K2KW <K2KW@prodigy.net>
Date: 16-Apr-2000 18:05:19
> Obviously most of the literature and theory prefer to have it higher,
but
> could being close to the water mitigate this somewhat?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but salt water does NOTHING to enhance
a horizontally polarized signal (well, almost nothing, maybe about 0.1 dB
advantage per the models). The only advantage of being close to salt water
in this case would be no noise sources in that direction, and a pretty view.

Salt water ONLY enhances Vertically polarized signals. Without doing any
modeling, I would also suspect that 800' from the salt water is too far.
You are most concerned about the first (negative) reflection point of low
take off angles being over salt water, and I suspect that 800' (at 110'
effective elevation) is also too far for 40m. (In fact, N6BV, NT1N, and I
were talking about his not longer than an HOUR ago! We just got back to my
place after doing Visalia.)

And even IF this distance was OK, you only would get enhancement of a
vertically polarized signal when the path (reflection points) are over
water. If you are on the center of a small island with water all around,
you are in luck. But IF there is land behind the vertical, a vertically
polarized signal will be significantly weaker than a horizontally one in
that direction. For a vertical to be effective, salt water must be in the
direction of the arriving signal.

I have no doubt that the ZL9 crew got out OK, but as N6BT has been saying
recently, "Everything Works". It all depends on how well...

Another thing that is not obvious: if you elevate a vertical over ground (or
in the case of a negative sloping hill) lobes start forming at the same rate
as horizontal antennas do when you elevate them!! (basically one lobe per
wavelength of elevation) But at 110', you are about ~3/4 wave high on 40m,
which probably still gives you one fat lobe.

> 50' is the height limit in accordance with town regulations.
Alternative
> of course is not to bother with 40m and go with a C3.

50' + a 60' hill and a horizontally polarized 40m signal will do VERY well.
Put up the 40m elements and laugh as you beat most everyone in the pileups.
I doubt you could put up a vertical array that will beat it when you are
over land.

Kenny K2KW
Team Vertical Team Leader (6Y2A, 6Y4A, 4M7X etc.)



--------------------------------------------
Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc.
Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12

Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com
To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com
Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk
For problems with the list, contact force12@qth.com


This Thread
  Date   Author  
* 16-Apr-2000 K2KW
15-Apr-2000 Andrew Williamson
15-Apr-2000 Robert Doherty
15-Apr-2000 Pete Smith
15-Apr-2000 K1JD@aol.com
This Author (Apr-2000)
  Subject   Date  
* 40m at 50' (Island QTH) 16-Apr-2000