X-GM-THRID: 1201092871102915278
X-Gmail-Labels: rsgb lf
X-Gmail-Received: 112d4d90896419de33c124bd0bbf82edeefcb6a1
Delivered-To: daveyxm@gmail.com
Received: by 10.54.70.6 with SMTP id s6cs19536wra;
        Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.48.127.5 with SMTP id z5mr768348nfc;
        Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20])
        by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id o9si342158nfa.2006.04.19.12.03.12;
        Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
	id 1FWHvG-0000yf-Cv
	for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:01:06 +0100
Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net)
	by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
	id 1FWHvF-0000yW-PH
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:01:05 +0100
Received: from smtp800.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.12.142])
	by relay2.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.51)
	id 1FWJEk-0006K3-RK
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 21:25:19 +0100
Received: (qmail 63084 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2006 19:00:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO LAPTOP) (peter.martinez@btinternet.com@81.159.155.140 with login)
  by smtp800.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Apr 2006 19:00:55 -0000
Message-ID: <000a01c663e3$9600aaf0$0300a8c0@LAPTOP>
From: "Peter Martinez" <peter.martinez@btinternet.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <6.1.0.6.2.20060419144651.02a19240@127.0.0.1> <5.1.0.14.0.20060419162451.02431a98@u0019445.kuleuven.be> <6.1.0.6.2.20060419171908.02a17870@127.0.0.1>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:00:54 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.516
Subject: Re: LF: Top load coil at ground level?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 6684

>From G3PLX:

Effectively what Dick is suggesting is having the coil physically at the 
bottom where it can be housed and adjusted, but electrically at the top. 
This is done by extending two wires down the antenna such that the currents 
in these two wires are equal and opposite and they therefore make no 
contribution (or degradation) of the antenna performance.  If the antenna is 
electrically short anyway, it doesn't help to say this is a stub with a 
specific electrical length, it's just a coil connected into it's place with 
a pair of wires.

If the antenna was hollow, or like a lattice tower, the wire from the top 
hat could come down to the bottom inside the structure, so long as it didn't 
arc across!

73
Peter