Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81161 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2005 08:10:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-spamcore01.plus.net) (192.168.71.1) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 9 Jan 2005 08:10:35 -0000 Received: from mailnull by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with spamcore-l-b (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CnY9K-000HgC-1F for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:10:10 +0000 Received: from [192.168.67.3] (helo=ptb-mxcore03.plus.net) by ptb-spamcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.32; FreeBSD) id 1CnY9J-000Hg8-UA for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:10:09 +0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1CnY9i-000Lpt-34 for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:10:34 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1CnY6q-0002yu-5N for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:07:36 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.30] (helo=relay.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1CnY6p-0002yl-J9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:07:35 +0000 Received: from mail-public.northwestel.net ([198.235.201.66] helo=yk-pvtmailprd-01.internal.messaging) by relay.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CnY6n-0008Id-2V for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:07:35 +0000 Received: from yk-asavprd-01.northwestel.net ([172.19.112.40]) by yk-pvtmailprd-01.internal.messaging (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 Patch 1 (built Jan 28 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IA100CDLIKI0IP0@yk-pvtmailprd-01.internal.messaging> for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:07:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yk-asavprd-01.northwestel.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0987TJs027814 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:07:29 -0700 Received: from yk-asavprd-01.northwestel.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (yk-asavprd-01 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 25734-18 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:07:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from eagles (whthyt032-92.northwestel.net [205.234.32.92]) by yk-asavprd-01.northwestel.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j0986bvr027581 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:06:38 -0700 Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:06:37 +0000 From: "J. Allen" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-id: <009401c4f622$24ab3ee0$6401a8c0@eagles> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at northwestel.net References: X-SPF-Result: relay.thorcom.net: 198.235.201.66 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of northwestel.net X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=failed,FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.05 Subject: Re: LF: Antenna plans de J. Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com 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 X-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet SpamCORE (v3.00) Alex, Thank you for the fine feedback in both of your messages. The antenna is in a flat mountain valley far from any trees, but it has a long low house running from about 7 meters to about 27 meters from the base of the vertical tower. Other buildings and wiring are rare and farther away. The site is very "open" other than the one close house. There are no other towers or antennas on the site. I understand that the effect of the environment is impossible to calculate, but is there a general direction that the environment moves the resistance... does it normally move the resistance up from the calculated values or its it sometimes up and sometimes down... What is the experience that most LF operators have found? I am only curious about this.... My intention is to measure the installed antenna with its upper loading coils in place, and then add the amount of fixed and variable base loading necessary to make the antenna resonant. I understand that this is the normal method... Is this correct? J.