Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7697 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2002 08:59:41 -0000 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.225) by mailstore with SMTP; 18 Nov 2002 08:59:41 -0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: (qmail 5158 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2002 09:02:07 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 18 Nov 2002 09:02:07 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-SQ: A Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.10) id 18DhmB-0000v0-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 09:01:03 +0000 Received: from [134.58.10.57] (helo=mail3.cc.kuleuven.ac.be) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18DhmA-0000uh-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 09:01:02 +0000 Received: from dell-rik.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (pc-10-33-165-177.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [10.33.165.177]) by mail3.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id gAI90WGe068890 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:00:32 +0100 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20021118094533.00b43ed0@pb623250.kuleuven.be> X-Sender: pb623250@pb623250.kuleuven.be X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:06:47 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" In-reply-to: <000c01c28cd7$d8dcc700$69e8fc3e@l8p8y6> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LF: vertical/loop Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0tests=IN_REP_TO,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01version=2.42 Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Hi Mal,

The facts are  being distorted because of local environmental issues instead of comparing the two antennas on LF where both systems are small physically compared to the frequency.
Only those with sufficient unobstructed space are in a position to test one against the other for a true accessment.

Under perfect conditions nor the vertical nor the loop would have any losses. At low take-off angles the vertical would have a 3dB gain over the loop, at heigher angles the loop can be significantly better than the vertical.
But unfortunately these "perfect conditions" do not exist, one just can try to get close.
So whatever is taken as the definition of "sufficient unobstructed space" and  "for a true accessment", it is subject to interpretation.

In the days of Napoleon the definition for 1 meter was given as :
"The distance between the 2 gold plug in a certain platina-iridium bar the was kept somewhere in Paris (at 0 degrees C)."
(but meanwhile there is a more scientific definition)

In analogy the definition of "sufficient unobstructed space" could be :
"A certain property in northern England, sized several acres and tree free for antenna testing"

With a smile,

73, Rik  ON7YD