Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18312 invoked from network); 17 Jul 1999 09:41:15 +0100 Received: from magnus.plus.net.uk (HELO magnus.force9.net) (195.166.128.27) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 17 Jul 1999 09:41:15 +0100 Received: (qmail 11965 invoked from network); 17 Jul 1999 08:43:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by magnus.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Jul 1999 08:43:05 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 115Pmo-0006l7-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:25:34 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from [203.96.92.1] (helo=mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 115PmO-0006kt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:25:33 +0100 Received: from [203.96.106.165] by mta1-rme.xtra.co.nz (InterMail v4.01.01.00 201-229-111) with SMTP id <19990717082807.XCSW957005.mta1-rme@[203.96.106.165]> for ; Sat, 17 Jul 1999 20:28:07 +1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <37903A9C.4863@xtra.co.nz> Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 20:11:08 +1200 From: "vernall" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-XTRA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Horizontal polarisation on LF? References: <378FA25C.4435@xtra.co.nz> <378FD9A6.7C85326D@bellatlantic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sender: Andre' Kesteloot wrote: > > vernall wrote: > > > [...] > > > If sky wave mode is what > > is actually being sought after, then it may well be worth experimenting > > with a horizontal "dipole"? > > assuming the above hypothesis is valid, why not a horizontal loop, which > could be much smaller than a dipole ?Andre' N4ICK I was not meaning to restrict the idea to a dipole, but rather to stimulate a re-think on why horizontal polarisation may be worth a try for sky wave mode of operation. A "loop" has less radiation resistance than a "dipole" when the size is small. But I am suggesting a rather large affair, and a long straight wire could be easier to install and maintain than a loop. But consider whatever suits the available site. As well as the long wire used on LF by ZL1WB, I can say that here in Wellington myself and Andrew ZL2BBJ have done some receive tests and impedance measurements on a big V antenna at the Quartz Hill HF DX club station (call sign ZL6QH). By connecting both feeders in parallel, so the V is like one big wire, the measured impedance is slightly inductive, which indicates the electrical length is just over a quarter wave at 180 kHz. The resistive component is not far off 50 ohms, but most likely it is ground loss swamping the result. We intend to do some LF transmitting in due course, on what is essentially a long wire with mostly horizontal aspect, so we will see what happens. I have also applied to have the 136 kHz band added to my Low Frequency Permit. Nothing like being an optimist .... Bob ZL2CA