Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9006 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2001 18:03:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 5 Jun 2001 18:03:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 7983 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2001 18:02:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 5 Jun 2001 18:02:55 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 157L0a-0003SL-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:52:48 +0100 Received: from [204.202.140.198] (helo=webmailmta.go.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 157L0X-0003SG-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:52:45 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from gomailjtp01 ([10.212.0.161]) by mta06.seamail.go.com (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.4.0.2000.10.12.16.25.p8) with ESMTP id <0GEG00AFRXFI4V@mta06.seamail.go.com> for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:47:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:47:44 -0700 (PDT) From: "John Sexton" Subject: Re: Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <2085457.991763264603.JavaMail.computernetworks@gomailjtp01> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: GoMail 3.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi John and Paul, I use a version of the KI0LE loop for receive. There is a continuous buzz on the vertical from some local power lines probably under the site here, which makes it very poor for receive. The loop is very much amongst the bushes and only a few feet off the ground, yet its reception is outstanding. The most important thing I found was to get it as far away from the house as possible. 73, John, G4CNN -----Original Message----- From: WarmSpgs@aol.com To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon Jun 04 14:13:27 PDT 2001 Subject: Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses >In a message dated 6/4/01 4:26:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, paulc@snet.net >writes: > ><< I have a location on my property where I could run a flat top antenna >of perhaps 70 to 80 feet high with a top hat made of parallel wires at least >200 feet long. > >I have a tower on my property that is 130' high and could attache to that >with the proper insulator if I did not mind the tophat sloping from 130' to >around 80 feet. > >Trees would be about 75 feet away in any direction ... > >Your thought? >> > >Seeing that we presently have no legal provision stateside for transmitting >into antennas of those dimensions, I have to assume you are speaking of >receiving. Ground system losses are less of a factor for receiving, >depending on the type of input your receiver has or what sort of antenna >tuner you are using with it. Proximity to trees is not ideal even for >receiving at LF, but 75 feet or so should be acceptable. Receiving loops >would be still better, though. > >John KD4IDY > > > ___________________________________________________ GO.com Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com