Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24532 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2002 15:16:39 -0000 Received: from murphys.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.225) by mailstore with SMTP; 21 Oct 2002 15:16:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 6570 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2002 15:15:21 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by murphys.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 21 Oct 2002 15:15:21 -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 183eGL-0003m2-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:14:37 +0100 Received: from [194.73.73.176] (helo=protactinium.btinternet.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 183eGK-0003lt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:14:36 +0100 Received: from host213-122-25-52.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([213.122.25.52] helo=there) by protactinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 183eGK-0006nE-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:14:36 +0100 From: "Steve Thompson" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:14:19 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1] References: In-reply-to: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: Re: Ant Questions Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03version=2.42 Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group On Monday 21 October 2002 14:21, you wrote: > Hi Geri, > > >>Do not be tempted to droop the ends of any top wires. > > > >... I challenge that. My umbrella antenna 18m high with 5 pieces of > > top-load > > >radials sloping downwards (each about 7 m long) **works fine** > > It "works fine" to be sure, and it's possible that this is the only > physical shape possible for your surroundings, BUT did you verify that > there is no loss from drooping the top hat radials Vs not drooping the top > hat radials? My experience with many shapes of top hats is that it DOES > reduce the radiation measured in the far field. Is that in comparison with no top loading at all, or purely horizontal top loading? Steve