Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12760 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2002 04:49:22 -0000 Received: from marstons.services.quay.plus.net (212.159.14.223) by mailstore with SMTP; 15 Nov 2002 04:49:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 29978 invoked by uid 10001); 15 Nov 2002 04:48:50 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (193.82.116.70) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 15 Nov 2002 04:48:50 -0000 X-SQ: A Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.10) id 18CYOs-0004mV-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 04:48:14 +0000 Received: from [216.93.66.205] (helo=mail0.mx.voyager.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18CYOr-0004mM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 04:48:13 +0000 Received: from k6500 (d141.as0.mpls0.mn.voyager.net [169.207.171.15]) by mail0.mx.voyager.net (8.11.6/8.10.2) with SMTP id gAF4mBQ62981 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:48:12 -0500 (EST) From: "WE0H" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:49:32 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-reply-to: Subject: RE: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_01_02, USER_AGENT_OUTLOOKversion=2.42 Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Hi Alex, We use vertical loops here. The trees don't affect them much. I can walk up to my loop and watch the RF current meter and not see any change until I get closer than 1 foot from the loop and then it drops a little. They work nice with all my trees in my yard. 73's, Mike>WE0H http://www.we0h.us/lf.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org]On Behalf Of Alexander S. Yurkov Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 4:23 AM To: 'rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org' Subject: Re: LF: RE: Re: RE: Loop vs Marconi Hi, Group. On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Ashlock,William wrote: > > >A canopy of trees will also effect a loop antenna, try a 50 ft vertical and > >gain 6dbs and you will probably still be on the plus side even with some > >attenuation from the trees. > > You sir, are absolutely WRONG! > > A spent 100s of hours on my vertical antennas before changing over to loops. It seems to me a loop (if wire diameter is large) may be bit better then vertical of same dimension if there are lot of enviroment losses (many trees and so on). Loop should be less sensetive to enviroment then vertical. But in clear space vertical should be better. Generally by increasing wire diameter one can increase loop effectivity. Unfortutenly You can't increse vertical effectivity in such a way. Any way comprehensive study of the problem (vertical versus loop) seems to be very worth and interesting. But this require lot of work both experimental as theoretical. Hoprisontal loop can not be effective because it will produce strong current in the ground and loss should be hight. 73 de RA9MB/Alex http://www.qsl.net/ra9mb _____________________________________________________ This message scanned for viruses by CoreComm