LAWRENCE MAYHEAD wrote:

 Whilst I agree that height is very important from the transmit point of view,please dont forget the recieving problem,where big is not neccessarily best!  I dont think we should discourage anyone,  In fact I should like to see listening tests on this side ,with others possibly without big antennas joining in. 73s Laurie.
 

This is the first time that I have heard the theory that a small antenna, especially on LF out performs a large full size one for the frequency, or as near to it as you can get.  That is like saying do not use a full size 40 metre dipole because a piece of wire lying on or near the ground is better. I am waiting for someone soon to say  that a half size G5RV will out perform all others !!!!
Over the years I have tried all sorts of antennas large and small for both TX and RX and there is no doubt that the larger antennas has the advantage in all cases. On RX a small antenna does not have the capture area to produce a good strong signal.
If you must use a small antenna for other considerations, like you are afraid of heights, have strange neighbours, do not like planning procedures, xyl thinks its ugly, what the postman might think, have a qrn problem and you want to null it out, that is fine but do not make excuses and take a dislike to those that are not effected by the above observations.
I am encouraged by those that put effort into their systems and antennas and I try to follow. To suggest that one is DISCOURAGING is gibberish.