Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: LF: Re: "Ground" losses
From: "John Sexton" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
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: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
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, [email protected] 

<< 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.

___________________________________________________ Mail Get Your Free, Private E-mail at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>