Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | <[email protected]> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | LF: Re: Top-fed LF antenna idea |
| From: | "Peter Martinez" <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Sat, 24 Jun 2006 09:30:37 -0000 |
| Delivered-to: | [email protected] |
| References: | <[email protected]> <002301c69690$4cd321c0$5ac428c3@captbrian> <[email protected]> <005f01c696a6$b55dd1c0$5ac428c3@captbrian> <[email protected]> <002001c696e3$74317a20$0300a8c0@LAPTOP> <00a701c696f5$5231ff00$5ac428c3@captbrian> <001101c69757$d0da6380$0300a8c0@LAPTOP> <002e01c6976a$63f891c0$121686d4@captbrian> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
From G3PLX: Brian said: Why struggle with a short whip when on flat roof of many buildings is space for a 70 foot horizontal ? The important thing is to maximise the RF current flowing 'into the sky' and minimise the RF current which is just flowing back round behind you into the earthy side of your transmitter. So whatever it is you are using as a way of generating an RF current in the top of the tower, it needs to be 'out there' rather than 'in here', otherwise the current just flows in a small loop at the top of the tower, with no associated radiation resistance. I think there's a law of physics which says that the effectiveness of an antenna is a function of how much of the sky you can fill with wire. It must ultimately derive from Murphy's law, which is best stated as "If something is going to be really worth doing then it's not going to be easy". 73 Peter |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | LF: Re: Re: Re: Top-fed LF antenna idea, captbrian |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | LF: Re: Re: Re: Top-fed LF antenna idea, James Moritz |
| Previous by Thread: | LF: Re: Re: Re: Top-fed LF antenna idea, captbrian |
| Next by Thread: | LF: Re: Re: Re: Top-fed LF antenna idea, James Moritz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |