Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: Re: RE: Folded monopole - Food for thought |
| From: | Andy Talbot <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:38:03 +0100 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=WbFeCOa5kmSBSkelcYA4rl2Aa8FhgOn9nrggq1DlIiA=; b=xkt597tW45ReH/l6o53DpbU3CXVpvBt1vPO6OR0e4T9QlBCBO4ByGSDCWBjVtLd+tG Gl+OXKMAGt1UnF4c24GlhDgB8YW6x7OCzNw+sqZ/xrB85sZ0uE0uhG3YGIpIN94BNq1+ SxOSoODcLisrCxR66J307Zd5Xdi28eCgNCjAk8YdTOpGV76PKuxoTTNJtTAg1qzIScYm 5sNq0oM+Zg8bhEIGXtmYxVL3Sq7ptC7qz0BEJDr7LFpvOP/nmHPf3pYS4dQSgOf6yZS1 8xqsw9HkcYRodeZ85xtu227EjNy+n99gjTzOHfKNfjPU4RE6Zp6A3CjDvEjRINs9yw95 rp6A== |
| In-reply-to: | <1156BF06E81A40ED928F77349725D23D@gnat> |
| References: | <CAA8k23TogtdhVt5L4N8h2X8mZQeqTnPR1VPydFpYQrHnTG3ojQ@mail.gmail.com> <C6107F3FF0014066ADA6D0452B156B95@Clemens0811> <1156BF06E81A40ED928F77349725D23D@gnat> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
|
6dB more, not 3dB
Height squared 'jnt On 14 August 2015 at 22:31, Alan Melia <[email protected]> wrote: The problem with a monopole at LF is that the effective height is only half (approx) the physical height. For an inverted L where the top length is at least twice the height, the effective height is close to the physical height .....so 3dB more ERP. It may not matter so much on 160m (I used a 16foot centre loaded "tank-whip" at one time :-)) ) but where |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | LF: Re: RE: Folded monopole - Food for thought, Alan Melia |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: Re: RE: Folded monopole - Food for thought, Alan Melia |
| Previous by Thread: | LF: Re: RE: Folded monopole - Food for thought, Alan Melia |
| Next by Thread: | Re: LF: Re: RE: Folded monopole - Food for thought, Alan Melia |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |