I'm always surprised that so many people seem not to realise that using a horizontal antenna next to sea water, whilst hardly unlikley to produce good results, is nevertheless going to produce vastly reduced performance compared to using a vertical. At least insofar as our usual quarry - good DX - is concerned.
 |
| This 1952 graphic (based on real measuerements, not models), and any number of modern versions, is all people like 2W0YMS need to absorb. It's not difficult. Fields depicted over perfect ground (i.e.similar to seawater). |
So I idly commented on the latest 'holiday-style' DXpedition that were merrily using a horizontal dipole, on Twitter yesterday.
I was a bit surprised to find a fellow Welsh amateur pipe-up with a rather odd - and wholly pointless - response, which clearly indicates his belief that the horizontal vs. vertical assertion is wrong. Oh, and that I appear to buy antennas "off the shelf" (I invariably build my own antennas, and never bought a vertical HF antenna):
Well, it takes all sorts. Even ones who are not particularly adept at punctuation, or being a bit circumspect about what they commit to the public sphere.
For those who are more interested in learning than being pointlessly abusive online when your argument is fundamentally incorrect, you can try this site by the Royal Signals ARS, as but one of very many you will find online and in books.
Given the choice between people like the late Les Moxon, G6XN, and an upstart like 2W0YMS, I know which one I will take notice of. Maybe a copy of the ARRL Antenna Book and/or HF Antennas for All Locations for you next Christmas, Mark? You might just learn something and even go try it out for yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment