Guy, I know it is not equal to your statements, but in my mind you are making a good case for the use of elevated (and tuned) radials. L B Cebik recommended them to me at FDIM several years ago over in-ground radials and I have never done the work of burying the radials, so I have no comparison. Mine are supported on electric fence insulators in the trees 10 feet up, and the monopole and radials are tuned together using the techniques outlined in UN4ON's Low-Band DXing (page 9-23). The radiator is the 40/80 vertical/160 inverted L BC-Trapper also described in the same book. (yes, I have radials for 40 and for 80 and for 160).
It works well for me, and no way did I want to dig through the tree roots in the forest nor trip over wires on the ground when I wanted to take a walk. There are good reports of elevated radials, although some measurements by Tom Rauch W8JI indicated some disagreement, but for my situation it is the best solution despite any controversy. 73, Don W3FPR On 12/20/2010 12:28 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: > (For the record, I am also addressing some off-reflector extensions of > this thread with a single post.) > > We are still talking about an end-fed antenna for 80-10 which presents > unique problems. Trimming the horizontal length of up 30, out 30 for > a good match will help a lot. But that will not address avoiding an > up to 10 dB loss problem in the radial system that can make it perform > like a wet noodle dipole. > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
