This subject has been discussed here plenty of times in the past, and the
consensus has always been that trees and other foliage near a 160m antenna
has a negligible effect on the transmitted signal. That's what I have
believed for some time.
In this case, K9LA was talking about two things:
Some time ago I attempted to make direct measurements of the HF conductivity
of trees, at least for the trunk and limbs. I simply put a two rings, with
nails to penetrate through the bark, around the trunk spaced a couple of
feet apart. Basically what I had was a resistor. I then measured
OK - found out they will be on the Island(s) for a work assignment...thanks to
all that sent me the info! 72, Jim R. K9JWV
From: rodenkirch_...@msn.com
To: topband@contesting.com
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 12:18:25 -0600
Subject: Topband: Prince Edward and Marion Islands, ZS8
This from the
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Mike Waters mikew...@gmail.com wrote:
This subject has been discussed here plenty of times in the past, and the
consensus has always been that trees and other foliage near a 160m antenna
has a negligible effect on the transmitted signal. That's what I have
I live on several acres that is a watershed area with a relatively high fresh
water
table.
Almost all of the land is densely populated with trees and some ranging up to
a 100' or more.
For transmit antennas on 160, I have an inverted L that goes up to 85' with
30 elevated radials. And, I also
I *very much* appreciate the many replies to my post. I've known about the
effect of foliage at VHF and above for a long time, but I think I've just
learned something new and useful. :-)
Since the vertical portion of my inverted-L is over 10 feet from the tall
oak tree (and its leafy branches)
