KE2IV
| Joined: | Sat, Apr 4th 1998, 00:00 | Roles: | N/A | Moderates: | N/A |
Latest Topics
| Topic | Created | Posts | Views | Last Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 43' verticals -- what's the theoretical basis? | Oct 11th 2011, 22:00 | 5 | 12,096 | on 20/10/11 |
Latest Posts
| Topic | Author | Posted On |
|---|---|---|
| 43' verticals -- what's the theoretical basis? | KE2IV | on 11/10/11 |
| QST is filled with ads from various manufacturers and suppliers offering "all-band" 43-foot verticals. Legitimately, all these ads make it clear that this (and any vertical) will require a good ground plane system of radials for effectiveness. But why 43-feet? What is the "formula" to explain why this length will effectively radiate on "all bands" (i.e. 160m - 10m) with a decent ground plane system? I'm interested in puting one up -- but would like to know the "theory" behind such an antenna. Any guidance to the articles or texts to explain would be greatly appreciated. 73, George KE2IV |
||
| General Comments | aa6e | on 29/7/11 |
| I'm a lifetime member of the ARRL. While I appreciate the League's desire to enhance communications with and between members, I do not think that instituting forums on the website is wise. All too often these forums become places for shouting matches, insults and general negativity. There are simply too many people who just lose all sense of propriety when they sit at a computer keyboard. One sees it on every forum not just in ham radio, but generally all over the internet. Perhaps it will be different here -- although I doubt it. Certainly, unless the moderators intend to be actively interventionist I am all but convinced that this forum site will deteriorate quickly into a viper pit of insult and innuendo as do so many others. |
||
