cubical quad max height

[W5LZ]

shoemaker,
It depends very much on propagation, so in general, yes it'll do 'better' the higher it is. There are still limits determined by propagation, practicality, and the frequency of use. The higher the frequency the more an antenna's height will make a difference (that's due mainly to propagation and how radio waves behave). A -practical- height has a lot to do with the limits that local/federal regulations say you can take advantage of, as in how tall a tower (and can you really afford one that high?).
The 'best' circumstance might be a really huge tower with an antenna spaced every wave length or so. Or maybe a huge tower with the antenna mounted on a hoist that you can raise/lower to suit conditions. And considering how fast propagation can change, maybe that multiple antenna thingy would be the better of the two. (Gonna have me one'a them as soon as I win the next three lotteries! I'm holding my breath too!)
What it amounts to is that the "best height" is variable and not very predictable. So in most cases, whatever the highest you can reasonably put an antenna, will be the 'best' you can reasonably expect. Ten feet is better than one foot, 30 feet is better than 10 feet, and higher is better than that till you run out of space and money. On my city lot, running out of usable space is more of a limiting factor than money is (believe it or not!).
- 'Doc

PS - Mother Nature is making up for the drought of the last couple of years. My 'tower site' is so soggy I'd have to put one on floats! Or watch it gradually sink out of sight...

 

[shoemaker]

Thank you so much Doc, and sorry for the late response. 8)

 

[CDX-007]

BOOTS & QUADS

Hey shoemaker, I built a homebrew 3 el Quad back in '89 and not a single local could keep up with my signal into New Zealand / Australia / Tazmania with an old Cobra 2000 & a Skipper 300 humming along with 3 8950s giving me around 450w pep, including the locals with Ham rigs and KWs, - except for one guy, Ed.

Ed would open & close the band. He would literally be in QSO with the Mates 'Down-Under' for a good 15-20 minutes before I could even hear 'em.

I lived 155' above sea level, in the city, & surrounded on 3 sides by powerlines while Ed lived 11 miles from me, in the country at 700', no power lines nearby.

His beam was on a 50' tower & mine was on a 4 section Rohn push-up mast atop a 20' roof.

Other than the difference in elevation & powerlines our antennas bore 2 similarities; I built both and they were both Quads, mine was a 13' long 3 element & Ed's was a 27' long 5 element.

I'd say we both had our booms right about 53' considering the rotor and pole.

When I tested it into Australia at 12' from the ground while finishing the build for Ed, then later that week to the same fellow I'd talked with on multiple occasions, he said "Same signal strength".

Locally the extra height helped tremendously, but for DX the quad didn't seem to care if it was at 12' or 53', due, I presume, to the inherent low take-off angle displayed by the Quad design.

At 36' you should love it, and as was stated earlier, the higher-the better for local ground wave contacts.

=====================

Shoemaker, do you actually make shoes (Hiking Boots) from scratch?
I have a wonderful old pair of 1980 Herman Survivors which are no longer in production but which I want to have a hand-made copy of made for me. Maybe several.
Do you do that type of work?

Thanks & 73

 

[shoemaker]

cdx-007 thanks for the information, and i do understand what you are saying. Oh and i am not a real shoemaker........sorry .............73s