Hey guys it might help me understand better if you gave us some actual quotes of the misuse statements you mention. I would like some examples so I can sink my teeth into some ideas on exactly what is being said about the counterpoise when giving the wrong idea.
Like I said before my issues with such discussions is I find the arguments are difficult to follow sometimes, and I'm just a simple man.
I liked the idea of mobile use that Homer talks about, because I hear folks occasionally talk about capacitance associated with mobiles...and that might apply because the antenna is riding on insulating tires and the mobile body is close to the Earth.
I have not read Laport's article on this subject, but I get that he tells us the counterpoise idea used correctly produces a better result than buried radials or raised radials. I'm not sure if he got specific with what those differences are, but I doubt it. Are we talking about a big difference or is this another case of a technical difference that may be true...but has little impact on our real world use?
I'm going to model the Classic counterpoise example below, and see how it compares to a ground plane at the same height, a few inches above the Earth, vs. the GP at 5' feet and 9' feet and see what differences, if any, show up. I won't be including the coil or the capicator in the model however.
[ATTACH]9743[/ATTACH]
