yes, NB...but trying to find some 'indication' of an angle that may improve match, thereby adding efficiency to system which "should" add to gain on the horizon where we want it is Marconi's drive.
To all I say the models are all we have, we know they are not perfect and that everyones installs will be different in the real world. But science is about continually testing the theories and observations. We will always be doing it and others will always test the observations we leave behind.
Marconi knows what he is looking for and if along the way we can help him with some information then great! The results may be enlightning they may not. Nothing ventured nothing gained.
Now that having been said, i think that a systematic approach should help. First let's get a model that establishes the best theoretical height if we are going to use a sort of real world model with mast for THIS antenna (Marconi you mentioned the 1/4 wave above and that should be modeled separately in my thoughts) I have suggested 3/4 wl above ground as the best for supplying the bottom half of missing antenna with an elevated ground plane system,..
The other option is to model in free space, which is ok, but then we are left with trying to duplicate that on the ground, ie isolate antenna from mast, decoupling and etc
But to me real world with mast is best way to go.
"Good Day"
