I can imagine where such a scenario might happen similar to what you describe DB, but I don't think this is what Bob was talking about when he described his idea that he was steering the RF with his vertical Vector antenna years ago. I can only assume he felt his results were due to some modifications he made to his design and that is what showed him some increased gain in the far field.
I could be wrong, but I seem to recall back then Bob was telling us about his idea that the Vector was some sort of non-apparent colinear, and that the 1/4 wave cone radiated equally well, in magnitude and phase, with the top 1/2 wave radiator.
I think we have learned a thing or two about cancellation between the cone and the base of the radiator inside the cone...and that pretty much rules out any possible colinear response with the Vector design.
DB, when you told us you had modeled this idea...I figured you were using a Vector design and that by modifying the radial length and cone height your models showed a nice range of change in the angle of the maximum gain lobe to the horizon.
Sorry, I know little about ideas for a colinear antenna on a mountain top and the phasing required to transmit a good signal to a city below in a valley.
The conclusions I reached in my simple effort to modify my New Vector 4K model showed me that the FS model lowering the RF angle down by a few degrees, as I've noted above. This model also shows a modest increase in the gain simply by making the radials a bit longer than specified earlier.
I find there is one simple limitation in my results, however, the model has to be a free space model. I can't tell you why, however.
Maybe Henry or others have some thoughts on this subject.
If I'm up to the work I might post some details for my Vector models.
Thanks for your reply.
