You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

Without stating what would seem to be the obvious unless I'm missing something, a 5/8 wavelength antenna would show no more advantage over a similar antenna when the TOA is the only thing of issue with each one. As I understand it, the maximum advantage would be in the far field contacts of many miles out, and/or for DX, and we know DX is a fickle mistress where testing is concerned.
For consistently measurable nearer contacts even a 1/4 wavelength antenna has long been at the advantage locally due to its higher TOA. One should not be surprised if a drop in meter readings was reported locally when a longer antenna with lower TOA is put up. . .
I think being able to consistently report measurable advantages of one over the other beyond modeling differences will never happen. All of the reasons we use longer wavelength antennas are because of our quest for greater gain to the horizon that gives us better contacts (hopefully) into distances where conditions are simply uncontrollable: between us and the distances we are aiming at with very low TOA are too many variables to think of.
It's been said before better than I just did . . .
Nevertheless, I am awaiting the results of this poor man's GM anxiously.

<blockquote data-quote="HomerBB" data-source="post: 359306" data-attributes="member: 8569">Without stating what would seem to be the obvious unless I&#039;m missing something, a 5/8 wavelength antenna would show no more advantage over a similar antenna when the TOA is the only thing of issue with each one. As I understand it, the maximum advantage would be in the far field contacts of many miles out, and/or for DX, and we know DX is a fickle mistress where testing is concerned. For consistently measurable nearer contacts even a 1/4 wavelength antenna has long been at the advantage locally due to its higher TOA. One should not be surprised if a drop in meter readings was reported locally when a longer&nbsp; antenna with lower TOA is put up. . . I think being able to consistently report measurable advantages of one over the other beyond modeling differences will never happen. All of the reasons we use longer wavelength antennas are because of our quest for greater gain to the horizon that gives us better contacts (hopefully) into distances where conditions are simply uncontrollable: between us and the distances we are aiming at with very low TOA are too many variables to think of.It&#039;s been said before better than I just did . . .Nevertheless, I am awaiting the results of this poor man&#039;s GM anxiously.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HomerBB, post: 359306, member: 8569"] Without stating what would seem to be the obvious unless I'm missing something, a 5/8 wavelength antenna would show no more advantage over a similar antenna when the TOA is the only thing of issue with each one. As I understand it, the maximum advantage would be in the far field contacts of many miles out, and/or for DX, and we know DX is a fickle mistress where testing is concerned. For consistently measurable nearer contacts even a 1/4 wavelength antenna has long been at the advantage locally due to its higher TOA. One should not be surprised if a drop in meter readings was reported locally when a longer antenna with lower TOA is put up. . . I think being able to consistently report measurable advantages of one over the other beyond modeling differences will never happen. All of the reasons we use longer wavelength antennas are because of our quest for greater gain to the horizon that gives us better contacts (hopefully) into distances where conditions are simply uncontrollable: between us and the distances we are aiming at with very low TOA are too many variables to think of. It's been said before better than I just did . . . Nevertheless, I am awaiting the results of this poor man's GM anxiously. [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom