Efficiency here is secondary. The dominant factors are power pattern-- almost no horizontal gain-- and phase cancellation from transmission line effect from proximity to ground.
Nice, easy, HOA approach. I like it. However, let's all be careful. RF exposure and the danger of a shock are genuine issues. Someone touching the wire while standing on the ground -- especially if their shoes are not good insulators or the ground is wet could be fatal. There are voltage peaks along the wire and even at modest power levels they could be higher than what the insulation of speaker wire will handle. Even THNN wire could arc thru at a voltage peak along the wire. If there is any chance of arcing thru to combustible material it's a problem. And you'll need a hard copy of the RE exposure calculations showing you're within the limits so you can immediately show someone if you are ever questioned or challenged. And the wood fence, or even a plastic fence, when wet will detune the thing. Yes the tuner will "fix" that -- but it still soaks up RF. So a stand off of a foot or two is good. You'll need some way to camouflage it since the stand off makes the antenna more visible. But creativity may be able to solve that.
Tried it. Fence level antennas just do not work very well - they are WAY too low. A wire in the attic actually works better in many cases (and there are ways to make this work decently, with a decent attic). Regarding safety - YES - but try telling that to hams who use "Magnetic Loops" inside their apartments, running 50-100W. Talk about high voltages ... ZAP! Brian - K6BRN
IMO the fact that such LOW antennas don't work (definition of 'don't work': poorly designed for multihop skip and NOT optimized for NVIS)--and the REASON they don't work is apparently UNKNOWN or blissfully UNEXPLORED is a true failure of the testing pool. THESE limitations should be common knowledge. Repeat: common knowledge. IOW what is common knowledge amongst all slightly technically inclined US radio amateurs--to wit: use a NEC based model to show to yourself--apprears a badge of benefit, as if that ignorance MIGHT lead to new insights and NEW BENEFITS. It does not and can not. If you have QUESTIONS --why-- such poor antennas DON'T work, then feel free to ask. There are probably hundreds of your fellow hams who are willing to tell you the REASON behind such limited systems. Note the word REASON, not the word OPINION. Facts are facts. That's not a snotty know-it -all attitude. It's a 'think about what it MEANS to have that Part 97 license, and use it and the COMMUNITY to enjoy growing your knowledge base'. MO. Yours may differ. 73 Chip W1YW
Not Well, Period, end of sentence. There will be ops that swear by shitty ANT's. but it's only because it's their only option & have nothing to compare said shit ANT to. Don't be fooled by the saying "Any ANT is better than no ANT" Sometimes No ANT is actually better.
Jokes apart, a [wooden] fence is great mechanical support for made of wire DDRR-like antenna. Metal made fence is great counterpoise for [stealth, if required] wire GP.
Hi Chip (W1YW): Heh! Well! Pardon me! Perhaps we agree. Amateur banter on antennas is a good thing, not bad, as long as its civil. We share ideas and experiment. Some learn new tools - then learn the limitations - theirs and the tools. Sometimes success results. Often, an experiment fails - but we learn from it all the same. Pretty much how Marconi invented wireless. Those that are frustrated by this process simply leave the hobby. All is good as long as we stay safe - yet another good reason to "banter", because we may not know what we don't know, per your feedback against using a "lightbulb" as a high power dummy load, earlier on. Good work, BTW! So - it's NOT about the FCC "TEST". It's all about the journey afterwards - in what we do that we enjoy and learn from - even if we were never professionals. For those of us who are or were professionals, we took years of training, in engineering, safety and many other aspects of innovation. For hams, talking and doing IS learning - "On the Hobby", so to speak. And that's OK IMO. Brian - K6BRN
I have a metal fence around the back yard 85X60. Using the fence as a ground to my EFHW up 45 feet in center with ends 15 feet and 5 feet above ground. The antenna length is 131 feet. Works great. With 100 on watts CW I can work just anyone I can hear that is RST 239 and up. Don't know if fence is radiating much or the fence messes with the pattern, regardless one of my best antennas I had up here in 32 years using dipoles, verticals and EFLW antennas. In the house a CMC choke is close to the radio and grounded, don't have any RFI at all and it's a fairly quiet antenna.
So - you're using your fence as a ground/counterpoise/whatever - not as the antenna, which is really up 45 feet? Great! Height matters. Brian - K6BRN
A general answer, not particularly directed at anyone --- There is nothing learned when someone plugs a lightbulb into the antenna port and then claims success. There is nothing learned when a wire antenna--not a Beverage-- is splayed on a wooden fence 3 feet above the ground and the claim is 'better than no antenna'. The SPIRIT of ham radio is not to putter with failures and attach opinions over facts. The spirit is to get BEYOND that, ask WHY they failed, and then see IF some sort of solution can be found. For example, here's something to play with. Let's say you want to get on 10M--- a very real option this Fall with the great sunspot cycle max. One wave on 10m is, well 10m. 3 feet is about 1m. That's 'electrically short' but still useable. Think about how you can make an extended T wire vertical for 10m. The T is a top load splayed along the top of the fence (do NOT attach to the wood as it will load the antenna and invite the possibility of high voltages=fire).. The feed is at the bottom and ground wires are invoked. The 3foot vertical section is the actual antenna. Play with THAT idea because it 'works' (see prior definition). Does it work WELL? No. Will it have some realized gain at low angles, compared to the OP example? Yes. The 'hobby' is a licensed service, where there are testing BARRIERS where you express KNOWLEDGE for that privilege. Expressing an interest in knowledge is not a one time event in ham radio. only executed at the time of testing. Ask questions.. Many will be happy to help. 73 Chip W1YW
"Firing for effect?" Perhaps not and who cares? Much of the ham community is not "learned", anyway - it's just not a requirement. And we both know very well that using an incandescent light bulb as a dummy load was common practice by hams - and actually worked to a degree - back in the cruder, earlier days of tube radio. Especially when money was short. Today, with more sensitive and expensive SS gear, and a generally wealthier society, there are much better and safer ways to go. It's all a matter of context and perspective. Nope. Not "Learned". Just a statement of fact, for better or worse. Life is full of compromises. And part of learning is actually discovering what works, what does not work and what works better. I'll take an eager, questioning and skeptical student anyday over a person who is learned and has no room left for discovery. Umm, yeah. About that. There is no one "Spirit of Ham Radio". Its a HOBBY. One that can be fun, occasionally useful - or not. Pull ten hams out of a club meeting and you'll get seven different answers and three blank stares. "Well - ham radio spirit? That's making the ARRL Honor Roll!", or "Oh. Yeah! It's EmComm!", or "DXPeditions!", or "Contests!", or "Rag Chewing!", etc. Though the Spirit of Christmas Past has been known to show up at club meetings at times, generally when last years radio gift is no longer wanted and needs to be unloaded. And if you're thinking of profound technical contributions to this hobby, just ring up "Joe Taylor" and his magnificent crew. Prefer just plain brilliant and obsessed over the hobby? Respond to a CQ by Ulrich Rohde - he operates a LOT - and loves FT8. AND is doing his best to bring the military back into HF comms. Hmmm. But there are also bankers, fisherman, real estate agents, politicians and kids. They ALL have their own version of what amateur radio is. And that's OK by me. (SNIP!) Seriously? Because the "barriers" you refer are emotional ONLY. The tests are multiple choice, the answers are published, limited in number and there are tons of memorization/test prep sites on-line. The filter it provides is one of motivation, not knowledge. So - your point is pretty vague. Seems to have something to do with being "learned", which today is pretty synonymous with "ossified", "inflexible" and "unable to learn any more". You know how it is. The meaning of words change over time. My younger son educated me on what "Hook Up" means today. I laughed and said we had a more efficient expression for that using only four letters, in my time. Regarding failure... It's often said that we learn more from our mistakes than our successes - and I find that to be a valid observation. Especially after raising several children who often had to prove to themselves what I already knew, despite my patient and sometimes impatient coaching. That's when I realized that people have to "fall down" on their own and learn to get up themselves. Help and education simply eases that process and minimizes bruising. Its what we learn from our failures that allows us to perform well and nearly flawlessly when we absolutely have to. Training and education is great - but what we "learn" often does not become "real" until we stumble - and then it's imprinted at a survival level. So if some hams want to use a bedspring for an antenna and it works for them, great! So much the better if they later discover a dipole at 40 feet is even more effective. At LEAST they'll have a reference point. Many new hams DON'T. In the end, this is a HOBBY - not a profession. If you're having fun, following the rules and staying safe, you're doing it right. Brian - K6BRN
Brian, If you want to look at it as a "hobby", that's fine. But even 'hobbies' require an ever increasing knowledge base. You don't check your brain at the door when you get your ticket. We need to encourage our fellow radio amateurs to use 'experiments'--including even some GOOFY ones-- as incentives for BEING "skilled in the radio art" (see Part 97). Some of the responses in this thread do not meet that level. It is IMPORTANT to point out that fact, and the solution to ignorance in same. BTW I certainly know K1JT and N1UL. And, I might add, they know me But they are NOT responsible for rising the 'hobby' to a median level while there are those who want to be, well, 'goofy'. Part 97 requires EACH of us to be "skilled in the radio art". That is --to use your word--"learned". It is INDEED a requirement, anf not for a mere few. And "skilled" does not necessarily mean "expert", NOR "professional". It means having a working knowledge of making things happen to communicate via RF on assigned frequency allocations. A light bulb antenna, for example, does not meet that criterion. A three foot high wooden fence is a --restriction-- but its the SKILL that incentivizes seeking a solution iwth the constraint so posed (but not attempted in the OP). So, again, I find your arguments AGAINST being "skilled in the radio art"....untenable. "Skilled in the radio art"...that's what it means to 'do it right'. 73 Chip W1YW
Several years ago I experimented with a distant cousin to this fence antenna: the ground mounted 75 meter dipole. The state DOT found it great fun and sport to knock down my 75 meter dipole with a back-hoe and/or other such implements. So I left it down. Since it was designed to be a "local only" antenna for use from NY to the Caribbean, I tested it as such. The usual guys gave me only 2 s-units lower than the antenna in its normal location. Receive was quieter, obviously, and they weren't much lower than normal, still 10-20 over. One of the test stations who is now SK used a barbed wire fence surrounding his neighbor's cow field. Because he was 2000 feet higher at ground level, this antenna seemed to work marginally better even though it was galvanized steel instead of solid copper. The hobby is for fun. This stuff -- to me -- is fun!
You mean, because it IS a hobby? I think you're confusing a profession/livelihood with amusement. A hobby can be whatever you make it, within its governing rules. And unlike a job/profession/livelihood, FCC Part 97 has no requirements for what amateurs actually accomplish with their hobby. etc. Hmmm. That sounds suspiciously like proselytizing, with you as the evangelist. How about we let others make their own decisions? And BTW - I did encourage safe experimenting in my previous posts - but did not dictate how this had to be done. Note also that FCC Part 97 has quite a few lofty goals for amateur radio operators, but goals are not requirements. The requirements are more specific and usually denoted by "must, may, will and shall". But of course! I'd expect nothing less. Sounds like you want a badge and a billy club. Is that a good idea? (Probably not) .... And that's perfectly OK with me. I don't have an "ax to grind" regarding amateur radio. There are far more important things in life to "Do Right". And, by definition, per Part 97, the radio amateur exams establish skills to the level required. In the same operators you're calling "Goofy" and ... "unskilled"? Pretty judgmental, don't you think? Perhaps lucky for the community, you're in no position to enforce your .... zeal. BTW - "Learned" was your term. I just pointed out that it can be interpreted differently, today. Carry on, Chip! Brian - K6BRN
