[BC] Elevated Grounds

[Stanley Adams]

Thanks for all the replies fellows.  Appreciate it.  Conceptually, I would
think that there would not be much difference, yet on the other hand, we are
attempting actually to transmit one half of the total RF current through the
medium of the earth.  In the MW band, this is critical because most of the 
coverage is by means of the ground wave.  Now, I would think that an
elevated counterpoise would be better than driving ground rods in the rocks
of Vermont where the ground conductivity is extremely poor.  On the other
hand, in the great state of Illinois, or in the low lands of many places
where water is in abundance or traces of minerals, then the transfer effect
to the more conductive ground situation would be better then the elevated
remainder of what is practically a buried half of a dipole.  

In addition, I do know that where many of the old two tower flat tops were
converted to single tower verticals in the 1930's and counterpoises were run
around the roof, down the sides and grounded in the earth, that these
installations never did work too well. Part of it may have been due to
having a short tower, but the overall efficiency suffered as compared to the
standard ground builds.

Guess I need to go read my Terman's.

Stanley Adams
Memphis