[Lowfer] Alien e-probes

[Peter Barick]

>>> ashlockw@hotmail.com 09/16/03 04:59PM >>>
>>
Let me ask this question: By adding a ground plane to the base of an
E-probe 
antenna mounted at, say, 55 ft,  you expect to increase the signal?
>>
No, not my intent. Merely to rise above the canopy of trees, to get a
better window for signals. The issue of the GP is, as you say, for a
current return point for the probe. Also, it should diminish feed line
coupling to some degree. That degree - hence size - was at the heart of
my query. You seem to be pointing at zero increase in sig level for a
GP, okay, but what about noise coupled from the feedline into the probe?
Would like to diminish that. Well, that may be another contentious
issue, but on par with sig strength, huh?

>>
>what does one make of the AMRAD's LF probe using
>a smallish metal roof for GP and reported noise reduction and stated
>effective reception?

I believe the gain is not due to the improved ground plane but simply
to the 
metal roof providing a good ground to the return side of the probe -
and of 
>>

Okay, then would not a lesser radial-type screen serve as same and
approximate a such a return? 

>>
When I began testing E-probes at increased elevation in the back yard
(4 
years ago)
...........
 I added a 3ft dangling ground plane to act as the 
return for the probe and I was able to read the meter with binoculars.
The 
results indicated almost no increase in signal strength with height!
Next, I 
moved the equipment to a large open field and the results were the
same.
Bill A
>>

I remember that - and no one can say you didn't go the extra "mile"
using those peepers!

Peter