Nuff said. I'll keep that in mind next time you
say a vertical is 24 dB better than a dipole. :-) ........

Well, of course, I've never said any such thing.
But...It is often a large noticable difference.

Mike sed...
My guess is that it depends on where
the signals originated from

Thats exactly it. In general, the farther away, the
better the vertical vs the low dipole.
If you don't work long haul dx, the vertical user
may never see much advantage. At night on 40m,
if the distance is less than 1000 miles, often the
dipole and vertical would be about the same.
In my case, I had to get over a 1000 miles to see
much vertical advantage. At 1500 miles, it's fairly
obvious. "appx 2 S units worth". In the long hauls
to VK, JA, etc, often 3-4 S units worth. That will
be a larger increase than your 2 s units noise increase.
Modeling won't tell the whole story in a case like
this. Just ask W8JI about his 300+ feet dipoles
on 160m. In theory , they were supposed to beat his
vertical towers. But , they usually don't on long
paths where the angle is very low.
I once yakked with this guy in Tokyo for a while.
On the dipole at 1kw, I'd be S 8-9... On the
GP with 1 kw, I'd be a solid 20 over 9. And it's
reciprical as far as xmit/rcve. So I'd always be
listening on the vertical if I wanted to see the same
increase on my end.
The only exception would be if I had something
better like a beverage, etc, but that applies more
to 80 and 160, than 40.
Thats the real point of my comments,
not which is better. To me, installing a good vertical
for dx, and then listening on a low dipole to same is
kinda silly being the benefits are reciprical.
Also...Building a good vertical, but not using it for
long hauls is kinda silly too... :/ It's the wrong tool for
working 500-800 miles away. If it's never better than the
dipole in that case, don't fret too much, as it's perfectly
normal.
MK