They have stray radiation that the FCC's computer can not model.
On 2/10/12 5:43 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
> Off top my head, it would seem the slant wire would work to create a
> directional effect of one sort or other, depending on the specifics, but I
> have no clue why the FCC dissed that one. They usually attach some
> technical explanation to rulings. You have access to the specific
> proceedings? I could come up with a dozen speculations about it, but
> that's all they'd be.
>
> -- Guy.
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Herb Schoenbohm<herbs@vitelcom.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/10/2012 5:03 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote:
>>> The 120 comes from the watershed 1937 Brown Lewis and Eppstein study now
>>> found in the IEEE journals. There were distinct characteristics to 120
>>> times 0.4 wl (actually 115) that improved results even vs. 60.
>>>
>>> That a deficient radial system on one side has any significant reduction
>> in
>>> that direction alone VS THE OTHER DIRECTIONS is a fairly well debunked
>>> idea. That the missing radials reduce radiation in all directions, due
>> to
>>> diminished efficiency, is not disputed.
>>>
>>> 73, Guy.
>>>
>> Guy,
>>
>> What about the slant wire cause at least some directive component in the
>> direction of the slant wire?
>>
>>
>> Herb, KV4FZ
>> _______________________________________________
>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>
_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
|