On Tue, 02 Mar 1999 00:54:28 -0800, Kurt Andress <K7NV@contesting.com>
>We all should agree that a thorough and proper solution via physics
>principles is not so straightforward and readily attainable in all quarters.
>To pursue this form of solution will only lead to no change in the
>What has happened as a result of our discussion about correcting antenna
>area spec's. Absolutely nothing,
Well, no... Do you have any idea how many people read this reflector?
I have had people I never met before walk up to me at hamfests and
start up a conversation on something I wrote on Towertalk. I asked
them how they knew me, and they pointed to the "K2AV" on my cap...
As best as I can tell most readers go for the archives, most readers
*don't* post, and are quite intelligent enough to follow what gets
said here, and form pretty decent independent opinions.
Anyone putting up a significant ham station has probably heard about
towertalk, and has checked in for reading if they're on the internet.
A medium with this kind of power had to wait for the internet. But now
that it's here, it is taking manufacturers to task, and they are
Not nothing. Maybe we can't force *all* the mfrs to get in line, but
the one's who are paying attention here will (are) start to pull
Everyone who reads this regularly can quote the names.
>from what I can determine. Resolving that
>problem is way easier than this one. So, we need to keep this solution
>simple to expect to see it in our lifetimes.
...KISS... ...ITES... ...SFE... (Simple, fair, enforceable)
Guy L. Olinger
Apex, NC, USA
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com