In a message dated 9/19/01 12:48:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Wrong philosophy. Try the products first in the model and if it
doesn't provide any improvment throw it in the trash. Your design
first by prototype philosophy is not what any engineering firm would
do today. I suppose there are some who would try but they wouldn't be
********Brian, before Eznec everyone built prototypes. I used model air
plane brass tubing for elements. I specifically stated "since Eznec I model
everything first." It saves a lot of time if you know how to read the
patterns. Didn't you read it? Now if you read it why did you make such a
statement above? Your arrogant statement served no useful purpose whatsoever.
Second. You have now completely changed the design you talked about
to try and make it work. What if you were doing this in the real
world? What a waste of time and $$.
************Hold on, I added a BC variable after WWII selsyn driven for
simplicity out at the base. The variable vacuum is too slow to adjust out of
the shack. So I changed the design and did make it work quicker--so what?
Who cares besides you in the real world? Your statement is "totally
irrelevant." Simplicity is the name of the game. Try it. What's the big sin?
Any technique that works better is not a waste of time or $$. I'm sure the
original suggester doesn't care either so why should you? Before selsyns the
wire of an L was frequently run into the shack right to the series Xc and the
linked coupled or a pi network final. By having taps on the Pi tank coil one
can change the matching range of it real fast for the L wire to the tube
plate. They were clever chaps in those days. Finals were open years ago and
easy to get into to change a coil tap for example or some had a rotary coil
insulated shaft coming out front--after first shutting off the HV. Appliance
operators can't get into the rigs now to do these things.
Third, per W8JI's notes, the coax won't handle the power.
*********He has no knowledge of the size of coax I used--as usual. Why
don't you ask before going off in another tangent? It's true that coax used
as a 1/4 wave matching stub has SWR on it and that increases the losses some
but not for the full length. The SWR is about 1.8:1 (for 90 ohm coax
connected to a 160 ohm load). I feel coax all the time after a long
transmission and if it doesn't get warm that's acceptable to me. I ran the
actual test--he didn't as usual. I emphasized the necessity of this to keep
from putting your foot in your mouth--repeatedly.
You have to go to RG133 (unavailable anywhere I could find on using
the GOOGLE search engine. It is 0.4" diameter stuff with a big solid
copper center conductor. Any guess on the $$/foot if you could find it).
********You fail to realize we in Seattle have access to Boeing Surplus
and coax, wire and aluminum that makes your mouth water.
Making your favorite (open wire line) is impossible for 90
ohms. The closest one can come is 110 ohms with 1/4" copper tubing
close spaced. Thus another design iteration.....
********I never said I made 90 ohm open wire line for that application.
But if I wanted something for that range or higher there is a trick you don't
known of just paralleling 2-300 ohm 1/4 waves for a 150 ohm stub. That will
invert 450 ohms down to 50 ohms balanced. Or paralleling 3-300 ohm stubs for
a"100 ohm 1/4 wave stub". That will invert ____ohms down to 50 ohms. I'll
let you do the math. Or parallel a 300 with a 150 ohm line there was at one
time--for another "100 ohm 1/4 stub." How do you like them design apples?
There is no dielectric like around 300 ohm amphenol around 2 copper tubing's
attempting to make low Zo 1/4 wave stubs. Therefore if you know your coax
cable formula for Zo and related math you talk about all the time, I'll ask
you how that dielectric changes the Zo of the line? This is a "Pop Quiz!"
You Show me YOUR math.
I mentioned one lead of an open wire line plugging into a coax switch and the
other lead through a series Xc to the case ground. That particular feedline
came from a 80m dipole and also a 40M horizontally oriented quad loop. A
single L wire can also connect to the coax switch center through the Xc
also--I did it here. The other coaxes to the coax switch acted like radials.
It's a useful concept. Perhaps you could suggest a few?
Anybody in the US can work JA with great signals when the band is open
on 10M using a wet noodle antenna. I have worked a JA here who was
running 500 microwatts. It wasn't his antenna, my antenna. It was
propogation. It is more a matter of knowing when the propogation is
**********Get off it Brain. I'll be happy to compare with your "wet
noodle" any time. Your example is a "wet noodle." I gave an important point
you totally missed again. I said "I was still 20/9 when the strongest JA's
had dropped to S6 or less (band going dead) and I was in contact with the
last signal heard around S1-2 before total collapse which was often the HL in
Korea." No one else ever called them when I finished. Seattle has plenty of
witnesses for this. Some burnt rubber over here to check it out or called me
on the phone. I could hardly explain it myself but it happened and will use
this beam again this winter for further comparisons. It's Kicks Butt. If
you are going to claim great knowledge of band conditions, learn how to spell
Tests all done in the 30's?? Hmmmmm. I guess you didn't use any coax
then. Seems to contradict all you have said. My recollection of
history is that coax as we know it was not put into service until a
few years pre-WWII. If you did, I can understand why you hate the
stuff. No comparison to today's products.
********You can't get anything right can you? I didn't say ALL the tests
were run in the 30's--my 1st ones were and 4 or 5 since. Many used the L
longer than a 1/4 wave in the 30's with the series Xc as it is a clever way
to raise the Rr to any higher value which is generally lower than 50 ohms. I
didn't say I used coax then either. I have never said I hated coax either.
I've just pointed out how well open wire line works, lasts and how cheap it
is and suggested tuners that work great. I use all kinds of coax. About 40
years ago I purchased 4000' of Times Wire&Cable Teflon coax RG-8 size that
cost Boeing $1.75/ft--double shield silver plated and all that--11 cents a
foot. It has the same loss as Pollyfoam. Eat your heart out. It's awesome
stuff. I just got 250' of a recent Teflon coax for 50 cents foot that I
think had a $1.60/ft price. I use coax and open wire line where it works
Brian it's very clear to me everyone who E-mailed me, you have
"intentionally butchered and misstated" the information I took a lot of the
time to send you. Your statements indicated you lacked the basic insights to
grasp how it worked and I have forgotten your call. With all your "40 years
of extensive experience of ham radio reading you bragged about" you said
"last year you had never seen or heard of any of my articles--even though
they had been discussed and referenced repeatedly on TT." Your current post
shows your reading hasn't improved. I asked you to contact me privately if
you had any questions a week ago and you didn't. Your and Tom's nonsense has
been in full display again for reasons known only to you. It's very obvious
Tom put you up to this. I will state here that both your personal conducts
are highly unethical and libelous. This conduct has no limits on TT. I am
telling you and Tom "never to comment on my Posts or Articles anywhere in Ham
Radio or use your practices on others again". Tom was told this in E-mail
last year when he kept rewording my posts and would make up theory (from some
book he couldn't produce?) to support a different version of a subject at the
time on TT. Tom was also told to "stop his making up his total bold faced
lies about what I do and say." Yet he has continued to do so.
The information given Freely by many on TT is prepared in usually a short
period of time and is not a Doctor Thesis. Errors in numbers can occur.
Some data is well documented and some used to give their opinion but would
"get Flamed" as the term is frequently used. It discourages many
contributions. Even documented data that is easily proven by those with
proven RF skills and insights is literally attacked by you and Tom in clever
ways even after repeated requests I've made to try it. Unfortunately
Reflector Administration has alowed your practices to continue when told
repeatedly of this and not allowed proper defense of legitimate material
without any justification. If you and Tom can't understand the most
elementary of antenna concepts, unload your technical deficiencies elsewhere.
Getting new concepts to the ham public is difficult enough with your total
nonsense. Actually try sometime before you jump on it. Don't you ever get
tired of being wrong? If you violate my request again you will have a very
"Uncomfortable Legal QSO." Do I make myself perfectly clear? K7GCO
73 de Brian/K3KO >>
List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
supporting towers up to 100 feet for under $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com