Author: Guy Olinger, K2AV" <k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 23:11:28 -0400
My take on .... The idea is seriously flawed that the ground path somehow invalidates the measurements, using the protocol specified in the comparison report. The root assumptions of the modelling wi
Hi Guy, I'm not saying the tests are correct or incorrect, but there are certainly some things being overlooked in the response below. What about a condition where an antenna does not have a perfectl
Author: Guy Olinger, K2AV" <k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 22:28:15 -0400
Hi, all. I suppose that all of the material that could be abstractly related to this comparison would be a book. Practically, though, do they actually bear on the case in point, with a large enough e
You replied: The argument you give supports the fact the range is flawed and subject to scattering problems, and physical TILT in the antenna was never mentioned as a cause. Re-radiation and scatteri
Guy, See my comments below. Mike, W4EF............ Hi, all. I suppose that all of the material that could be abstractly related to this comparison would be a book. Practically, though, do they actual
Author: Guy Olinger, K2AV" <k2av@qsl.net (Guy Olinger, K2AV)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:56:50 -0400
Michael (W4EF) is a good representative of the commentary from one of the major viewpoints about the tri-bander comparison. Expresses himself and the major complaints very well. I just don't agree to