I think that as long as we can agree that just because someone thinks a particular antenna works better than some other antenna they have had, and no rigorous testing under scientifically controlled
FWIW, I have not heard or seen K2AV making unreasonable "claims" of performance. Guy says that it works as well as,some compromise radial and counterpoise solutions that many of us are forced into by
FWIW, I have not heard or seen K2AV making unreasonable "claims" of performance. Neither have I, nor have I ever inferred he did. My point, which was addressed to Steve, was pretty basic stuff. I don
Author: Dan Edward Dba East edwards <dan.n.edwards@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
I wonder.....Is there is a simple way to compare the field strength of an FCP with my current NON dense and uniform ground system, and draw reasonably accurate conclusions about efficiency improvemen
N7CL suggested 5 wavelengths as being a viable distance for meaningful measurements -- that's half a mile. Rudy's 160M measurements were done at only 700 ft, with a quarter-wave radiator and quarter-
Tom, FWIW, I have been following this discussion and will agree that your intended points somehow get changed. Also, I totally agree with your statement "when multiple things are changed in a randoml
I would add however (having experience here) that an incremental improvement to a poor antenna can show significant results when you have a low baseline. Sent from my iPad ___________________________
Ah yes, the pursuit of the proverbial "RED X", as espoused by an American quality control guru...! Don't ask me for his name, as I've forgotten it since I retired--but the ONLY sure-fire way to confi
I wonder.....Is there is a simple way to compare the field strength of an FCP with my current NON dense and uniform ground system, and draw reasonably accurate conclusions about efficiency improvemen