Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Fan Dipole (I thought taht was the discussion)

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fan Dipole (I thought taht was the discussion)
From: "Don W7WLL" <w7wll@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 18:22:38 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Amateur radio is more than a hobby, but that is certainly one part of the definition.

I think we, including myself, often let ourselves get embroiled in subjective issues where our opinion seems important to weigh in about, over other things.

I think K9YC hit the nail on the head back a few posts, you can work the world on most anything, if you've the patience. I remember as a kid back in '55 actually trying to load different weird things and good friend W7GG (then W7TDK) giving me signal reports from about 2 miles away. Didn't prove anything but that you could do that.

I do want to know what I should be doing, and what the supporting and proven scientific methods are that support the 'should'. Like everyone who puts antennas up, from a practical standpoint I probably will usually end up with something a bit off mark (but will understand why and be willing to live with any undesirable circumstances). You do what you got to do and what you can do.

And what antenna works on on person's site might be a dummy load on another's. Just the way it is.

Let's not get uptight. It is OK to talk about one's own experience or opinion but let's not attack another's. I think it is OK and right to correct something that is scientifically known to be inaccurate (but careful, your circumstances may vary).

I'm still not a Ford man but that doesn't make them a 'bad' car.

Take a breath everyone!

Don W7WLL



-----Original Message----- From: Wes Stewart
Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2017 5:26 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fan Dipole

It's a hobby . We get to choose our own metrics.

I do find it interesting that my metric of DXCC countries worked is bogus in
your mind while equally subjective experiences of yours are more valuable. Did
you compare your antennas on a calibrated range operated by skilled people?

It's a rhetorical question; no need to answer.

On 10/1/2017 6:15 AM, john@kk9a.com wrote:
I am surprised that people still do not realize that working DXCC countries
is no indication of antenna performance. The poor desert ground may be
helping your inverted V however why would an inverted V be your only option?
I have used various 160m antennas from a number of locations in the US and
Caribbean and found a low inverted V to be very inferior to a top loaded
short vertical even without an extensive radial field.

John KK9A


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>