That says more about what some people read into computer programs than
it does about about "what some computer says is optimum". VOACAP is
based upon empirical data and statistical analysis, and as such it
displays predicted (not absolute) results for a representative (not
absolute) time period within certain accuracy limits . HFTA used VOACAP
to determine the predicted best takeoff angles for various paths **as an
average over an entire eleven year sunspot cycle**.
As a planning tool HFTA is the best we have to work with. It is based
upon sound science and was written by a competent software engineer.
It does pretty much exactly what it was intended to do ... give you the
best chance of optimizing your results over a long period of time.
Anybody who thinks that it will hold true in every instance, or that
actual results won't often be even better than predicted, doesn't
understand the tool that they are using or the physics behind it.
Dave AB7E
On 3/2/2012 10:39 AM, David Blake wrote:
>
> I have never had an tower higher than 48 feet yet somehow have managed to
> work ALL DXCCs (#1 Honor Roll). and all 40 zones
> on 6 bands. Over 300 DXCCs on 6 bands, etc, etc. My point is that you can
> do a lot with antennas at much less than what some computer program says is
> optimum.
>
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|