Gee, I didn't realize that Ward and Steve's exhaustive tribander tests and
subsequent report constituted 'no facts' to support Jim's argument.
Seems to me the majority of knowledgeable antenna folks here respect Ward's
engineering background and Steve's installation background.
73, kelly
ve4xt
On 12/3/13 4:51 PM, "Richard Solomon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not sure what your hangup is about Mosley (if you 'dis it, at least spell
> the name right),
> but saying in general that they have less gain than a dipole is really
> stretching your
> credibility.
>
> I had a PRO-57A for many years and I can attest it worked better than a
> dipole. But,
> so far, all I read is talk, with no facts presented to support your
> comment.
>
> 73, Dick, W1KSZ
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Jim Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 12/3/2013 8:29 AM, Doug Scribner wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for all the responses...
>>>
>>
>> Before investing any more time and money in the Moseley, I STRONGLY
>> suggest that you buy and study the report by N0AX and K7LXC on a dozen or
>> so tri-banders, including two Moseleys. The executive summary is that they
>> were VERY poor performers -- like less gain than a dipole at the same
>> location and height, and over the same path. Order the report from K7LXC's
>> website.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|