Topband: Radials Again

[Ed Swynar]

On 3rd October Garry wrote:

> Tom is right. We all have anecdotes of unbelievable QSO's, but few of us
> have believable antennas.
>
> Garry, NI6T

Gary et al,

I essentially "...grew up" as a Ham reading & thoroughly enjoying poring
over the late-great Lew McCoy's articles --- whether based upon cold, hard,
calculated scientific facts, or not, his writings were the stuff of dreams
for young upstarts like myself.

Surely every great idea that may be taken for granted to-day started out as
someone's dream, at one time or another. "Believability" always starts in
one's self. Scientific confirmation comes after the fact, and is oft-times a
luxury exercised by those who may have failed to dream the dream in the
first place, but are quick to condemn those who do.

Case in point: the seemingly over abundance of antenna articles & write-ups
to-day that rely oh-so-heavily upon computerized confirmation of their
performance through programmes like EZNEC. Certainly such modern tools are
wonderful ones to have, indeed, but I do miss skipping the verbiage of some
pieces, and going directly to the paragraph near the end sub-headed by the
word "Results". Now THAT'S the stuff of dreams...everything else was merely
a means to that end.

We miss something magical about Amateur Radio when we stop dreaming. Isn't
that why we collectively got into this game in the first place...?

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ