[TowerTalk] Re: TH7 Traps

[gdaught6 at stanford.edu]

On 9 Sep 2003 at 22:12, Jim White, K4OJ wrote:

> Excuse my ignorance but what "Handbook" do you insist I read? 
> Antennas mounted in same place on the same\ tower at same height
> compared... sounds like the kind of comparison I want to see!

Well, I think the report IS scientific!  It isn't complete (and the 
authors admit that) in that it doesn't compare a large number of 
paths, with a large number of ionosperic conditions.  It does indeed 
use the scientific method (experiment: avoid biases: take data) and 
it shuns the "read the handbook/Bible/authoritarian source" sort of 
argument.  Until someone does a more complete job, I think it's 
excellent.

And gain isn't just a function of boom length.  It's a function of other 
things, too... like loss, for instance.

And please note, it doesn't say that TH7's don't work.  It doesn't say 
that Mosley's don't work.  It says that others work better in the 
authors' quantitative, careful, incomplete) tests.

If you believe that a TH-7 outperforms a C31XR, that's what it is, a 
BELIEF.  If you want to be convincing, describe your test setup and 
show us your data.

73,