[TowerTalk] InnovAntennas contact info

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Well, if you're too lazy to check advertising claims, you will buy
Mosley antennas with their overstated gain and dead last performance
in the W0AX/K7LXC tribander tests.  Of course you would never know
about that since you would not buy an unbiased publication.  QED

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 3/20/2013 10:28 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>
> That's hardly the case, and it's laughable for you to toss it off as
> being an entitlement attitude prevalent in modern society.  If Ford
> advertised that one of their cars was faster in the quarter mile than
> one of Honda's cars I'd want to know which car they were comparing
> themselves to and I'd want to see the actual data before I made a
> purchasing decision based upon that claim.  I certainly wouldn't want to
> have to search for it elsewhere, and I certainly wouldn't want to have
> buy a subscription to Car and Driver to see if Ford was lying or not.
>
> So if you're going to go that far afield to argue with me, please don't
> bother.
>
> Dave  AB7E
>
>
>
> On 3/20/2013 12:35 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>
>> When the information is in the public domain it is not the job of
>> any vendor to regurgitate it in the form and place you want.  Just
>> because an antenna manufacturer chooses not to reprint Kraus, et. al.
>> or J. C Maxwell on his web page doesn't mean that the designs derived
>> from their work and others are not valid or verifiable.
>>
>> The mindset of so many people that they are *entitled* to personal
>> answers to every question the moment and in the form they desire just
>> because they choose to question rather than seek the information on
>> their own.  This is so symptomatic of the ills of modern society.
>> Just a few years ago rather than demand "push" information, someone
>> with a real interest in the subject would have gone to the library and
>> read the journals where they would have found the answers in articles
>> reviewed by editors of the caliber of G(M)3SEK and other experts.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>> On 3/20/2013 2:51 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>>
>>> Uhh ... the burden is NOT on me to substantiate any vendor's claims for
>>> performance.  It's on him, and until he does so, I will remain the
>>> skeptic when I see things that have generally been debunked elsewhere,
>>> such as the claim that a loop driven element significantly reduces
>>> reception of man-made noise.
>>>
>>>  From http://www.g0ksc.co.uk/intro-lfa.html :
>>>
>>> "Additionally, the close (sic) loop at the feedpoint deems the LFA less
>>> susceptible to man-made noise and static."
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Dave   AB7E
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/20/2013 11:13 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If these antennas have been so extensively modeled and optimized,
>>>>> there should be a clear comparison available that would tell us
>>>>> whether the difference warrants the hype.
>>>>
>>>> Do just a little literature search for yourself rather than expect
>>>> that UPS will deliver a box of books customized for your skepticism.
>>>> There have been dozens of patterns posted on Justin's personal web
>>>> site over the last couple years as well as journals in the area and
>>>> web sites of other antenna developers.  The data is out there but
>>>> nobody is going to spoon feed the skeptics.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>>
>>>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TowerTalk mailing list
>>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>