[TowerTalk] InnovAntennas contact info

[Jim Lux]

On 3/20/13 7:28 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.



well.. I think that in the antenna literature, there's a tradition of it 
not necessarily being "readable for free"  but that's a whole 'nother 
argument about technical journals.

However, it is reasonable these days to expect that if someone makes a 
specific claim *on the web* that they would offer a link to where the 
basis of the claim is verified.

I don't expect print ads to have footnotes and references. But there's 
no excuse these days to have *web* literature (and specifically selling 
sites) to have the evidence to back up a claim.

I don't necessarily think it's required that someone publish a NEC 
model, but I would expect to see, for instance, some pattern plots, and 
something that tells me whether it's a measured pattern or calculated.

If someone is going to claim that "NEC doesn't model this antenna", then 
I'm really going to want to see objective evidence for the claim.. range 
measurement data (an informal range is fine, as long as they describe 
what they did, so I can tell if there's likely to be measurement 
artifacts that provide the magic performance).  And, just because 
there's lots of crackpottery out there, I'd like to see an explanation 
of *why* NEC doesn't do a good modeling.    (a dielectrically loaded 
antenna, or one that has geometric problems with NEC, are good examples.)

The bar (for me) is also higher if you are *selling* the antenna, as 
opposed to just publishing the design for others to fool with.

(same goes for equipment, really.. I'm tired of people claiming things 
like "laboratory grade" which has no real meaning.. )