RadioBanter - View Single Post

February 20th 04, 09:07 PM

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:34:46 -0600 (CST),
(Richard Harrison) wrote:
Art, KB9MZ wrote:
"The dipole is a very inefficient radiator."

.... It could hardly be correctly called inefficient.

Hi Richard,

We are back into this stale wheeze about efficiency "per unit length"
which is the same siren song of the cfa.

Put one out in the field, measure it against one of those "inefficient
radiators" and we find it roughly -30dB more "efficient" than the
standard BCB antenna.

The cfa may well be more efficient "per unit length" because it costs
less in steel and is smaller, its coverage follows that downward
spiral too. On those terms, hoisting a dummy load 30 feet into the
air would be far more efficient "per unit length" with roughly -60dB
more "efficiency."

Properly speaking, this new usage of "efficiency" should have been
confined to the thread Semantic Nonsense where we could properly
appreciate the ratio:

Semantic Nonsense + Nonsense
--------------------------------------
Nonsense

As any adept calculator puncher can appreciate, almost anything said
shows more than 100% efficiency. :-)

The acid test of the capitalist broadcast marketplace has shown not
one cfa sold. Now, in the socialist world, like Egypt, they had one
(1) provisional sale? If there were still an Iron Curtain, they would
have bought this nonsense up like Pravda at the red square newsstands.
Even at that, the Iron Curtain would probably be a necessary
resonating structure to make it work.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC