Frank Gilliland wrote:

In , "(Scott Unit 69)"
wrote:


wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 10:54:25 -0600, 'Doc wrote:

I would suggest you take a look at exactly what
I said. Don't 'read into it' any more than what's
there, especially about the 'normal' trash that goes
on in this NG.
'Doc

I read exactly what you said.............
Something about dragging out misconcepts.
It seems to me that you may be the one that
believes in misconcepts. There is a easy way
to determine this. It's done by asking you a
simple yes or a no question.

Do you believe a shorter antenna can be made
to show more gain than the 102" SS whip.?
yes or no

I bet the results of your test were unrepeatable. I think your
X-terminator generated a minor lobe in the direction of the recieve
antenna due to the coils and a funky RF ground and other variations in the
pattern.

I think he fudged the numbers. Like I said, if anyone has one of those
X-terminators in my area I'll be more than happy to run a test. In fact, I
can run it with a few other CB antennas I have laying around, including
102" fiberglass and magnetic SS whips, a short center-loader from RS, a
couple helical dummy-loads, and I even think there's a rubber-ducky in the
scrap heap. And I can test them properly, mapping a field from my truck to
just outside the near-field, using an unmodified AM radio (unmodulated),
no QD connectors, tuned with an FSM, measurements for forward and
reflected power, and DC voltage measured at the radio during transmit.
Hell, I'll even punch a hole in the roof for this test!



It would be interesting to see the 102" fiberglass against the S/S whip.