Lancer wrote:
On 13 Jun 2004 14:55:14 -0700, (I Am Not
George) wrote:

Lancer wrote:
On 13 Jun 2004 13:29:14 -0700, (I Am Not
George) wrote:

Lancer wrote:
Chris; Nice looking antenna, large open air coils are more
efficient.
Some people see a large open air coil and think its all about
power
handling capability.

rotflmao I dont think mounting 8 lb. of plumbing on your trunk lid
is
efficient. There are easier ways to get bandwith. for example if
you
want efficient youd be using a 9 ft whip. even bent over like a
bow
the 9 ft is more efficient than a 4 ft loaded open air coil model.

You don't have a clue to what you are talking about.

http://tinyurl.com/yq3gd

1) Broad Bandwidth does not mean an antenna is more efficient.

I didnt bring up bandwith someone else did


You sure did, look back at your post.

2) No one ever said a 4 ft antenna was more efficient than 9 ft
one.

no you said the open air coils were more efficient

They are more efficient than a coil wound on a solid form.
Want to argue that point?

And an isotropic radiator is more efficient than an open air coil.
Want to argue that point?

3) A 9 foot antenna "bent over" will more than likely be less
efficient than a properly designed 4 or 5 foot antenna.

the open air coil antenna is less efficient because the coil
radiates
part of the power and that power is lost.

Wrong, the coil has very little radiation. The open air coil has
less
loss because the losses are less in an open air coil.
(resistive losses, capacitive coupling losses, form loss)
Do a search on coil Q

Care to argue that point?

"The open air coil has less loss because the losses are less in an
open air coil." thats like Twisty saying "its true because I said so"
lol. Care to argue that point?

4) A stainless steel antenna is less efficient than a copper
antenna
of the same length.

not if its electrically shorter than the stainless one

Electrically shorter? You meant physically shorter. I can take a 18
foot antenna and make it electrically shorter than 9 feet while
still
keeping it 18 feet long. dumbass

congratulations you have been reading the arrl handbook now what does
it say about losses from loading coils you should read that and get
back to us.

Now do you care to make another post and prove what a
stupid dumbass you are when it comes to antenna theory?

the only dumbass here is you lol

You have again proven you are a stupid dumbass that knows nothing
about antennas. Care to try again?


Give up assclown look at my original post and see how far away from
the point you have taken this thread in an attempt to pretend you know
something. you must be as frustrated as Steveo because he is posting
aerial pics of wa3moj's niegborhood lol