"Landshark" wrote in message
m...

"Leland C. Scott" wrote in message
...

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
Everyone will think I'm insane for saying this, but Landshark has it
right.

No he doesn't.

Of course I do Leland, you just don't want me too

Then explain away the the information on the other site. Get a copy of EZNEC
and model it yourself.

http://www.eznec.com/

And if you're to cheap to buy a copy then try the freebee versions at:

http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/swindex.html

Then you can check at the site below for antenna modeling tips and
information about many types of antennas from an expert in the area.

http://www.cebik.com/

And another interesting antenna site:

http://www.antennex.com/


In order for co-phased antennas to achieve that ideal figure-8
pattern they must be nearly ideal antennas, which CB antennas are
not.

How would you know Leland? Remember, you don't like
CB, let alone talk or use or own one.

You have been sleeping at the keyboard. I was on CB back in the late 70's
until I got fed up with all of the jerks on the air. Even ran a mobile
AM/SSB system. I used a Midland combo base- mobile radio. At that time the
rigs were 23 channels. I've been there, done that, and gave away the radio
to my nephew some years ago.


They don't nessessarly need be to be ideal, but the do need to be
installed
the same way. By the way no antenna is ideal, but many people have a lot
of
success anyway.

Landshark's link explains why this happens. I wouldn't expect any
significant improvement in the omnidirectional characteristics of
dualies (as the site claims), but I do know they don't provide any
noticable directional gain.

If you check the link I provided you will see there is some gain. The
gain
does not become noticeable until you have at least a 1/4 wavelength
separation, and at that it is around 2 db or so. On the site I posted
the
link for you will see the figure 8 pattern becomes very noticeable for a
half wavelength between antennas.

The point was that it was a much better omni-directional pattern
on Dual antenna's, to which that is achieved. You are saying
that Signal Engineering, which soul business is antenna's is wrong,
good luck on trying to convince others of that.

They also make antennas for money. And when money is involved you have to
suspect the claims they make. It won't be the first nor the last time a
manufacture stretched the truth, i.e. lied. But then again you guys also
believe Class "C" amplifiers are linear, "magic" lenghts of coax to fix
antenna SWR etc. This news group should be named "rec.voodoo.11m.radio" from
all of the crap that's passes for fact.


--
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

Wireless Network
Mobile computing
on the go brought
to you by Micro$oft