Yea...That's the ticket. Well, I figure he looked at the melted part and
said: "Gee, if I can keep this from melting..oh no... _WHY_ is it melting?
....perhaps high current. Yea, that's the ticket. There's high current in
this part. I'll make it less lossy and it'll heat less and then the
antenna'll be more efficient.....

New technology, yea (;-). You can work Chile with a light bulb. As I say;
"You need iron in the sky." PUBLISH and let the experts poke at it.

My lot is 50' x 150' [155m x 460m outside the US] and I _very_ easily fit a
40M inverted Vee @35'. Work the world - several bands.

There's a never ending quest for a number of physically unrealizable things
including, but not limited to: a small, directive, high efficency antenna --
free power -- the "best" route to work -- the ideal mate...Yadda, Yadda

I'll believe when...
--
Steve N, K,9;d, c. i My email has no u's.




"Tom Ring" wrote in message
...
Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too
judgemental.

The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could
have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary
materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

tom
K0TAR

Tam/WB2TT wrote:


An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds
with
its claim of high efficiency.

Tam/WB2TT