RadioBanter - View Single Post

October 17th 04, 03:39 AM

wrote in message
news:nTFbd.249694$D%.245079@attbi_s51...

"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
[... ]

The results of the test should put to rest any speculation
about this issue. I'm looking forward to the test and seeing the test
results.

I get feedback from some of my professional customers who have the
capability to test the antennas they analyze with EZNEC. They report
very good agreement between analysis and measurement. Of course, most of
them are real pros in both modeling and measurement. Given the choice of
believing their results or Ken's and Chuck's, I go for theirs. Even
though you might not consider those folks to be "experts", I do.

But by all means, let's look at the test results -- unless you believe
that "critical coupling" results in radiation that conventional test
ranges can't detect but hams can. . .

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Yes Roy,

It has been well established that the
available NEC engines model extremely
well with conventional designs. That is
not the issue.

Your innuendo regarding 'professional'
customers is silly. In my 67 years, have
been Chief Engineer of commercial radio
and television stations, as well as having
designed commercial radio and
television stations, including the first all
solar powered commercial (5 KW) FM
station in the US. You seem to opine
that the ability to make measurement's
is limited to a only special few.

Since none of your customers are
producing critically coupled designs,
your arguments in this regard are
without merit, and IMO, the intent of
this post was a failed attempt to
reduce my standing.

You claim to be a science minded
person, yet you choose to accept
theoretical results over contradicting
empirical data, and do so, without
even an iota of curiosity.

That is not science, it's closed-minded
silliness! Equally as silly, is your
raising such a stink over 1/3 of a dB...
which will prove to be your Waterloo.

73,
Chuck, WA7RAI