No Chuck, that is not going to happen.When you are an experimentor you don't
have to be hindered by diminishing returns as it is the chase that is the
most rewarding part. There has been many oilfields and silver mines that
have been abandoned ONLY because of diminishing returns which is usually
because of greed and not for the joy of doing what one likes to do.
For those who quote from books without a real understanding of what is being
said are doomed to only quoting books
without the self determination needed to explore new frontiers. A book is to
be used to explore the past but to explore the
future one has to avoid generating bed sores and procrastination and explore
what the future holds for those who are willing to move without fear of
failure.
On diminishing rear radiation, that can only go so far as the efficiency
relates heavily to the ratio of the element diameters
relative to spacing of elements on the reflective medium, so one can easily
be disapointed when stacking two 2 element beams using only 4 elements
instead of the many required for a "dish", but the low take off angle can
still be reproduced as well as a narrow beam with extra gain if the
corrective reflective contour can be obtained. Sure beats argueing about
current decline versus current drop versus current flow or what pack of
wolves to join.
By the way, do you know if dish antennas suffer from static like dipole
arrays? I would think they would be immune
but I really don't know.
Regards
Art KB9MZ XG



"Chuck" wrote in message
news:hSwfd.12591$6P5.1429@okepread02...

wrote in message
news:vYcfd.314858$3l3.210855@attbi_s03...
...

May I also point out that if you allow elements to vary in diameter and
height and still keeping to
a .1 boom length, gain increases until ultimately the elements form a
combined parabolic shape
and progressively place rearward radiation energy into the forward
direction
until the ultimate is reached,
where there is no radiation to the rear and F/B is absent. I would
remind
you that the top element is
going to be designed to be disconnected and connected to ground to
determine impact on static noise.
It is also my intent to string nylon from one end of the elements to the
other, progresively tightening it
until a suitable bend or bow is put in place such that the beam width
narrows to somewhere in the
range of 30 degrees. (ala point to point to get highes gain together
with a
lower take off angle)

I do have a fold over tower by the way over 1/2 acre of clear ground
with
embedded wire screen
and I am surrouded by sloping farmland with Drummond soil..The 1 inch
hardline is routed undeground.
The above experimentation is why I have so much fun with antenna
experimenting where in other
ways the experts would say it is useless to try before I even put my
shoes
on.

Regards
Art

Many years ago - before computer modeling -
I was talking with a fellow down under (VK or
ZL, I can't recall) who was experimenting with
parabolic elements. Like you, he was using
fishing line to achieve the shape.

Don't let banal criticism get under your skin...
not everyone feels secure when venturing to
the outer edge of the envelope g

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI