I said in the original post that I didn't always trust what modeling
programs say,

==========================

Very sensible!

Don't risk suffering from delusions of accuracy.

Modelling programs are invariably less acurate than the data stuffed into
them.

And the data stuffed into them nearly always contains nonsensical elements.

Yet results are religiously quoted by old-wives as being of gospel truth and
value, equivalent to misquoted, out-of-context, statements by Terman and
Kraus.

Who believes antenna relative gain figures stated in milli-bels at 14 MHz,
or the take-off angle is 20.7 degrees, when the DC ground conductivity is
average and ground permitivity, just as important, is not even mentioned?

And a 1000 other examples.