On 8 Mar, 12:29, Roy Lewallen wrote:
art wrote:

No, I don't have the burden programmers do. Gaussian arrays are part
of antennas and programmers continue to ignore it. Hopefully so called
"errors" in other programs have escaped yours
I am not familiar with your particular programs since they are just
number crunchers that get you close to the mark but you do have
customers and are very much aware of the Gaussian subject so shouldn't
you recheck your own for accurracy?
Art

Well, let's see. I have professional customers who use EZNEC daily to
design complex antennas for commercial, military, and government use. On
many occasions, they test the designs on a test range and find good
correlation between EZNEC and measured results. This has been done over
and over for a wide variety of antennas for years. Countless others have
done the same with NEC and other NEC based programs. I have a standing
request for anyone to report any difference in results between EZNEC and
NEC, and so far have had zero responses except when the user
accidentally made the models different.

On the other hand, I have you weaving your theories but without a single
shred of evidence as far as I can see that the antennas you create have
any advantage over any others, or even that they work as you claim. And
for that matter, I find it nearly impossible to divine exactly what
performance you *are* claiming for your creations.

So, should I check my program for accuracy because of your rambling
conjectures? Certainly not!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Your choice Roy Since you have never had reason to place revisions on
your programs! ( you consider your self as always being right) I see
your point. It has been correct from the get go.
I informed you about the problem in case minninec had some
intertwining with your programs. I am pointing this out because for a
very long time I have been communicating about Gaussian antennas and
from you and others I got howls and ridicule about the whole idea and
the scientific rational behind it.
SO FOR THE MOMENT I bend under pressure from you and your associate
experts to inform you that minninec programs provide evidence of
gaussian arrays.
I have only checked ao and aop for this anomoly that I have been
referring to but I do not have the pocket depth to check all programs
that are connected to NEC. Thus I am alerting you and all nec users
that despite my efforts to show that this is not an error the majority
of experts think otherwise therefore, it would be appropiate for
programmers to see how far this error is embedded if it is an error
and take corrective action.

Just so you don't take your normal aproach when you are out of your
depth I am informing you in the simplest way possible that AO and AOP
which uses a form of NEC produces what I term as a gaussian array if
you allow it to procede without pre direction to a yagi and will
always produce a gaussian array. I am not saying this affects you but
just alerting you since the program has been in existence for many
years when it eminated from the government release of the
underpinnings for the likes of you to copy. If gaussian arrays are in
error according to the majority of this newsgroup as well as
professionals then I suggest that such programs are subject to an
overview that portray that they are legitamate. Programmers and
experts certainly cannot have it both ways and follow the jeering
group as lemmings.Something is wrong and you use this newsgroup to
advertise your product so you cannot avoid the fact that you have been
notified in the future what ever that may be so you cannot say you
were unaware.
Certainly your customers would be comforted with your assurances that
it is not necessary to check.
Art