On Jun 17, 8:51 pm, John Smith I wrote:
Mike Kaliski wrote:

...

Now if he could make it work efficiently on all frequencies with 50 ohms
impedence and with no requirement for further matching or adjustment of any
sort, I would be impressed. :-)

Mike G0ULI

Well then, let me take you at least half way to being impressed:

Doesn't impress me much, and it's not really new either.
I did that 12-15 years ago on my first mobile antenna..
"combining a helical mast with lumped loading coils."
Big deal...
Myself, I think he would be better off to dump the helical
windings, and just use all lumped loading..
A large high Q lumped coil will generally have less total
loss than using any narrower dia helical winding along
with a lumped coil.
I did away with the helical windings on mine. And I
still have good current distribution.
And slightly less loss.


1) "The technology is completely scalable:

What isn't ?

"
2) "All I have to do is tap the helix at its base, and you get a perfect
50-ohm match with out any lossy networks as are required for other
advanced antenna designs," said Vincent.

Who says other designs have lossy matching networks?
Mine don't.. He calls that an advanced antenna design? Hummm...
I'll reserve comment...


3) "Eight years ago, antenna design was 90 percent black magic and 10
percent theory," said Vincent. "But now, with my design, they are 10
percent black magic and 90 percent theory."

This is even worse... That statement is just total BS...


The above from this URL:

http://www.jefallbright.net/node/2718

He mentions being able to create these in 1/4 to 5/8 design--so, create
a 1/2 and loose the radials and salt water ...

Wow, that's really advanced.. I wish I could think to try that... :/

It is difficult to find real detail on this antenna! Makes 'ya wonder,
don't it?

JS

Not really.. The antenna is ok I guess, nothing really horrible about
it, but I don't see anything new. In fact, some of his statements are
sort of silly.. IE:
"For instance, in a normal quarter-wave antenna the current
continually drops off in a sinusoidal shape, but these antennas
don't do that," said Vincent. "The current at the top of the antenna
is 80 percent of the current at the base."

Wow..I suppose he thinks his antenna will outdo a full quarter wave
then I guess.. Good luck in the contest is all I can say...

Then you have this jibber jabber..
"Using a DLM antenna one-third to one-ninth the size of standard
quarter-wave antenna, he measured nearly 80 percent efficiency,
when conventional wisdom would dictate that an antenna the size
of a DLM should be only 8 to 15 percent efficient."

Look how vague it is.. Can't even get the size of his antenna right..
So how can we decide what to compare it to?
Also he makes no mention of ground quality, radials, etc..
It's easy to sound "advanced" when you don't give enough info
for anyone to prove you wrong...
Anyway... ho hummmm.... As you can tell, I'm really excited
about this new fangled technology.
MK