View Single Post
  #8   Report Post  
Old November 3rd 03, 10:02 PM
Richard Clark
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:40:59 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:


"Marc H.Popek" wrote in message
...
www.fwt.niat.net

This dielectric embedded antennas are smaller than naturally occurs and

yet
have a net gain


More correctly, they CLAIM a gain, relative to isotropic.


They? HE (the CTO in fact). American business has a recent history
of clown elevation.


If the antenna is smaller than a free space antenna, then it looses capture
area.


Capture area is hardly an issue for even the full size antennas they
replace.

I would be very interested to know how they recoup that.
I suspect these antennas might need some power to drive an on-board
amplifier, which means that their gain claim is bogus, and what they aren't
telling you is that the noise floor comes up also.

TANSTAAFL.

Hi Dave,

What is more to the matter is unstated issues of efficiency. I will
let the claims of 8 fold boons pass (which is marketese from the world
of ENRON). Compare these "advantages" of reclaimed volume to the
unanswered query of weight (no claims about density are there?).

Leftover halloween candy.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC