On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:56:12 -0800, John Smith
wrote:

Strange how the DLM is a VERY GOOD solution to some real world
problems/situations and that, since it is considered "unconventional",
causes so many to turn a blind eye.

Hi Brett,

Strange you should say that... is more the issue.

Who says the DLM is the best construction in this particular direction
of physically short antennas, perhaps it can be engineered to even
greater performance--however, to do so would require an atmosphere of
experimentation, trial-and-error, etc. which was in the ORIGINAL
purposes of the amateur radio service ... too bad so many forget.

Generally "who" at the start of a sentence introduces a question which
here above seems to have trailed off into weepy sentimentality.

I don't suppose you have any metrics for any of these observations you
purport to have made? Like how many have forgotten? Or naming "who"
of "who says the DLM...." (now that is certainly strange as it is so
obviously Vincent, Art and yourself).

Stranger yet is how it can be engineered to even greater performance
when it claims to better a radiator that achieves efficiencies in the
90s of percent. The dewy-eyed adulation of "greater" celebrates a
munchkin as goliath where this pygmy performer is gnawing on ankles to
keep our attention.

I simply wonder if you put RF to it, and unfortunately used hollow
tubes to construct it, what size fuse would Arthur claim it would
blow? You guys certainly struggle to support your observations with
practical, technical details.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC