On Dec 31, 5:57*pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote:

* ...



- - So you are saying that I have an Antenna and Transceiver
- - and can hear 5 Radio Operators in a Net on a Frequency;
- - but only 2 of them can hear me.

= BAD {Lousy} Poorly "Radiating" Antenna
without the 'matchbox' in the circuit.

- - I then put a MatchBox in-line between my Antenna and
- - Transceiver and Adjust-It; and can still hear all 5 Radio
- - Operators on a Frequency and now all 5 of them can
- - hear me.

= GOOD {Better} Nicely "Radiating" Antenna
with the 'MatchBox' in the circuit.

Once Again 'why' is it that with the MatchBox and the
same Antenna and Transceiver : Now more people can
hear me or hear me better : It the same Poor Antenna

Hey may be MatchBoxs are Super Radiators ? and they
are now hearing me off my MatchBox versus my Poor
Antenna without the 'matchbox'.

- - AGAIN - -
- - To Me That Is Very Real Improved Performance from
- - My Antenna and Transceiver that is a direct result of
- - using the MatchBox between them. ~ RHF
- - *.
...

As, I have said, the terms you think and communicate in are in error.
Because of preconceived notions you have formed, everything you hear
just brings you back to your previous errors.

Arguing though all that mess would only lead you further astray ... a
matchbox will do NOTHING to improve a poor antenna, whether you are
transmitting on that poor antenna or receiving on that poor antenna ...
once you realize that single point, progress forward will be possible,
end-of-story.

The world is full of "testimonials for a particular antenna(s)", many of
those testimonials are worth less than the paper they are written on.
Combine that with unscrupulous claims, "facts", figures and charts which
has been hoisted on an ignorant public (most famous might be the past
practices of CB antenna manufacturers/suppliers, although you can find
it in other radio venues also) and it is easy to see why so much
confusion exists.

One thing a matchbox is excellent at, getting the maximum amount of
power transferred to a poor antenna--where it will promptly be lost in
heat ... both, in the matchbox and in the feed-line/antenna-components.

Regards,
JS

JS - OK to use your 'words'

This here MatchBox thingee "is excellent at, getting
the maximum amount of power transferred to a poor
antenna"

CONDITION # 1 'Before' the MatchBox thingee :
Less Power Going to the Antenna; which is
Wasted as Heat; with no MatchBox Loses.
-or- Just may be less Power being Effectively
Radiated by the Antenna

JS -what-about- The 'Before' Condition of the Transmitter
with a Poor Antenna and NO MatchBox is IT's Power
Output "Optimum" {Full Power} or may be 'sub-optimum'
some reduced power level due to the Poor Antenna ?

Wouldn't the "maximum amount of power" = Full Power ?
And some thing less be a reduced power level ?

System : Transceiver Coax Cable Antenna
"" Power Out and Reflected Power

CONDITION # 2 'After' the MatchBox thingee :
More Power Going to the Antenna; which is
also Wasted as Heat; with MatchBox Loses.
-or- Just may be More Power being Effectively
Radiated by the Antenna.

JS -what-about- The 'After' Condition of the Transmitter
with a Poor Antenna and using a MatchBox is IT's
Power Output now at "Optimum" {Full Power} with the
MatchBox and the Poor Antenna ?

Wouldn't the "maximum amount of power" = Full Power ?

System : Transceiver Coax Cable MatchBox Antenna
"" Power Out

JS -obtw- What's with these references to CB Radio ?

is the nature of electricity and radio frequencies
and the laws of physics different for amateur and
cb radio two-way communications ? ? ? ~ RHF