On May 30, 9:05*pm, tom wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On May 30, 7:24 pm, tom wrote:

Hmm, my antennas, and probably everyone else's here, tend to be over 98%
efficient.

How much better are yours?

tom
K0TAR

That's a silly question Tom it is the pattern that matters to me.
Anyway it was 100% and the pattern was a ball which to me is what I
snip
Art

So your antenna, including losses, is 100% efficient. *I find that a bit
tough to believe. *Ok, impossible to believe.

tom
K0TAR

Well it depends on what the programmer refers to as efficiency. It
could also mean all forces accounted for and when summed equals zero
as reflected by the radiation ball
and as you say it also accounts for losses. I'll wager that is what
all antenna programs refer to as efficiency. Either way it is only 2%
higher than the figure you were boasting about and yet you believe
yours. Selective analysis?
Art