On Saturday, November 15, 2014 12:40:29 PM UTC-6, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/15/2014 12:58 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/14/2014 10:02 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/14/2014 4:26 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/14/2014 3:55 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

You ignore the fact this is an idealized environment. That is NEVER the
case in a real installation.

You ignore the fact this is modeled on an AVERAGE environment.


But you claim it is an absolute fact that an 80 meter antenna at less
than 100' is crap. This is solid proof.

I never made any such claim nor did I say "an 80 meter antenna at less
than 100' is crap".


That's true. You said is sucks. Let me quote you:

"Any dipole type antenna will suck on 75M if mounted less than about
100 feet, or about .4 wavelengths."

That was in response to the original poster who said his antenna sucked,
not me.


It is still your statement.

It was the posters statement and my response to that statement.

snip remaining puerile drivel



Wrong again, as the archives prove. And you can't lie your way out of it.

You can copy and paste. But you do not UNDERSTAND.


So much drama, so little time... :|