Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

I thought that I would compare my new antenna before it goes up with
one of my old long boom yagis. I found that tho my new array had approx
the same bottom contour of the main lobe of the long boom yagi the
depth and width of the half power main lobe dimensions were much
larger.
This means that with my new arrays main beam covering a larger land
surface area for contacts
the signal to noise may well be a disadvantage tho I must admit that in
the past I have had mechanical difficulties with long booms. The fact
that the main lobe half power points are broader in all directions I
assume that would be the choice for dx style competitions even tho
noisier but for the all round ham operator what is the best choice for
hams such as myself who is not interested in contests?
I suspect that many hams, especially those with small lots, have
tangled with this question so I would like to know what your descisions
were and why..Now if you are interested in keeping this newsgroup for
antenna style discussions now is the chance to contribute to see if
that is where ham members interests truly lies..
Regards
Art

Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

On 19 Oct 2006 12:51:11 -0700, "art" wrote:

I thought that I would compare my new antenna

Hi Art,

I've seen your recent lamentations with Brian (who you forgot to
apologize to for your comments) about the lack of technical comment.
To date, EVERY posting that you've made in several weeks has missed
100% of the following:
1. What frequency?
2. What design style?
3. What gain?
4. What f/b?
5. What f/s?
6. What feedpoint impedance?
7. What bandwidth?
8. What height?
9. What optimum launch angle?
10. How many elements?
11. What spacings?
12. What lengths?
13. What orientations?
14. What method of feed?
15. What forms of loading?

Issues 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,and 12 all require numeric responses.
Issues 2,13,14, and 15 demand ordinary mechanical descriptions of
conventional devices.

If the numbers and ordinary mechanical descriptions do not bear out
anything remarkable, you can be sure this will be a short thread. It's
that simple.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

Richard
You decided to leave school for the Navy so that you can meet a man in
every port,
where as I chose the education route. Your desires are definately
different to mine as I am happily married to nice lady and seek
education.
You look after your own business while I attend to mine and I will
ignore the message you send out when you are wearing those tight black
shakesperian tights even tho you are lacking the balls in declaring
what you are actually looking for l You are bald, lonely, and a
forlorn dismal pathetic individual, a former pretty/petty
officer.without a mate, Find yourself another avocation like roaming
the side streets lin another district looking for what you call action,
San Fransisco comes to mind from what I hear, try throwing mud around
there.
More continued below



Richard Clark wrote:
On 19 Oct 2006 12:51:11 -0700, "art" wrote:

I thought that I would compare my new antenna

Hi Art,

I've seen your recent lamentations with Brian (who you forgot to
apologize to for your comments) about the lack of technical comment.
To date, EVERY posting that you've made in several weeks has missed
100% of the following:
1. What frequency?
2. What design style?
3. What gain?
4. What f/b?
5. What f/s?
6. What feedpoint impedance?
7. What bandwidth?
8. What height?
9. What optimum launch angle?
10. How many elements?
11. What spacings?
12. What lengths?
13. What orientations?
14. What method of feed?
15. What forms of loading?

Issues 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,and 12 all require numeric responses.
Issues 2,13,14, and 15 demand ordinary mechanical descriptions of
conventional devices.

If the numbers and ordinary mechanical descriptions do not bear out
anything remarkable, you can be sure this will be a short thread. It's
that simple.

Now to the above sniping comments. Go back to the beginning of those
threads and read the first or initial posting which you haven't done as
yet and neither did Roy Llewellen,None of the above is relevant to
those initial postings. What you did was to wait for other posters
to supply an avenue for you to do your normal sniping and Roy came in
with his normal "sigh"and "I don't understand" comments, he even backed
you up with the idea that rear radiation is used to complement the main
lobe at the front, willing to put out trash in the hope of getting a
jab in.

All this garbage reminds me of a mathematition named George Green who
went to school for a year or so in I believe the 1700s before his
father pulled him out of school to join him as a flour miller.
While the grinding wheel turned George wrote down many mathematical
analysis but his work was not accepted because as an outsider he used
terms that others could not or would not accept. A couple of hundred
years later a mathematician, it might have been LaPlace decided to
review these thesis and had no bones about substituting terms of the
modern day and with minor alterations took on the mantle of a genius
where his name is banded around to this day. Most of Geoge Green's work
has now been claimed by others tho a few Green's theorems still remain
but for the work of one open minded mathematician
who gained instant fame where as others stayed aloof because of the
terms used all of Green's work would have been lost. Go back to your
college books or somebody elses in your case and look up a few of those
famous names in the past other than Maxwell and Coloumb( yes try some
who proved many a theorem via mathematics,) and you will find some who
followed education for its own sake who made allowance for Greens self
home education and gained by it rather than only accepting the company
of those who hold their noses aloof.
If something is missing or missnamed it is not much to ask for
clarification instead of throwing mud. You may have had a lot of
setbacks in your life and how people viewed you
but frankly you chose a certain way of life and what goes around comes
around.
Back off of people and live and let live as others have continued to do
so in your past
The days will look much brighter and even those Shakesperian plays and
the company you keep will not be so deterring and you will enjoy the
life you have remaining so much better.
Think about it, does mud throwing really make you happy and content?
What are you really looking for so that your remaining life is one of
content?
Art

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

On 21 Oct 2006 19:44:50 -0700, "art" wrote:

Well, basically nothing. So, at the expense of bandwidth let's run
that list once again:

Hi Art,

To date, EVERY posting that you've made in several weeks has missed
100% of the following:
1. What frequency?
2. What design style?
3. What gain?
4. What f/b?
5. What f/s?
6. What feedpoint impedance?
7. What bandwidth?
8. What height?
9. What optimum launch angle?
10. How many elements?
11. What spacings?
12. What lengths?
13. What orientations?
14. What method of feed?
15. What forms of loading?

Issues 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,and 12 all require numeric responses.
Issues 2,13,14, and 15 demand ordinary mechanical descriptions of
conventional devices.

If the numbers and ordinary mechanical descriptions do not bear out
anything remarkable, you can be sure this will be a short thread. It's
that simple.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

Jus' wonder.
Does Art read what he writes, after he writes it and does he understand what
he wrote? Or are those just fragments of his elaborate train of thought
making it onto the I-waves and puzzling the rest of us dummies?
Snip shield on!

Here is the challenge for the antenna designer:
Design antenna that on transmit will radiate with some 15 dB gain in all
directions and on receive be capable of sharp beam control in H and V
planes, infinite F/b and F/rest of course.

Yuri, K3BU


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On 21 Oct 2006 19:44:50 -0700, "art" wrote:

Well, basically nothing. So, at the expense of bandwidth let's run
that list once again:

Hi Art,

To date, EVERY posting that you've made in several weeks has missed
100% of the following:
1. What frequency?
2. What design style?
3. What gain?
4. What f/b?
5. What f/s?
6. What feedpoint impedance?
7. What bandwidth?
8. What height?
9. What optimum launch angle?
10. How many elements?
11. What spacings?
12. What lengths?
13. What orientations?
14. What method of feed?
15. What forms of loading?

Issues 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,and 12 all require numeric responses.
Issues 2,13,14, and 15 demand ordinary mechanical descriptions of
conventional devices.

If the numbers and ordinary mechanical descriptions do not bear out
anything remarkable, you can be sure this will be a short thread. It's
that simple.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Long boom Vs Stacked elements
 

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:

Jus' wonder.
Does Art read what he writes, after he writes it and does he understand what
he wrote? Or are those just fragments of his elaborate train of thought
making it onto the I-waves and puzzling the rest of us dummies?
Snip shield on!

Here is the challenge for the antenna designer:
Design antenna that on transmit will radiate with some 15 dB gain in all
directions and on receive be capable of sharp beam control in H and V
planes, infinite F/b and F/rest of course.


I WANT ONE!!!!!

Dave WD9BDZ

Yuri, K3BU


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...

On 21 Oct 2006 19:44:50 -0700, "art" wrote:

Well, basically nothing. So, at the expense of bandwidth let's run
that list once again:

Hi Art,

To date, EVERY posting that you've made in several weeks has missed
100% of the following:
1. What frequency?
2. What design style?
3. What gain?
4. What f/b?
5. What f/s?
6. What feedpoint impedance?
7. What bandwidth?
8. What height?
9. What optimum launch angle?
10. How many elements?
11. What spacings?
12. What lengths?
13. What orientations?
14. What method of feed?
15. What forms of loading?

Issues 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,and 12 all require numeric responses.
Issues 2,13,14, and 15 demand ordinary mechanical descriptions of
conventional devices.

If the numbers and ordinary mechanical descriptions do not bear out
anything remarkable, you can be sure this will be a short thread. It's
that simple.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC