Michael Coslo wrote:

...
Non sequitar here?

I do care about why and how the antenna works. I just don't agree with
AI4QJ's premise that Eznec is for discussion purposes only. It isn't, it
works just fine for design and implementation of them also.

Its a good tool for design of antennas. It gives me the data I need and
the expected outcome. I've designed simple antennas using "personal
level math" too. I don't do that much any more. I did the calculations
on paper too. I don't know if that makes them better than if they were
done using a calculator though.

There are some people that
operate at 27MHz who don't care how their radios work, only that they
can peg your meter at 10 pounds.

And there are some sanctimonius people out there who are educated
orders of magnitude beyond their intelligence, ready to throw out veiled
insults at the drop of a hat.......

Fortunately no one like that is in this conversation, eh?

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

I really don't want to be involved, the complexities of this argument
are too great a demand for my time, and I lack the deep understanding to
add beyond where others have already gone (indeed, they have gone well
beyond my understandings--I play a game of catch-up.)

However, I don't believe anyone is actually dismissing EZNEC. I know of
no better which does what EZNEC does. Nor am I aware of anyone actually
attacking the personalities behind or around EZNEC--it is the premises,
formulas, equations EZNEC is based on which harbors the discussion ...
and such discussion cannot hurt.

I believe the above is most accurate--just now and then a temper might
flare ...

Regards,
JS