Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:07:03 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

...
Then you would need a suitable name for it. Let me see, we are mating
up a "dummy load" with a "dipole." How about "Dummy-Pole?" grin

Been there, done that. About 30 years ago, I went on a field day
exercise where one of the HF stations was running a lightbulb on a
pole for an antenna. 100 watts RF, about 50ft of RG-8/u, voltage
stepped down with some kind of xfomer or balun, and a 150 watt
incandescent light bulb. I don't recall how well they did, but I
could see that the log was filling with contacts. Who needs an
antenna anyway?


Hmmm, sounds like that you mention might be the "Original DummyPole!"
Or, "DummyPole I."

This new design should probably be named "DummyPole II." grin

Regards,
JS