On Nov 16, 7:37*am, JosephKK wrote:


Two things. *

And for the second thing... I happen to have problems with
portraying a dummy load on a stick as the answer to all things
of a radiating nature.
I've seen his antenna, and I know how it was built.
It's a dummy load on a stick.
See for yourself. Don't just take my word for it.
http://www.k8gu.com/webpost/unwin-antenna.jpg
Note that this antenna is for 160m use.
My MW receiving loop would likely out radiate that thing.
If I used my mobile antenna, it would get ugly.
All his antenna is, is a helical whip, with contra wound
windings to make it even more lossy than if it were wound
in a normal military manner.
The extra "coil" on top is basically useless, and only adds
a small bit more inductance to the antenna. Maybe enough
to scoot down the band a few kc's.. :/
He says it needs no ground plane, but being it is a vertical,
it sure as heck does, if reducing ground loss is an issue.
Of course, if one is willing to ignore massive coil loss, it's
no large stretch to assume he has no problem ignoring
ground losses either.
What is hilarious to most, is that he uses bafflegab mumbo
jumbo to try to explain the workings of an antenna that is
not only prior art I'm sure, but also a very perverted version
at that. I compared his antenna to a MW loopstick used for
receive purposes only.
Look at the picture and tell me your analysis.
You can apply plain old known vertical antenna technology
and come up with a pretty accurate assessment of the
efficiency of his antenna.
Mumbo jumbo is not required for this task.
Fairy tales won't cut it either. Nor neutrinos, the weak
force, or the shoe size of Captain Kirk.
Maybe this will shed some light on my persistent
skepticism of his illustrious, but stinky design.