Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Clark wrote in message
There is no discussion as to the genesis of this "approximation." There is no data garnered by experiment to support it. That's simply a false statement. So please tell us what objection do you have to the graphs in the ARRL Antenna Book (a previous reference of mine) from which everything I have said logically follows. I believe Tom's point was that more information was known or available preceding the "approximation" than following it, which portrays the "approximation" as a degradation of knowledge. That's a laugh since most hams are incapable of measuring anything like 3000+j2000 ohms. I have no idea what your (or Tom's) agenda is but it is apparently to convince everyone that shortcuts are useless and only gurus like yourself can bestow the sacred cow knowledge of antennas on us, the unwashed masses. -- 73, Cecil, W5DXP |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Mobile Ant L match ? | Antenna | |||
EH Antenna Revisited | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |