Was it in the April issue? A lot of "fools" fell for such articles in
73 Magazine, Hi.
One such antenna was to be buried under ground then the "polarity" of
the radiated
wave would be "inverted". ;-)

There are a few who experiment with "EH" antennas, where a coil is
placed in coffee cans,
spaced at different intervals for the band the antenna is to be used.
http://www.qsl.net/w0kph/can.html

JJJHS

Jeff wrote:

Hi,
Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or
early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates)
mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax?
Does anyone know more details of this?
JEFF
ZL3TNV

JJJHS,

"EH Antennas" eGroup on YAHOO !
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh-antenna/

"EH Antenna Users" eGroup on YAHOO !
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eh_antenna_users/

"E-H Antenna Builders & Users" eGroup on YAHOO !
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ehantennausers/

"WTAL Fans" eGroup on YAHOO !
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WTALfans/
The EH antenna has exceptional promise. It is about 10' in
diameter, requires no extensive underground radials, uses
approximately 75% less energy and is more efficient.

WebSite with Tools and Tips to Assist "EH" Antenna Design & Building
http://www.eh-antenna.com/EH_Antenna_Tools_and_Tips.htm
http://www.geocities.com/ke0vh/eh
http://www.qsl.net/vk5br/EHAntennaTheory.htm
http://www.eh-antenna.se/

That's My Name Too ~ RHF
LYRICS= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis...jjhschmidt.htm
MUSIC= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis...idis/jjjhs.mid
SONGS= http://www.walkthroughlife.com/midis/kidsmidis/
http://www.backyardgardener.com/loowit/song/song48.html
http://www.backyardgardener.com/loowit/janeellen.html
http://www.scoutsongs.com/lyrics/johnjacob.html
NIH= http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/john.htm
NIEHS-INDEX= http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/music.htm#index
..
..
= = = JohnJacobJingleHimerSchmidt wrote in message ...
Was it in the April issue? A lot of "fools" fell for such articles in
73 Magazine, Hi.
One such antenna was to be buried under ground then the "polarity" of
the radiated
wave would be "inverted". ;-)

There are a few who experiment with "EH" antennas, where a coil is
placed in coffee cans,
spaced at different intervals for the band the antenna is to be used.
http://www.qsl.net/w0kph/can.html

JJJHS

Jeff wrote:

Hi,
Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured in a 60's (or
early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched PCBs (like spaced plates)
mounted inside a plastic bucket, and fed with coax?
Does anyone know more details of this?
JEFF
ZL3TNV

..

On 5 Jul 2004 01:26:17 -0700, (RHF) wrote:

The EH antenna has exceptional promise. It is about 10' in
diameter, requires no extensive underground radials, uses
approximately 75% less energy and is more efficient.

Hi OM,

More efficient that what, a resistor? 75% less energy than what, a
resistor?

The eh antenna is one of several of a class that take more effort for
less return than simply putting up as much wire as you have room for -
even if it is the same size as any of these "amazing!" antennas.

The absurd claims that attend the cfa/eh/fractal crowing societies is
matched by their inability to prove them except through their own
special math (never mind the S-Meter).

However, there are those who argue SWLers need poor antennas and I
suppose these fit the bill nicely. The technical equivalent of cell
phones VS string-and-dixie cups tho'.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

RC,

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt
to answer his question.

First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ?

Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ?

Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ?

- - - - - The Original Question - - - - -

Hi,

Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured
in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched
PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and
fed with coax?

Does anyone know more details of this?

JEFF
ZL3TNV

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful
.. . . then simply hateful.

A 'noted' Yahoo ~ RHF
..
..
= = = Richard Clark wrote in message
= = = . ..
On 5 Jul 2004 01:26:17 -0700, (RHF) wrote:

The EH antenna has exceptional promise. It is about 10' in
diameter, requires no extensive underground radials, uses
approximately 75% less energy and is more efficient.

Hi OM,

More efficient that what, a resistor? 75% less energy than what, a
resistor?

The eh antenna is one of several of a class that take more effort for
less return than simply putting up as much wire as you have room for -
even if it is the same size as any of these "amazing!" antennas.

The absurd claims that attend the cfa/eh/fractal crowing societies is
matched by their inability to prove them except through their own
special math (never mind the S-Meter).

However, there are those who argue SWLers need poor antennas and I
suppose these fit the bill nicely. The technical equivalent of cell
phones VS string-and-dixie cups tho'.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
..

On 5 Jul 2004 18:12:09 -0700, (RHF) wrote:

RC,

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Your ego is showing.

Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt
to answer his question.

Like you? ;-)

Instead of playing twenty questions:
First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ?
Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ?
Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ?
Let's all note that it was your introduction of 6 off-topic links to
an antenna who I have already responded to against these same three
preceding questions.

Hi OM,

The eh and their ilk are on every sucker list on the web. It is a
simple matter to NOT cross post your responses if they don't shine
under examination. It is also a simply matter to either stay
on-topic, or to at least follow your own side-thread.

Respond to the technical issue, or learn to unlink your posts.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

RC,

The prior post to mine in this thread was a reference to the EH Antenna.

Yes I have an 'ego' and apparently your have an "EGO" too.

Hey, I try to be helpful and keep things positive.

I did not play Twenty Questions : I posted three.

I then provided Eight Links to more EH Antenna Information.
[ Not Six Links. ]

I also posted Eight Links related to the prior poster's
Screen Name: "JohnJacobJingleHimerSchmidt" {JJJHS}
[ It's called relating to people / a side-bar. ]

You have the tendency to state you opinions as facts; and
thereby discount all other opinions.

For some the EH Antenna may be a matter of 'faith' and to the
extent that it "Works" in some form or fashion: Hey It WORKS !
Your technical details valid or not, have very little relevance
to them and 'their' EH Antenna.

So Say I - My Opinions Stated as Facts ~ RHF
..
..
= = = Richard Clark wrote in message
= = = . ..
On 5 Jul 2004 18:12:09 -0700, (RHF) wrote:

RC,

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Your ego is showing.

Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt
to answer his question.

Like you? ;-)

Instead of playing twenty questions:
First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ?
Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ?
Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ?
Let's all note that it was your introduction of 6 off-topic links to
an antenna who I have already responded to against these same three
preceding questions.

Hi OM,

The eh and their ilk are on every sucker list on the web. It is a
simple matter to NOT cross post your responses if they don't shine
under examination. It is also a simply matter to either stay
on-topic, or to at least follow your own side-thread.

Respond to the technical issue, or learn to unlink your posts.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 6 Jul 2004 11:02:19 -0700, (RHF) wrote:

Yes I have an 'ego' and apparently your have an "EGO" too.

Certainly, mine is earned.

Hey, I try to be helpful and keep things positive.

Posting as a substitute for Prozac, or is it Lithium?

I did not play Twenty Questions : I posted three.

Hmm, a matter of degree not substance. As for substance I note you
have no interest in engaging the outcome of your questions' answers
nor in pursuing the technical claims of your submitted eh antennas.
So I will respond to your style and expose your weakness in that
regard too. ;-)

For some the EH Antenna may be a matter of 'faith' and to the
extent that it "Works" in some form or fashion: Hey It WORKS !
Your technical details valid or not, have very little relevance
to them and 'their' EH Antenna.

Rabbit ears for AM reception WORK for the faithful too. Such a
recommendation! It's like short-changing the blind to teach them self
sufficiency.

So Say I - My Opinions Stated as Facts ~ RHF

Actually "so write you." No one can hear you scream on the internet.

For others following the poor quality of discussion surrounding the eh
antenna; this design has been field tested, studied and analyzed quite
thoroughly on rec.radio.amateur.antenna. It is quite an education to
simply look at the field data offered by the proponents themselves
(who are just as incapable in reading engineering reports as any
Yahoo).

For the sheer bulk and complexity of the eh design, their own reports
shows it to be fully 0.1% to 1% efficient compared to a simple design.
Of course, few of you may be capable of erecting this simple design.
However, going to the trouble with the eh when you could as easily use
rabbit ears purchased at Radio Shack must bring with it what Yahoo
cites as the misty-eyed boon of faith (which accounts for easily 20
over S9 signals in an S1 field of noise where the faithless only hear
static).

Henceforth we can call these designs Faith-Gain Antennas. It means
that if you discard tuners, preselectors, tuned antennas, and simply
use a wire coat hanger; that if you squeeze your eyes hard enough and
fall to your knees with folded hands held slightly above brow level,
then you too can enjoy the melodious tongues from other lands
communicating to your inner heart - don't forget to turn on the radio.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Your ego is showing.

Uh oh -- worlds are colliding. Remember, rec.radio.shortwave is not a radio
newsgroup, the people there are not knowledgeable about, or interested in,
the technical aspects of radio. If it doesn't involve nasty name-calling or
wild-eyed, mouth-foaming political looniness, then it doesn't belong in
rec.radio.shortwave.

RHF wrote:
RC,

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt
to answer his question.

First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ?

A Dummy Load


Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ?

Makes a pretty good Dummy load


Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ?

Acts like a Dummy load.



- - - - - The Original Question - - - - -

Hi,

Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured
in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched
PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and
fed with coax?

Does anyone know more details of this?

JEFF
ZL3TNV

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful
. . . then simply hateful.

Oh Gee, Richard isn't being hateful, just responding to your post
responding to the original posters msg.

The world of engineering is like this - gotta have a tough skin, yaknow?
rule 1 is extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it.

rest snipped

- mike KB3EIA -

MC,

"If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it."

If Your Antenna Works... Your Will Hear and Be Heard [.]

Hey, What Works... WORKS ! ~ RHF
..
..
= = = Mike Coslo wrote in message
= = = ...
RHF wrote:
RC,

Instead of playing the 'game' of posting a reply to anything I post.

Why don't you be helpful to the original poster and attempt
to answer his question.

First - What type (name) antenna is he talking about ?

A Dummy Load


Second - What is your 'expert' opinion about this antenna ?

Makes a pretty good Dummy load


Third - What are the technical aspects of this antenna ?

Acts like a Dummy load.



- - - - - The Original Question - - - - -

Hi,

Does anyone remember a weird compact antenna that was featured
in a 60's (or early 70's) edition of "73" magazine. Had 2 etched
PCBs (like spaced plates) mounted inside a plastic bucket, and
fed with coax?

Does anyone know more details of this?

JEFF
ZL3TNV

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

It's much nicer and rewarding to be honestly helpful
. . . then simply hateful.

Oh Gee, Richard isn't being hateful, just responding to your post
responding to the original posters msg.

The world of engineering is like this - gotta have a tough skin, yaknow?
rule 1 is extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

If your antenna works, no amount of his scorn will stop it.

rest snipped

- mike KB3EIA -
..