gareth wrote:
wrote in message
...

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being
self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others
on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by
his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of
ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular
phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as
straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the
essence of the issue.


Physician, heal thyself.

And what does this topic or group have to do with physicians, gas bag?


--
Jim Pennino

On 11/20/2014 2:50 PM, wrote:
gareth wrote:
wrote in message
...

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being
self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others
on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by
his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of
ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular
phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as
straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the
essence of the issue.


Physician, heal thyself.

And what does this topic or group have to do with physicians, gas bag?

You took the bait, Jim. Did you really need to do that?

I am depressed that adult licensed amateur radio operators can be so
juvenile. Is this how you conduct yourselves on the air? In person?

You are a discredit to the amateur community as well as all of society.

John S wrote:
On 11/20/2014 2:50 PM, wrote:
gareth wrote:
wrote in message
...

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being
self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others
on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by
his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of
ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular
phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as
straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the
essence of the issue.


Physician, heal thyself.

And what does this topic or group have to do with physicians, gas bag?

You took the bait, Jim. Did you really need to do that?

Yeah, why not, there's nobody posting much of anything but Jerry Stuckle
hallucinating about some imaginary 80M dipole I was supposed to have
had.


--
Jim Pennino

On 11/20/2014 3:19 PM, John S wrote:
On 11/15/2014 7:33 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/15/2014 4:38 PM, wrote:
The following shows the effect on elevation pattern for a 1/2 wave
dipole antenna over ground at various heights for perfect, very good,
average, and extremely ground.

The important value to note is the elevation angle for the main lobe.

Generally for DX an elevation angle at or below 30 degrees is desirable
and for NVIS an angle above 60 degrees.

The elevation angles apply to any dipole type antenna, such as a G5RV,
OCF dipole, etc. but the absolute gain values will be quite different.

Also some types of dipoles have more lobes than the two of the 1/2
wave dipole; those lobes will still be elevated.

Perfect V good Avg Ext poor
Height gain @ elev gain @ elev gain @ elev
gain @ elev
0.10 8.6 90 6.3 90 4.4 90 3.1 90
0.15 8.4 90 7.1 90 5.8 90 4.3 90
0.20 8.0 90 7.1 90 6.1 90 4.6 66
0.25 7.4 90 6.7 68 5.9 61 4.8 50
0.30 6.9 56 6.4 51 5.9 48 5.1 41
0.35 6.8 45 6.5 42 6.1 40 5.4 35
0.40 7.1 39 6.9 36 6.5 35 5.8 31
0.45 7.7 33 7.5 32 7.0 31 6.3 28
0.50 8.3 30 8.1 29 7.6 28 6.7 25
0.55 8.9 27 8.5 26 7.9 25 6.9 23
0.60 9.1 25 8.6 24 8.0 23 6.9 21
0.65 8.9 23 8.4 22 7.8 21 6.9 20
0.70 8.5 21 8.0 20 7.6 20 6.8 18
0.75 8.0 19 7.7 19 7.3 18 6.7 17
0.80 7.6 18 7.4 18 7.2 17 6.7 16
0.85 7.5 17 7.4 17 7.2 16 6.7 15
0.90 7.6 16 7.5 16 7.3 15 6.9 15
0.95 7.8 15 7.7 15 7.5 15 7.1 14


Special note:

Most people understand that the results of an antenna analysis program
reflect the material used to construct the antenna and the type of
ground, if any, used for the analysis, are an approximation, and are
not accurate to 27 decimal places.

Further, most people also understand that absent them being a part of
the model used for the analysis, objects in the near field of the
antenna,
such as, but not limited to, 20 foot prision walls, blimp hangers,
skyscrapers, a deluge of biblical proportions, giant sequoia trees,
hovering 2 mile wide alien spacecraft, hords of locusts, large gold
deposits under the antenna, battles between Autobots and Decepticons,
beached aircraft carriers, and stadium domes may well effect the
actual antenna perfomance.

Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited.

Any spelling mistakes in this article are all entirly my fault. Any
grammer
errors spotted in this article were put there because I could.



Very good. You can cut and paste. Too bad you can't understand what
you're cutting and pasting, especially how to apply it.


Jerry, all the crap on this thread is your fault because of your
statement above. Can you even imagine how it might have gone had you
been a gentleman or had remained silent?

Shame on you for this and shame on Jim for continuing to bait you. You
two are ruining this group.

Why? Because I call a troll what he is?

You don't like it - quite frankly, I don't give a damn. I will continue
to call trolls exactly what they are.

I'm long past the age that I give a damn what trolls or anonymous
posters care about.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 21/11/2014 11:23 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snipped
Any spelling mistakes in this article are all entirly my fault. Any

Jerry, all the crap on this thread is your fault because of your
statement above. Can you even imagine how it might have gone had you
been a gentleman or had remained silent?

Shame on you for this and shame on Jim for continuing to bait you. You
two are ruining this group.

Why? Because I call a troll what he is?

because you abuse anyone whos opinion differs from yours no matter how
wrong ( thats often?)

You don't like it - quite frankly, I don't give a damn. I will continue
to call trolls exactly what they are.
so you have no regards for the opinion of others especially when you
are wrong


I'm long past the age that I give a damn what trolls or anonymous
posters care about.

bury your face in a pillow sticky , do a favour eh .

we have two ears and one mouth for a reason sticky , time for you to
use them in proportion .

On 11/20/2014 2:08 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/20/2014 12:55 PM, the troll wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I didn't miss it. But he's just a troll.

You throw the word "troll" around a lot when someone disagrees with one
of your pronouncements; do you even know what it means?


Yes, I know what it means. And you are a perfect example.

Right...

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being
self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others
on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by
his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of
ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular
phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as
straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the
essence of the issue.


However, you have to understand. He once put up an 80 meter dipole.
And it didn't work well. So rather than admitting he screwed up the
antenna, he just claims that all 80 meter dipoles under 100' suck. Look
back through this newsgroup and you'll see it.

That would take magic as I have never in my life put up any sort of
80M dipole nor have I ever in my life lived anywhere that the lot was
big enough to put up an 80M dipole.

I once put up a 40-30-20-15-10 trap dipole, and even with all the
shortening from the traps, there still wasn't enough land to add 80M.

You are a lier.


Then you should take back your previous statement, troll.

As I never stated that I had ever at any time put up an 80M dipole of
any kind, I have nothing to take back, lier.




Ah, so now you claim you've never put up an 80 meter dipole - but you're
an expert on them! ROFLMAO!

And you can't even spell "liar". Some "expert".

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 11/20/2014 8:48 PM, atec77 wrote:
On 21/11/2014 11:23 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snipped
Any spelling mistakes in this article are all entirly my fault. Any

Jerry, all the crap on this thread is your fault because of your
statement above. Can you even imagine how it might have gone had you
been a gentleman or had remained silent?

Shame on you for this and shame on Jim for continuing to bait you. You
two are ruining this group.

Why? Because I call a troll what he is?

because you abuse anyone whos opinion differs from yours no matter how
wrong ( thats often?)

Only trolls - which, BTW, includes you. Most people on usenet I have a
lot of respect for.


You don't like it - quite frankly, I don't give a damn. I will continue
to call trolls exactly what they are.
so you have no regards for the opinion of others especially when you
are wrong


I'm long past the age that I give a damn what trolls or anonymous
posters care about.

bury your face in a pillow sticky , do a favour eh .

we have two ears and one mouth for a reason sticky , time for you to
use them in proportion .



You should speak for yourself - and you're third grade name calling,
something that only trolls do. More proof.

No wonder you want to remain anonymous. If I were as stoopid as you, I
wouldn't want anyone else to know, either.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/20/2014 2:08 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/20/2014 12:55 PM, the troll wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

No, I didn't miss it. But he's just a troll.

You throw the word "troll" around a lot when someone disagrees with one
of your pronouncements; do you even know what it means?


Yes, I know what it means. And you are a perfect example.

Right...

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being
self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others
on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by
his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of
ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular
phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as
straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the
essence of the issue.


However, you have to understand. He once put up an 80 meter dipole.
And it didn't work well. So rather than admitting he screwed up the
antenna, he just claims that all 80 meter dipoles under 100' suck. Look
back through this newsgroup and you'll see it.

That would take magic as I have never in my life put up any sort of
80M dipole nor have I ever in my life lived anywhere that the lot was
big enough to put up an 80M dipole.

I once put up a 40-30-20-15-10 trap dipole, and even with all the
shortening from the traps, there still wasn't enough land to add 80M.

You are a lier.


Then you should take back your previous statement, troll.

As I never stated that I had ever at any time put up an 80M dipole of
any kind, I have nothing to take back, lier.




Ah, so now you claim you've never put up an 80 meter dipole - but you're
an expert on them! ROFLMAO!

I know enough to understand what the elevation angles in this data mean
and that a diple is a dipole:

Perfect V good Avg Ext poor
Height gain @ elev gain @ elev gain @ elev gain @ elev
0.10 8.6 90 6.3 90 4.4 90 3.1 90
0.15 8.4 90 7.1 90 5.8 90 4.3 90
0.20 8.0 90 7.1 90 6.1 90 4.6 66
0.25 7.4 90 6.7 68 5.9 61 4.8 50
0.30 6.9 56 6.4 51 5.9 48 5.1 41
0.35 6.8 45 6.5 42 6.1 40 5.4 35
0.40 7.1 39 6.9 36 6.5 35 5.8 31
0.45 7.7 33 7.5 32 7.0 31 6.3 28
0.50 8.3 30 8.1 29 7.6 28 6.7 25
0.55 8.9 27 8.5 26 7.9 25 6.9 23
0.60 9.1 25 8.6 24 8.0 23 6.9 21
0.65 8.9 23 8.4 22 7.8 21 6.9 20
0.70 8.5 21 8.0 20 7.6 20 6.8 18
0.75 8.0 19 7.7 19 7.3 18 6.7 17
0.80 7.6 18 7.4 18 7.2 17 6.7 16
0.85 7.5 17 7.4 17 7.2 16 6.7 15
0.90 7.6 16 7.5 16 7.3 15 6.9 15
0.95 7.8 15 7.7 15 7.5 15 7.1 14

And you can't even spell "liar". Some "expert".

Special note:

Most people understand that the results of an antenna analysis program
reflect the material used to construct the antenna and the type of
ground, if any, used for the analysis, are an approximation, and are
not accurate to 27 decimal places.

Further, most people also understand that absent them being a part of
the model used for the analysis, objects in the near field of the antenna,
such as, but not limited to, 20 foot prision walls, blimp hangers,
skyscrapers, a deluge of biblical proportions, giant sequoia trees,
hovering 2 mile wide alien spacecraft, hords of locusts, large gold
deposits under the antenna, battles between Autobots and Decepticons,
beached aircraft carriers, and stadium domes may well effect the
actual antenna perfomance.

Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited.

Any spelling mistakes in this article are all entirly my fault. Any grammer
errors spotted in this article were put there because I could.


--
Jim Pennino

On 21/11/2014 12:56 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrotenymous


bury your face in a pillow sticky , do a favour eh .

we have two ears and one mouth for a reason sticky , time for you to
use them in proportion .



You should speak for yourself -
I have did and will continue to do so old man
and you're third grade name calling,
something that only trolls do.

now thats untrue no matter how many times you falsely make the claim


No wonder you want to remain anonymous.


common sense dictates that move , something you have sfa off old man

If I were as stoopid as you,

you mean as smart , having demonstrated yet again how silly you really
are


I wouldn't want anyone else to know, either.

then stop typing and remain quite , we might forget how silly you are
but most certainly you cant resist my charms

"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ...


However, it also doesn't look like you're a ham, so you would have
experience in how wrong he is.
================================================== =============
This will absolutely be the last thing I ever say to you, so I'll unload it
all at once.

I'm KD6VKW, over 20 years licensed, an active participant in our hobby. I
try to be as courteous and considerate as possible to all. particularly to
people who know less than I do, since I was once there.

What I said about you and your rudeness was absolutely and totally correct.
There is no call for it. It's a four-star mystery how you consistently
conjure up meanness as you do, but you'll never again be a bother to me.
Missing seeing your contributions in a thread may hurt the continuity of the
thread but I'll manage.

"Sal"