Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 01:54 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default A dipole over ground

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 8:13 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 5:06 PM,
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 12:45 PM,
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

You know enough to copy and paste a chart. That's all. You have no
idea *what the chart shows*.

That sounds a lot like a straw man argument to me and you repeatedly
refuse to address what it is that the chart does show.

Those are two traits of a real troll.

snip


I've tried explaining it to you in the past. But you discard any
attempts at proof I provide. So don't try to tell me I haven't provided
any proof.

All you have provided as proof is "I got a WAS" which is NOT proof
of antenna performance.




It is more proof that you have that your figures are wrong!


A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.

And actual propagation reports are more accurate than theoretical charts.


A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.


This right here shows you how wrong you are.

But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.



But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.

If you want REAL propagation reports with REAL numbers, than use
http://pskreporter.info/pskmap.html



LOL, you refuse to accept REAL reports because they contradict your
fantasies.


A REAL report would be what you get from pskreporter which has numbers
coming from a computer based measurement in dB, not just some guy saying
"59".

So, tell me. If my antenna "sucked", how did I work Alaska and Hawaii
from Iowa? In fact, how did I work California and Massachusetts?
According to you, it should have been impossible because my antenna
"sucked".


I have never said anything is impossible; you are delusional.


--
Jim Pennino
  #2   Report Post  
Old November 22nd 14, 11:01 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,067
Default A dipole over ground

On 11/21/2014 8:54 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 8:13 PM,
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 5:06 PM,
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/21/2014 12:45 PM,
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

You know enough to copy and paste a chart. That's all. You have no
idea *what the chart shows*.

That sounds a lot like a straw man argument to me and you repeatedly
refuse to address what it is that the chart does show.

Those are two traits of a real troll.

snip


I've tried explaining it to you in the past. But you discard any
attempts at proof I provide. So don't try to tell me I haven't provided
any proof.

All you have provided as proof is "I got a WAS" which is NOT proof
of antenna performance.




It is more proof that you have that your figures are wrong!

A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.

And actual propagation reports are more accurate than theoretical charts.

A QSL card has no figures other than the usual 59 for both ends.


This right here shows you how wrong you are.

But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.


But you're always right. And you discount anything that disagrees with
your fantasies.

If you want REAL propagation reports with REAL numbers, than use
http://pskreporter.info/pskmap.html



LOL, you refuse to accept REAL reports because they contradict your
fantasies.


A REAL report would be what you get from pskreporter which has numbers
coming from a computer based measurement in dB, not just some guy saying
"59".

So, tell me. If my antenna "sucked", how did I work Alaska and Hawaii
from Iowa? In fact, how did I work California and Massachusetts?
According to you, it should have been impossible because my antenna
"sucked".


I have never said anything is impossible; you are delusional.



So you say that reports of a strong signal all over the state prove your
theory - but reports from all over the world are worthless because they
are not "propagation reports". IOW, reports which support your
fantasies are fine, but those which do no support your theories don't
count. Talk about selective bias!

And no - you didn't say it was impossible. But I still challenge you to
show how I could do that if my antenna "sucked". After all - it was
just an inverted VEE, apex at 50', ends basically at ground level.
According to you, I shouldn't have been able to work farther than Omaha.
Yet I worked both coasts virtually every night in the winter time.

So tell me, how could such an antenna that "sucks" according to your own
words, work?

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

==================
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA Antenna 8 February 24th 11 10:22 PM
Safety ground versus RF ground for a 2nd Floor shack jawod Antenna 11 March 14th 06 02:38 AM
Transforming your simple Ground Rod into a Ground Anchor : Is It Worth The Work ? - You Decide ! RHF Shortwave 10 December 24th 05 10:09 PM
Ground Or Not To Ground Receiving Antenna In Storm ? Robert11 Antenna 32 December 20th 05 01:52 AM
Improving ground for a Vertical dipole worth it ? .J.S... Antenna 9 February 25th 05 12:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017