Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Safety ground versus RF ground for a 2nd Floor shack | Antenna | |||
Transforming your simple Ground Rod into a Ground Anchor : Is It Worth The Work ? - You Decide ! | Shortwave | |||
Ground Or Not To Ground Receiving Antenna In Storm ? | Antenna | |||
Improving ground for a Vertical dipole worth it ? | Antenna |