Dear Group:
I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for me
to know what is being contended. The statement mentions shooting,
stability, termination, and at least one wire as a Beverage (wave)
antenna.
As we all know, Beverage's wave antenna is used on receiving for its
directivity and rarely is used as a transmitting antenna.

My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

73 Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin - Michigan USA
Home:


"The only thing that prevents people from shooting themselves
in the foot with the wire below the Beverage is the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy, and of course that means it doesn't help with
stability or termination."

My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

73 Mac N8TT

Judge by yourself, here is the complete posting, rest of the discussion is on
http://lists.contesting.com/archives...-08/index.html
Yuri


I'd say that given "average" elevation angles for DX, you
should treat both
arrival elevation angle and tilt from ground loss as being
roughly equal
factors.

None of that matters anyway Chuck when the pattern of the
antenna isn't any good. We know a lot more about antenna
patterns and how antennas respond over earth than we did
back in the earlier part of the 20th century.

The fact is we want the horizontal area of the antenna to
have as much response as possible. If we put a wire below
the antenna that *really* changed things we know by where it
is located it could only make things worse.

A Beverage responds in the horizontal area only because of
the high loss in the media below the antenna. Without a
highly conductive media below the antenna, it's a cloverleaf
with a null off the ends caused by the vertical ends
dominating the response.
It's all in the antenna pattern. We can have all the tilted
wave we like but if the antenna has a zero response slice
looking at it and major lobes 20dB stronger 45 degrees to
either and off both ends, we won't be very happy with the
results.

The only thing that prevents people from shooting themselves
in the foot with the wire below the Beverage is the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy, and of course that means it doesn't help with
stability or termination.

If you think it does, lay a very long wire on the ground and
measure the input impedance. See how it looks compared to a
~50 ohm ground rod connection....I guarantee it won't look
pretty.

73 Tom

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:51:47 -0400, "J. McLaughlin"
wrote:

I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for me
to know what is being contended.
....
My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

Hi Mac,

The danger of this is these "arguments" (offered on the behalf of a
otherwise silent party) is that they have every chance of being under
reported, and over extended. It quickly devolves to "so-and-so
thinks...." to triumphantly prove it-just-ain't-so.

It reminds me of past statements offered as V9SRB's logic in his
behalf that never were suggested by him nor even intimated. As a
one-time shot against a full statement, I suppose that is enough to
critique, but I have seen this hothouse orchid bloom into fully
fleshed philosophies projected onto the silent protagonist by
unrelated statements forced into continuity by the critic presuming a
sub-context.

If Yuri, you have some beef against Tom, I can fully concur in his
personality taking you there. Has he offered howlers? You bet! Is
he guilty of other rhetorical shenanigans - don't we know. Is he
demonstrably skilled? Well, yes, that too.

[warning to readers, metaphors employed to a sly comic interlude]

Suffice it to say no Radio Moscow program ever interviewed a Radio
Free Europe commentator to serious issues - why would you expect such
a re-alignment of the heavens for your sake?

Ask George W for help; you might find he would take on the evil Dr.
Joyce Brothers to solve our moral problems with Howard Stern. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Dear Richard and others:
You have helped me to understand what the issues are likely to be,
what they could be, and even a glimpse of what they might become.
I shall file in my list of
interesting-things-to-think-about-in-a-serious-way the issue of what
happens to the behavior a wave antenna having a "wire" on the ground
directly under the antenna wire. I do recall dealing with a similar
issue where I was verifying a modeling issue by testing the Zo of a very
long wire over a conducting plane. Might be a paper in there somewhere.

It reminds me of a fundamentals of mathematics class that I took
from Prof. Halmos. Perhaps his greatest genius was his ability
frequently to suggest interesting problems.

I shall exit stage right 'till I have "thunk" through the
interesting bits. Thank you for your assistance.

73 Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin - Michigan USA
Home:

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:51:47 -0400, "J. McLaughlin"
wrote:

I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for
me
to know what is being contended.
...
My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

Hi Mac,

The danger of this is these "arguments" (offered on the behalf of a
otherwise silent party) is that they have every chance of being under
reported, and over extended. It quickly devolves to "so-and-so
thinks...." to triumphantly prove it-just-ain't-so.

It reminds me of past statements offered as V9SRB's logic in his
behalf that never were suggested by him nor even intimated. As a
one-time shot against a full statement, I suppose that is enough to
critique, but I have seen this hothouse orchid bloom into fully
fleshed philosophies projected onto the silent protagonist by
unrelated statements forced into continuity by the critic presuming a
sub-context.

If Yuri, you have some beef against Tom, I can fully concur in his
personality taking you there. Has he offered howlers? You bet! Is
he guilty of other rhetorical shenanigans - don't we know. Is he
demonstrably skilled? Well, yes, that too.

[warning to readers, metaphors employed to a sly comic interlude]

Suffice it to say no Radio Moscow program ever interviewed a Radio
Free Europe commentator to serious issues - why would you expect such
a re-alignment of the heavens for your sake?

Ask George W for help; you might find he would take on the evil Dr.
Joyce Brothers to solve our moral problems with Howard Stern. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:15:56 -0400, "J. McLaughlin"
wrote:

I shall file in my list of
interesting-things-to-think-about-in-a-serious-way the issue of what
happens to the behavior a wave antenna having a "wire" on the ground
directly under the antenna wire. I do recall dealing with a similar
issue where I was verifying a modeling issue by testing the Zo of a very
long wire over a conducting plane.

Hi Mac,

Where the discussion remains technical, it seems to me that both Tom
and Yuri are saying the same thing. On the other hand, they may say
it differently, but the conclusions seem to agree.

Your experience and studies to this point would be instructive.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

KB7QHC:
Where the discussion remains technical, it seems to me that both Tom
and Yuri are saying the same thing. On the other hand, they may say
it differently, but the conclusions seem to agree.


Huh? Which "same thing?"

Yuri

On 23 Aug 2004 03:11:29 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

KB7QHC:
Where the discussion remains technical, it seems to me that both Tom
and Yuri are saying the same thing. On the other hand, they may say
it differently, but the conclusions seem to agree.


Huh? Which "same thing?"

Yuri

Which difference?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

KB7QHC:
Where the discussion remains technical, it seems to me that both Tom
and Yuri are saying the same thing. On the other hand, they may say
it differently, but the conclusions seem to agree.


Huh? Which "same thing?"

Yuri

Which difference?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

What are you refering to? Can you be more specific?
Wire laying on the ground "changing" resistance or terminating Beverage in the
ocean?

Yuri