On TopBand reflector the "guru" proclaimed:

"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."

So if you want wire to be lossy, jus' lay it on the ground! :-)
.... and the "worshipers" nodded in amazement

Believing W8JI claims can be hazardous to your radios. :-)

Yuri da BUm

On 21 Aug 2004 15:16:49 GMT, self-important Yuri Blanarovich
failed a maturity test:

On TopBand reflector the "guru" proclaimed:

*plonk*

If you take issue with something Tom wrote, why not
just deal with him direct?
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH


"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...
On TopBand reflector the "guru" proclaimed:

"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."

So if you want wire to be lossy, jus' lay it on the ground! :-)
... and the "worshipers" nodded in amazement

Believing W8JI claims can be hazardous to your radios. :-)

Yuri da BUm

"dtdonaly" wrote in message
...
If you take issue with something Tom wrote, why not
just deal with him direct?
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH


Or, open it for discussion in that forum?

Pete

" Uncle Peter" wrote in message
news:fmMVc.12477$yh.1034@fed1read05...

"dtdonaly" wrote in message
...
If you take issue with something Tom wrote, why not
just deal with him direct?
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH

Tom must be doing something right - he's the only US station I've ever
worked on 160m (with 5 watts QRP & a very modest end-fed wire by the way).

73, Peter VK3YE http://www.qsl.net/vk3ye

Agree - I've seen his station, as well
Murray vk4aok

Peter Parker wrote:

" Uncle Peter" wrote in message
news:fmMVc.12477$yh.1034@fed1read05...

"dtdonaly" wrote in message
om...

If you take issue with something Tom wrote, why not
just deal with him direct?
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH


Tom must be doing something right - he's the only US station I've ever
worked on 160m (with 5 watts QRP & a very modest end-fed wire by the way).

73, Peter VK3YE http://www.qsl.net/vk3ye

If you take issue with something Tom wrote, why not
just deal with him direct?
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH



I had my share of dealing with Tom direct and pointing out wrong information
that he was spreading on the waves of Internet. For that I was attacked by him
and called "pathological scientist" rather than engaging in reasoning and
discussions. When I tried to defend the truth and reality on the reflectors, I
would be unsubscribed by Herr Administrator and Tom was given last word,
"proving" he is "right". To those reflectors I never came back and one of them
is TopBand. This is #7 gross misstatement from Tom that I am pointing out. I
mentioned it here for the benefit of those who care. If anyone wants to worship
W8JI and his "pontifical" statements that are sometimes wrong, be my guest.

Tom must be doing something right - he's the only US station I've ever
worked on 160m (with 5 watts QRP & a very modest end-fed wire by the way).

73, Peter VK3YE http://www.qsl.net/vk3ye

...and that proves that everything Tom says is right?

People can be wrong, and usually appreciate if they are corrected or shown
better way. W8JI seems to be "absolutely right" even when he is wrong. He would
first ridicule the one who tries to correct his misconceptions. Then if
argument ensues and he realizes and is convinced that he was wrong, he would
not admit it, but goes quiet for a while and later emerges as a "guru" on the
subject pretending it was all his invention. He is doing some things right, but
he has this attitude that does not reflect well on hams and it is not manly to
attack someone for bringing up correction, and then making it his own
"invention", not giving credit where is due. That is called plagiarism.
So, I brought this up for those who care about reality, and I am taking
advantage for ability to post here, where reflector Gestapo will not silence
me. Tom is hanging around reflectors where he is protected by administrators,
when he encounters knowledgeable opposition to some of his fallacies, he can't
take the heat, will not admit being wrong and goes and thrives behind reflector
Gestapo. I am not looking for fights, I am trying to point out when I see
something posted publicly wrong.

If anyone cares to discuss the subject, or explain how the conductor laid on
the ground can lose its conductivity, bring it on. I can't figure out how this
could happen and I would enjoy being enlightened.

73 Yuri, K3BU.us

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