On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:12 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

[snip]
|
|Regarding my claims; you cannot provide
|one substantiated instance where my
|antennas did not perform as stated. Where
|are the complaints? Where are the
|dissatisfied users. One would think after TEN
|years there would have been some indication
|of a fraud if one did exist.
|
|Or perhaps you simply imagine that all those
|good folks who find my antenna design a
|superior one, are merely deluded idiots, as
|Brian Beasley once accused...

One only look at the deluded victims and followers of the likes of
Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, the Nigerian finance minister,
etc. to realize that hucksters never find a shortage of true
believers.

Let me show you how this works.

I _personally_ guarantee you that my design for a 3-element 20-meter
Yagi will out perform any Raibeam of the same boomlength and at the
same height above ground. (I'll leave out the "electrical
boomlength", whatever that means)

Now it is up to *you* to prove this claim false.

And like any good huckster, as "proof" of the superiority of my
design, I offer these testimonials:

With the antenna at a modest height of 50' above ground and fed with
250' of coax, in the recent ARRL Field Day contest Single-op N7WS was
able to hold a frequency while running 100 W (SSB) on emergency
power. In only 17 hours of operation 1357 20-meter Q's were logged.
All states and all ARRL sections were contacted.

During the recent YV0D expedition, N7WS worked them not once, but
twice on SSB (this ****ed them off, but I'm tired of not being in the
log when I know that I worked them), on the first call, and also
worked them with ease on CW.

http://dx.qsl.net/cgi-bin/logsearch.cgi?L=yv0d&C=n7ws

Etc., etc....

Wes Stewart wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:12 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

[snip]
|
|Regarding my claims; you cannot provide
|one substantiated instance where my
|antennas did not perform as stated. Where
|are the complaints? Where are the
|dissatisfied users. One would think after TEN
|years there would have been some indication
|of a fraud if one did exist.
|
|Or perhaps you simply imagine that all those
|good folks who find my antenna design a
|superior one, are merely deluded idiots, as
|Brian Beasley once accused...

One only look at the deluded victims and followers of the likes of
Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, the Nigerian finance minister,
etc. to realize that hucksters never find a shortage of true
believers.

Hi Wes,

While what you say may be true, it
proves nothing, in that performance is
observable and comparable, and does
not require blind faith to observe it.

Let me show you how this works.

I _personally_ guarantee you that my design for a 3-element 20-meter
Yagi will out perform any Raibeam of the same boomlength and at the
same height above ground. (I'll leave out the "electrical
boomlength", whatever that means)

Now it is up to *you* to prove this claim false.

Since you are making the claim, and
there exist untold numbers of Raibeam
antennas that have consistently beat
antennas of your design (a yagi is a yagi)
in pileups, etc., the onus would be on
you to prove your claim is valid.

Conversely, if there were thousands of
your 3-element 20-meter Yagis that have
beat out the Raibeam antennas in pileups,
and the Raibeam guy makes such a claim,
then it would be up to the Raibeam guy to
prove his claim was valid.

It is all a matter of what has been
established by many instances over
time.


And like any good huckster, as "proof" of the superiority of my
design, I offer these testimonials:

With the antenna at a modest height of 50' above ground and fed with
250' of coax, in the recent ARRL Field Day contest Single-op N7WS was
able to hold a frequency while running 100 W (SSB) on emergency
power. In only 17 hours of operation 1357 20-meter Q's were logged.
All states and all ARRL sections were contacted.

Great... but a single case establishes
nothing.


During the recent YV0D expedition, N7WS worked them not once, but
twice on SSB (this ****ed them off, but I'm tired of not being in the
log when I know that I worked them), on the first call, and also
worked them with ease on CW.

http://dx.qsl.net/cgi-bin/logsearch.cgi?L=yv0d&C=n7ws

Etc., etc....


It is a well know fact that Pat Murdoch,
ZL1AXB and I, both running 4 element
Raibeams @ 40 ft, held a daily sked
for close to four years, throughout the
bottom of the previous cycle on 10 meter
SSB, with power levels never exceeding
500 watts PEP. In only about 5% of the
total contacts were the sigs too weak to
hold the sked.

.... the only signals on the band...

With that antenna, Pat won first place,
single op CW, in the ARRL 10 meter
contest both in 1996 and again in 1997 -
the only years he participated.

http://www.raibeam.com/page11.html

In the years he participated in the WPX
and CQWW contests, you will find Pat
listed in the top 10m positions as well.

Now, addressing your first assertion:
Pat can hardly be a deluded Raibeam
*cult* follower, since many of his
experiences are a matter of record.

And that does establish something.

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:58:43 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

|
|Wes Stewart wrote in message
.. .
| On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:12 -0700, "Chuck"
| wrote:
|
| [snip]
| |
| |Regarding my claims; you cannot provide
| |one substantiated instance where my
| |antennas did not perform as stated. Where
| |are the complaints? Where are the
| |dissatisfied users. One would think after TEN
| |years there would have been some indication
| |of a fraud if one did exist.
| |
| |Or perhaps you simply imagine that all those
| |good folks who find my antenna design a
| |superior one, are merely deluded idiots, as
| |Brian Beasley once accused...
|
| One only look at the deluded victims and followers of the likes of
| Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, the Nigerian finance minister,
| etc. to realize that hucksters never find a shortage of true
| believers.
|
|Hi Wes,
|
|While what you say may be true, it
|proves nothing, in that performance is
|observable and comparable, and does
|not require blind faith to observe it.
|
| Let me show you how this works.
|
| I _personally_ guarantee you that my design for a 3-element 20-meter
| Yagi will out perform any Raibeam of the same boomlength and at the
| same height above ground. (I'll leave out the "electrical
| boomlength", whatever that means)
|
| Now it is up to *you* to prove this claim false.
|
|Since you are making the claim, and
|there exist untold numbers of Raibeam
|antennas that have consistently beat
|antennas of your design (a yagi is a yagi)
|in pileups, etc., the onus would be on
|you to prove your claim is valid.

No. You have made unsubstantiated claims and *personally* guaranteed
performance. When I do *exactly* the same, you cry foul. I forgot to
mention that I sprinkled my antenna with floobydust, which makes it
superior to conventional Yagi designs.

|
|Conversely, if there were thousands of
|your 3-element 20-meter Yagis that have
|beat out the Raibeam antennas in pileups,
|and the Raibeam guy makes such a claim,
|then it would be up to the Raibeam guy to
|prove his claim was valid.

There are thousands of Yagis that beat Raibeams every day. This
proves nothing, just as does the converse.
|
|It is all a matter of what has been
|established by many instances over
|time.
|
|
| And like any good huckster, as "proof" of the superiority of my
| design, I offer these testimonials:
|
| With the antenna at a modest height of 50' above ground and fed with
| 250' of coax, in the recent ARRL Field Day contest Single-op N7WS was
| able to hold a frequency while running 100 W (SSB) on emergency
| power. In only 17 hours of operation 1357 20-meter Q's were logged.
| All states and all ARRL sections were contacted.
|
|Great... but a single case establishes
|nothing.

Gee, I offered a second case just below and I could go on and on. But
if this is meaningless, which it is, why do you publish such as this:

"...Your 20 meter, two element Raibeam is a firecracker..."

"...up about 33ft on the gable of the house and 70 watts, I can get
into the DXpeditions with no real problems...."

"... I can easily break the pileups barefoot, ..."

Blah, blah .....
|
|
| During the recent YV0D expedition, N7WS worked them not once, but
| twice on SSB (this ****ed them off, but I'm tired of not being in the
| log when I know that I worked them), on the first call, and also
| worked them with ease on CW.
|
| http://dx.qsl.net/cgi-bin/logsearch.cgi?L=yv0d&C=n7ws
|
| Etc., etc....
|
|
|It is a well know fact that Pat Murdoch,
|ZL1AXB and I, both running 4 element
|Raibeams @ 40 ft, held a daily sked
|for close to four years, throughout the
|bottom of the previous cycle on 10 meter
|SSB, with power levels never exceeding
|500 watts PEP. In only about 5% of the
|total contacts were the sigs too weak to
|hold the sked.

It isn't a "well-known fact" I never heard of it before and I doubt
anyone else here has either. It proves absolutely nothing.

|
|... the only signals on the band...
|
|With that antenna, Pat won first place,
|single op CW, in the ARRL 10 meter
|contest both in 1996 and again in 1997 -
|the only years he participated.
|
|http://www.raibeam.com/page11.html
|
|In the years he participated in the WPX
|and CQWW contests, you will find Pat
|listed in the top 10m positions as well.
|
|Now, addressing your first assertion:
|Pat can hardly be a deluded Raibeam
|*cult* follower, since many of his
|experiences are a matter of record.
|
|And that does establish something.

Hardly.

Are you guys have fun yet?

Danny, K6MHE

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:20:40 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:58:43 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

|
|Wes Stewart wrote in message
. ..
| On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:12 -0700, "Chuck"
| wrote:
|
| [snip]
| |
| |Regarding my claims; you cannot provide
| |one substantiated instance where my
| |antennas did not perform as stated. Where
| |are the complaints? Where are the
| |dissatisfied users. One would think after TEN
| |years there would have been some indication
| |of a fraud if one did exist.
| |
| |Or perhaps you simply imagine that all those
| |good folks who find my antenna design a
| |superior one, are merely deluded idiots, as
| |Brian Beasley once accused...
|
| One only look at the deluded victims and followers of the likes of
| Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, the Nigerian finance minister,
| etc. to realize that hucksters never find a shortage of true
| believers.
|
|Hi Wes,
|
|While what you say may be true, it
|proves nothing, in that performance is
|observable and comparable, and does
|not require blind faith to observe it.
|
| Let me show you how this works.
|
| I _personally_ guarantee you that my design for a 3-element 20-meter
| Yagi will out perform any Raibeam of the same boomlength and at the
| same height above ground. (I'll leave out the "electrical
| boomlength", whatever that means)
|
| Now it is up to *you* to prove this claim false.
|
|Since you are making the claim, and
|there exist untold numbers of Raibeam
|antennas that have consistently beat
|antennas of your design (a yagi is a yagi)
|in pileups, etc., the onus would be on
|you to prove your claim is valid.

No. You have made unsubstantiated claims and *personally* guaranteed
performance. When I do *exactly* the same, you cry foul. I forgot to
mention that I sprinkled my antenna with floobydust, which makes it
superior to conventional Yagi designs.

|
|Conversely, if there were thousands of
|your 3-element 20-meter Yagis that have
|beat out the Raibeam antennas in pileups,
|and the Raibeam guy makes such a claim,
|then it would be up to the Raibeam guy to
|prove his claim was valid.

There are thousands of Yagis that beat Raibeams every day. This
proves nothing, just as does the converse.
|
|It is all a matter of what has been
|established by many instances over
|time.
|
|
| And like any good huckster, as "proof" of the superiority of my
| design, I offer these testimonials:
|
| With the antenna at a modest height of 50' above ground and fed with
| 250' of coax, in the recent ARRL Field Day contest Single-op N7WS was
| able to hold a frequency while running 100 W (SSB) on emergency
| power. In only 17 hours of operation 1357 20-meter Q's were logged.
| All states and all ARRL sections were contacted.
|
|Great... but a single case establishes
|nothing.

Gee, I offered a second case just below and I could go on and on. But
if this is meaningless, which it is, why do you publish such as this:

"...Your 20 meter, two element Raibeam is a firecracker..."

"...up about 33ft on the gable of the house and 70 watts, I can get
into the DXpeditions with no real problems...."

"... I can easily break the pileups barefoot, ..."

Blah, blah .....
|
|
| During the recent YV0D expedition, N7WS worked them not once, but
| twice on SSB (this ****ed them off, but I'm tired of not being in the
| log when I know that I worked them), on the first call, and also
| worked them with ease on CW.
|
| http://dx.qsl.net/cgi-bin/logsearch.cgi?L=yv0d&C=n7ws
|
| Etc., etc....
|
|
|It is a well know fact that Pat Murdoch,
|ZL1AXB and I, both running 4 element
|Raibeams @ 40 ft, held a daily sked
|for close to four years, throughout the
|bottom of the previous cycle on 10 meter
|SSB, with power levels never exceeding
|500 watts PEP. In only about 5% of the
|total contacts were the sigs too weak to
|hold the sked.

It isn't a "well-known fact" I never heard of it before and I doubt
anyone else here has either. It proves absolutely nothing.

|
|... the only signals on the band...
|
|With that antenna, Pat won first place,
|single op CW, in the ARRL 10 meter
|contest both in 1996 and again in 1997 -
|the only years he participated.
|
|http://www.raibeam.com/page11.html
|
|In the years he participated in the WPX
|and CQWW contests, you will find Pat
|listed in the top 10m positions as well.
|
|Now, addressing your first assertion:
|Pat can hardly be a deluded Raibeam
|*cult* follower, since many of his
|experiences are a matter of record.
|
|And that does establish something.

Hardly.

Wes Stewart wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:58:43 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

|
|Wes Stewart wrote in message
.. .
| On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:12 -0700, "Chuck"
| wrote:
|
| [snip]
| |
| |Regarding my claims; you cannot provide
| |one substantiated instance where my
| |antennas did not perform as stated. Where
| |are the complaints? Where are the
| |dissatisfied users. One would think after TEN
| |years there would have been some indication
| |of a fraud if one did exist.
| |
| |Or perhaps you simply imagine that all those
| |good folks who find my antenna design a
| |superior one, are merely deluded idiots, as
| |Brian Beasley once accused...
|
| One only look at the deluded victims and followers of the likes of
| Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, the Nigerian finance minister,
| etc. to realize that hucksters never find a shortage of true
| believers.
|
|Hi Wes,
|
|While what you say may be true, it
|proves nothing, in that performance is
|observable and comparable, and does
|not require blind faith to observe it.
|
| Let me show you how this works.
|
| I _personally_ guarantee you that my design for a 3-element 20-meter
| Yagi will out perform any Raibeam of the same boomlength and at the
| same height above ground. (I'll leave out the "electrical
| boomlength", whatever that means)
|
| Now it is up to *you* to prove this claim false.
|
|Since you are making the claim, and
|there exist untold numbers of Raibeam
|antennas that have consistently beat
|antennas of your design (a yagi is a yagi)
|in pileups, etc., the onus would be on
|you to prove your claim is valid.

No. You have made unsubstantiated claims and *personally* guaranteed
performance. When I do *exactly* the same, you cry foul. I forgot to
mention that I sprinkled my antenna with floobydust, which makes it
superior to conventional Yagi designs.

Hi Wes,

Unsubstantiated in your mind perhaps...
but there are many with first hand
experience ITR who would strongly
disagree with that baseless opinion.
Baseless, in that it lacks first-hand
experience to give it substance.

BTW, That was a money-back
guarantee, and in 8 years, the only
refund requested and issued, was
because the poor guy's wife had a
cow over the idea of a beam above
the house. Apparently he failed to
inform her of his plans...


|
|Conversely, if there were thousands of
|your 3-element 20-meter Yagis that have
|beat out the Raibeam antennas in pileups,
|and the Raibeam guy makes such a claim,
|then it would be up to the Raibeam guy to
|prove his claim was valid.

There are thousands of Yagis that beat Raibeams every day. This
proves nothing, just as does the converse.

Perhaps you should argue this with
Dr. Ken Asmus, VA3KA , a scientist who
conducted a shoot-out in Canada...

"The Raibeam RB-36x was installed late fall last year (October '00). For the next few
weeks I used the Raibeam heavily and was extremely pleased with it's performance. In
nearly every comparison with my A4 it was equal or stronger in signal strength. In many
QSO's, both long medium and short range, and on all 3 bands, the RB-36x was 1-2 S units
stronger. This was both surprising and pleasing considering the RB-36x is about 15 feet
lower than the A4. Using the Raibeam I was able to work ALL the major DXpeditions in the
last year (on 20-15-10 meters SSB/CW and RTTY) and was the top Canadian in the 2001 ARRL
DX contest (SSB) 10M single band with 1400 QSO's."

You can see a photograph of the two
towers and beams at:

http://www.raibeam.com/page23.html

The RB-36x has 2 elements for each band,
interlaced on a 14 foot boom, and weighs
only 36 pounds.

|
|It is all a matter of what has been
|established by many instances over
|time.
|
|
| And like any good huckster, as "proof" of the superiority of my
| design, I offer these testimonials:
|
| With the antenna at a modest height of 50' above ground and fed with
| 250' of coax, in the recent ARRL Field Day contest Single-op N7WS was
| able to hold a frequency while running 100 W (SSB) on emergency
| power. In only 17 hours of operation 1357 20-meter Q's were logged.
| All states and all ARRL sections were contacted.
|
|Great... but a single case establishes
|nothing.

Gee, I offered a second case just below and I could go on and on. But
if this is meaningless, which it is,

I see we agree on something...

why do you publish such as this:

"...Your 20 meter, two element Raibeam is a firecracker..."

"...up about 33ft on the gable of the house and 70 watts, I can get
into the DXpeditions with no real problems...."

"... I can easily break the pileups barefoot, ..."


I simply published the unsolicited opinions
of others - opinions based on their first-
hand experiences that they wished to
share with others.

Since most gave email addresses, please
feel free to contact those opinionators,
and perhaps you can convince them they
are all delusional, having been brainwashed
by an evil antenna cult leader... g

|
|
| During the recent YV0D expedition, N7WS worked them not once, but
| twice on SSB (this ****ed them off, but I'm tired of not being in the
| log when I know that I worked them), on the first call, and also
| worked them with ease on CW.
|
| http://dx.qsl.net/cgi-bin/logsearch.cgi?L=yv0d&C=n7ws
|
| Etc., etc....
|
|
|It is a well know fact that Pat Murdoch,
|ZL1AXB and I, both running 4 element
|Raibeams @ 40 ft, held a daily sked
|for close to four years, throughout the
|bottom of the previous cycle on 10 meter
|SSB, with power levels never exceeding
|500 watts PEP. In only about 5% of the
|total contacts were the sigs too weak to
|hold the sked.

It isn't a "well-known fact" I never heard of it before and I doubt
anyone else here has either. It proves absolutely nothing.

It proves your fixed opinions are stronger
than your curiosity!

Tell you what: Steve, ZL1SB is Pat's
neighbor and longtime friend, His email
addy is on my website. Contact him if
you'd like to have your mind opened.

Or perhaps you would like to discuss this
with Rod, ZL2ACE who has done
considerable independent testing of this
antenna design and is knowledge of the
10m skeds.

|
|... the only signals on the band...
|
|With that antenna, Pat won first place,
|single op CW, in the ARRL 10 meter
|contest both in 1996 and again in 1997 -
|the only years he participated.
|
| http://www.raibeam.com/page11.html
|
|In the years he participated in the WPX
|and CQWW contests, you will find Pat
|listed in the top 10m positions as well.
|
|Now, addressing your first assertion:
|Pat can hardly be a deluded Raibeam
|*cult* follower, since many of his
|experiences are a matter of record.
|
|And that does establish something.

Hardly.

It seems inconsistent that you repeatedly
cry "unsubstantiated" then refuse to
consider substance. Though I suppose
if you bothered to check out the contest
records, it may raise havoc with your
unsubstantiated opinions, perhaps?... hi

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:44:12 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

[snip]
|
|Perhaps you should argue this with
|Dr. Ken Asmus, VA3KA , a scientist who
|conducted a shoot-out in Canada...

I'm sure that Dr. Asmus is a fine fellow, all-around good guy and he
no longer beats his wife. But the minute I hear, "the RB-36x was 1-2
S units stronger", science has gone out the window and bafflegab has
blown in.

[snip]
|
|It seems inconsistent that you repeatedly
|cry "unsubstantiated" then refuse to
|consider substance. Though I suppose
|if you bothered to check out the contest
|records, it may raise havoc with your
|unsubstantiated opinions, perhaps?... hi

Contest records are not "substance."

Comparative measurements on a calibrated antenna range would be
substance. I will consider them.

SK

N7WS

Wes Stewart wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:44:12 -0700, "Chuck"
wrote:

[snip]
|
|Perhaps you should argue this with
|Dr. Ken Asmus, VA3KA , a scientist who
|conducted a shoot-out in Canada...

I'm sure that Dr. Asmus is a fine fellow, all-around good guy and he
no longer beats his wife. But the minute I hear, "the RB-36x was 1-2
S units stronger", science has gone out the window and bafflegab has
blown in.

Wes,

You demean a scientist merely to
feed your perverted ego and maintain
your narrow-minded preconceptions?

Where is the intellectual honesty in
that? Where is the science in that?

You demonstrate the only kind of
science you support is that which
confirms your silly preconceptions,
despite reality.

Which would imply, had the
comparison gone the other way,
you'd have accepted that data
unquestioned.

Hypocrisy has no standing in real
science.


[snip]
|
|It seems inconsistent that you repeatedly
|cry "unsubstantiated" then refuse to
|consider substance. Though I suppose
|if you bothered to check out the contest
|records, it may raise havoc with your
|unsubstantiated opinions, perhaps?... hi

Contest records are not "substance."

Comparative measurements on a calibrated antenna range would be
substance. I will consider them.

Since you've established that your
mind is an impenetrable brick, I'd
venture to say you'd reject test
range data outright, if it failed to
meet your silly preconceptions.

Do you still live in Tucson? Just
a 100 miles south of me...

If so, I invite you to consider this:

Let me know the next time you're
on 17m... I'd be happy to blow your
silly 3 el yagi away with my measly
2 elements...

Have a nice...

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI

SK

N7WS

Wow, what an interesting read.