On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:34:39 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Radials? I missed that.

On 11 Nov 2004 12:20:02 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
Hint: no inductive choke was needed, and the radial
lengths remained the same.

Problem: Unconventional usage leads to unconventional claims; shortly
followed by unconventional physics offered as proof in terms of
unconventional usage - familiar?

Richard Clark wrote in message . ..
On 12 Nov 2004 06:07:50 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
I'll bet you money that a well designed, dedicated, tunable
antenna can achieve a better SWR than any discone.
I don't want your money (nor your ganja). Time and tide won't wait
for you to offer an example either. :-)



Don't take my word for it...go measure
and compare for yourself...


S.

On 12 Nov 2004 12:16:27 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
Don't take my word for it
Never entered my mind to do that.
...go measure and compare for yourself...
Been there, done that. Time and tide are not still for the
expectation of ganja-man's example. :-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Dr. Slick wrote:
I'm certain that one of two things (or a
combo of both) did the trick, but i wanted to
see if any of you seasoned antenna boys could
guess what the problem was.

Dear Dr -

This is just a WAG, but were you supporting the dipole on an aluminum
ladder at first? Then substituted a non-metalic support?

Thanks for the interesting topic - I see it has long legs!

Lee H, NB7F
antenna boy...

Dr. Slick wrote:
"(1)A properly tuned and positioned dipole will
be resonant at only one frequency.
(2)Double-dips are a bad sign, and the return loss suffers."

(1) - Nope, just not true.
(2) - Not true either. (see #1)

With the two 'dips' not being harmonically related, it
appears that there is some 'other' reason, the feed line
for one, or something near the antenna (a person for instance?).
'Doc

'Doc wrote:
Dr. Slick wrote:
"(1)A properly tuned and positioned dipole will
be resonant at only one frequency.
(2)Double-dips are a bad sign, and the return loss suffers."

(1) - Nope, just not true.
(2) - Not true either. (see #1)

With the two 'dips' not being harmonically related, it
appears that there is some 'other' reason, the feed line
for one, or something near the antenna (a person for instance?).
'Doc

He said something about radials. Radials not attached to the
antenna are like parasitic elements. Two shorter radials will
resonate at a higher frequency than two longer radials.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Richard Clark wrote in message . ..
On 12 Nov 2004 12:16:27 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
Don't take my word for it
Never entered my mind to do that.
...go measure and compare for yourself...
Been there, done that. Time and tide are not still for the
expectation of ganja-man's example. :-)



Like i said, i'm willing to bet money.

But your stubborness and inability
to receive new information has kept you
ignorant this long, so why should you
ever change? Stay the way you are
and always have been...


Slick

On 13 Nov 2004 15:36:02 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
But your stubborness and inability to receive new information
What new information? Time and tide washes over empty claims. :-)

Quit tokin' on your spliff and name a simple "marijuana garden variety
dipole" antenna that outperforms a broadband
Discone
Biconical Dipole
Rhombic
Log Periodic Dipole

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Along those same lines: did you swap a metal mast for a fiberglass one?

NB7F
antenna boy

Richard Clark wrote in message . ..
On 13 Nov 2004 15:36:02 -0800, (Dr. Slick) wrote:
But your stubborness and inability to receive new information
What new information? Time and tide washes over empty claims. :-)


So the time and tide will wash over your
empty brain too!


Quit tokin' on your spliff and name a simple "marijuana garden variety
dipole" antenna that outperforms a broadband
Discone
Biconical Dipole
Rhombic
Log Periodic Dipole


Don't need to. "Jack of all trades and master of
none" applies to broadband amplifiers AND antennas as
well.


S.