Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:33:55 +0100, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
wrote:

Whereas such antenna predictors seem to feature in amateur usage,
does anyone, anywhere, in the world of amateur radio have an
understanding of the underlying principles involved in
predicting the performance of antennae, or have we all,
regrettably, become indistinguishable from
consumerist CBers or beginner licensees?

I understand how antenna work and how to predict performance. I can
even do it without 4NEC2 or other antenna modeling program. For
example, the uglier the antenna, the better it works. Antennas that
are more expensive, bigger, and in violation of local building
ordinances, work the best. Experimental prototype antennas always
work while the production versions never seem to work as well. If
there are two ways to assemble an antenna, the wrong way will have
higher gain, lower VSWR, or both. High gain, small size, or wide
bandwidth; pick any two. Using these rules of thumb and others,
anyone can predict how well an antenna will perform by inspection and
without using computer models, Smith charts, or tedious calculations.

As for your inability to distinguish yourself from consumerist CBers
and beginning licensees, it might be because you have most of the
characteristics of both.


Gareth once complained about a mobile CB set-up he installed in a 4x4
couldn’t reach further than a quarter mile. That’s all you need to know
about Gareth and radio.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur