"stefano" wrote in message
...
Hello,

After sometime ,I am here again to inform all the Om community interested
about the last news on the EH antenna.
The antenna was tested, following the FCC rules ,by Stu Graham a important
broadcasting engineer.


Uhhh, what FCC "rule" describes antenna testing?

Ed
WB6WSN

Hello,
I thought it was useful add here some words from Ted:
--------------
THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY: The test report shows there were 15 measurements
at various distances out to 10 miles from the antenna on each of 6 radials.
Then the data is plotted to show that there is some directivity due to local
interference (power lines). Finally, a RMS value of all data points presents
a value of 0.4 dB less than the standard AM Broadcast antenna. That value is
then used in the News Release and plotted on a curve to show that even
though the center of the EH antenna is at 0.1 wavelengths, the radiation is
only 0.4 dB less than a standard 1/4 wavelength tower with 120 radials. The
curve also shows that if the center of the EH Antenna is raised to 1/4
wavelength, the radiation from it would exceed that from the standard tower
by more than 2 dB.

For the AM Broadcaster, the primary benefit is that he can have an antenna
that does not require any ground. He can even locate the antenna on top a
building. We are currently developing a free standing antenna that will only
require enough ground for a base. The end user (the Broadcaster) has no
interest in the latest technology, he only wants to make money. For those
that have a station, in most cases he can sell the land his antenna is now
on, install an EH Antenna on a small plot, then sell the existing land and
put money in his pocket. For those that want to build a new station, the
land cost has been prohibitive - until now.

Ted
"stefano" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hello,

After sometime ,I am here again to inform all the Om community interested
about the last news on the EH antenna.
The antenna was tested, following the FCC rules ,by Stu Graham a important
broadcasting engineer.
For any news and to read any data on it (including the complete report
from
the consultant) please go he
http://www.eh-antenna.com/AM_Broadcast.htm

Please read all the docs related.

Three years ago I put on this forum a special announce about this
important
discovery.
Now we can publish all the evidences we were right.
There is no doubt, the so called "EH mode " is real and alive.
During the test the antenna was installed at about 1/10 of a wavelenght .
On this position alomst equalled (only -0.4 db) a perfect 1/4 standard
tower
with 120 radials.
The real important feature is we can trade height for gain.
When the antenna is installed at 1/4 wav. it shows a 2.5 db of gain ( yes
,
GAIN for a ground wave over a standard tower)

very high efficiency
very large bandwidth
very compact size

For the ham applications a new era is approaching. Antennas on 40, 80 or
160
metres are very small on size, showing the same or better efficiency over
a
standard full size vertical dipole.

I wanted just share this great news with all interested people.
My best 73's
Stefano IK5IIR

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:37:53 GMT, "stefano" wrote:

Hello,
I thought it was useful add here some words from Ted:

Hi Stefano,

You forgot to include that the eh is down, -10 to -30 dB from FCC
station field measurements:
http://www.eh-antenna.com/documents/EHANTENNA_proof.pdf
All the while requiring a tower and top hat to perform so poorly.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Stefano,
There appear to be a lot of "if's" in the 'certification',
and more conjecture than measured fact. Like most (should
say ~all~) press releases, this one can be used on gardens to
increase the growth rate. Just remember to wash the produce
carefully before use.
'Doc

Hi Doc and all,
I think you don't want read the document.
is not a press release.
Please ask to Mr. Graham
He can answer any question
Stefano

"'Doc" ha scritto nel messaggio
...


Stefano,
There appear to be a lot of "if's" in the 'certification',
and more conjecture than measured fact. Like most (should
say ~all~) press releases, this one can be used on gardens to
increase the growth rate. Just remember to wash the produce
carefully before use.
'Doc

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:55:51 GMT, "stefano" wrote:
Hi Doc and all,
I think you don't want read the document.
is not a press release.
Please ask to Mr. Graham
He can answer any question
Stefano

Hi Stefano,
I think you haven't read the document.
what you describe is press release.
Please read
http://www.eh-antenna.com/documents/EHANTENNA_proof.pdf
which shows poor performance
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Stefano,
It isn't? Then why does it say it's a press
release? And you are right, I didn't read ALL
the documents. After going through most of them
I had seen enough to know that my 'garden' wasn't
large enough for ALL the documents.
I'm sorry Stefano, until there is documented
proof from a reliable source, presented in a
straight forward manner, my credulity meter will
stay stuck on 'B.S.'...
'Doc

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:16:13 -0500, 'Doc wrote:
I'm sorry Stefano, until there is documented
proof from a reliable source, presented in a
straight forward manner, my credulity meter will
stay stuck on 'B.S.'...
'Doc

Hi Doc,

The documentation is there, it is in the appendix no one reads
(especially Stefano). It shows quite distinctly how this antenna goes
straight into the toilet out beyond line of sight (that should show
some change in the Neilsens for an AM station). Somewhere between -10
and -30dB compared to the standard quarterwave antenna. It shows up
clear as a bell on the charts (the test engineer drew the FCC standard
in RED and the test data plunges like a russian submarine). They
could use this stuff in the economics department of an University
class in how to kill business without really trying.

Of course the introductory material reads like the Playboy After Dark
advisor. They used the line of sight numbers to show that the best
numbers for the eh equaled the worst field readings the FCC considered
allowable. In other (their) words "just as efficient or better."
P.T. Barnum showed more class when he fleeced suckers.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard,
It's just the same old advertising 'gimmick', tell'em what
you want them to believe, then hide the truth in all the
small print and numbers. I think the data furnished by the
Mr. Graham is ligitimate, it's just been massaged by the sales
people till it says something that isn't a fact. I also think
that Stefano may not have read ALL of the documents as you
suggested. He doesn't really sound like he's as naive as he
seems...
'Doc

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:16:13 -0500, 'Doc wrote:



Stefano,
It isn't? Then why does it say it's a press
release? And you are right, I didn't read ALL
the documents. After going through most of them
I had seen enough to know that my 'garden' wasn't
large enough for ALL the documents.
I'm sorry Stefano, until there is documented
proof from a reliable source, presented in a
straight forward manner, my credulity meter will
stay stuck on 'B.S.'...
'Doc

Not sure which documents y'all are talking about, by my Sept. issue of
RadCom arrived today, with a review of the Arno Elettronica EH
antennas. Bottom line, the EH 20m. and 40m. antennas, transmitting to
different stations, were received as .5 to 3 S-units down from the
reference transmitting antenna, a G5RV.

EH sounds like a sorta okay antenna for those with limited space.

Bob
k5qwg