Dear MK:
You speculated about the performance of some antennas. Performance
includes antenna gain distribution and ionospheric propagation. The
programs that I, and others, mentioned would provide you with meaningful
performance numbers. I thought that you might wish to know the performance
of the antennas you discussed over the paths mentioned (and other paths).
Such knowledge might reduce the uncertainty of the speculations. It is an
engineering sort of thing. Not all are enamored of changes in entropy.

Please disregard my suggestion. It was not matched to your desires.

Mac N8TT
--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
wrote in message
oups.com...

J. Mc Laughlin wrote:
Dear MK (NM5K):

I do not understand. Why speculate? In the over forty years
that I
have been involved with the prediction of HF propagation, huge
progress has
transpired in the ease with which one may investigate the issues that
seem
to be of interest.

I'm not sure I understand. Why speculate about what? Verticals vs
dipoles?
Or do you mean propagation only? Or you talking about qround quality
per a
certain area?

Today, one may download and run a series of computer programs
that will
provide statistically significant answers to your questions. The
programs
have evolved over decades and are refined.
Go to:
http://elbert.its.bldrdoc.gov/hf.html

As Reg might say: ready to run.

Numbers tell the story. Enjoy.

Tell what story? I might try downloading them, but what is it I'm
trying to find out?
What are my questions? I'm not overly keen on downloading a potentially
large
program, I then have to install, and take up more room, without knowing
what it is
I want to do with it, or even what it does... You are leaving me in the
dark too
much as to what this program does...Even they don't give a real
description.. MK

J. Mc Laughlin wrote:
Dear MK:
You speculated about the performance of some antennas.
Performance
includes antenna gain distribution and ionospheric propagation. The
programs that I, and others, mentioned would provide you with
meaningful
performance numbers. I thought that you might wish to know the
performance
of the antennas you discussed over the paths mentioned (and other
paths).
Such knowledge might reduce the uncertainty of the speculations. It
is an
engineering sort of thing. Not all are enamored of changes in
entropy.

Please disregard my suggestion. It was not matched to your
desires.

If you say so...I just wanted to know what the program does.. I don't
have a lot
of room on my drive, and when they start talking about "install"
programs, ect,
it makes me think the program is pretty large. I don't think I really
"speculated"
about the antennas. I just described my results with them. I did
speculate as to
why I have to bump up the ground qualities in the modeling programs to
match my
real life results. But I think Richards theory about the elevated
performance
was about as good as any. I may try some of the programs later. I need
to get a
new drive..My present one is crammed full..I have to shuffle junk
around to make
room for big programs. My flight sim, and 1000's of old pictures I
store, hog all
my room...Not to mention a zillion zip files...I'm like a packrat when
it comes
to data....:/ Time for a new big drive...I rebuilt my puter last
summer, but
not the drive yet...I'm still on a puny 6.8 g. I need about a 100 g...
BTW...I'm not sure why my type is constantly messed up as far as the
lines, etc.
I'm using google, and I *hate* their post entry window...It doesn't
autowrap like
I'm used to, and I never know how to make it look normal...If you try
to let it
autowrap the lines, it just types off to the right forever...I never
had this
problem with the old google...If I try to match the width of the
previous post,
it still usually ends up all goofed up...Don't worry...It's not an
excess of wine
causing the problem. :/
MK