On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:38:10 GMT, "
wrote:

|
|"Richard Harrison" wrote in message
...
| Reg, G4FGQ wrote:
| "Naturally, laboratories can differ one from another."
|
| A lab may put its stamp of approval on your instrument, but your best
| assurance may be measurement of known values. The temperature of
| ice-water or the voltage of new dry cells, for example You usually can
| try several dry cells for confirmation or averaging.
|
| In antennas, one strategy for successful gain determination is
| comparison with an antenna of known gain.
|
|Whow, thats a good idea, write it up for QST. They are looking for pearls of
|wisdom
|that can be useful for ham radio operators so that we may maintain our
|perceived
|leadership of the art of antennas......'Compare with a antenna of known
|gain'...... Revolutionary!
|Now why hasn't any Guru on this group thought of this before today?

Perhaps because it's so commonplace that it doesn't bear mentioning.

|Now we have to decide what we use to measure the gain and more important
|not to compare or to compare at a single recieving point especially if the
|receiving depends
| on skip or propagation. Is it possible that Guru's are unaware that
|elevation angles
|can be different when comparing antennas? Another gem for the ARRL and
|provided
|solely by the leading gurus of AMATEUR radio operators no less. Ofcourse we
|need
|a telephone link with the country that we wish to hear the transmission,
|some thing on the simple lines of
|...."can you hear me now"
| question as we switch antennas
|between a dipole and a drape / curtain array every 5 minutes

If you believe that precision antenna gain measurements are made under
ionospheric propagation conditions, you are clearly delusional. But I
repeat myself.