Roy Lewallen, W7EL wrote:
"I don`t think that`s a valid excuse."

That old authors were satisfied with approximations may have less to do
with ignorance than with not having computers and programs to make
analysis fast and easy. The computer gurus have done well. A seconndary
effect of a paucity of computer power is a requirement for more
measurements. As the title of this thread is:"Accuracy of Antenna
Testing Ranges". measurement is still a concern.

As one who was doing plenty of tests and measurements 50 years ago, I`d
like to testify that if I could get 1-dB accuracy, I was satisfied.
Bailey may not have thought that was good enough accuracy, but I think
it was realistic for the period in the field. I`m sure the NBS did
better. But for ordinary purposes. 1 dB is probably good enough for
graphs and tables to be comparable in accuracy to the measurements you
can make. Of course, everyone wants complete accuracy.

Richard Fry`s and Arnold Bailey`s tables were within 1-dB. I think it`s
satisfactory.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI