On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 19:18:38 +0100, Dan Andersson
wrote:

One of the licensees are an Israeli supplier of RFID systems. You need to
check on the www.e-antenna.com for any references to them.

Hi Dan,

That's worse than vanity publishing. At least hard copy publishers
limit their quota of goof-ball articles due to the cost of ink.
Anyway, an Israeli supplier is hardly the end-all be-all on this
topic.

The rubber duck antennas are mostly to sensitive to metallic objects in the
proximity. There was actually good reasons to choose the EH but as the cost
for a helical was counted in cents, a multi dollar cost for an EH
replacement was a definitively showstopper.

Telling us "good reasons" were nixed by something else passes an
ocean's worth of water under the bridge. In the old days (and
possibly still) girls who didn't care for certain fellow's invitations
would put them off by saying they were washing their hair that night.

I'm afraid the eh/cfa/what-have-you are as plug ugly as that fellow,
but "something" has to be said so as to not hurt feelings.

The claim to be cheap could probably be true for a commercial AM transmitter
as you need a significant lesser amount of property to house it.

You are suggesting that antenna economy doesn't scale with decrease of
wavelength? Odd. You still have the same building either way.

As I was writing about VHF antennas, the amount of property needed is not
really anything to do with cost...

A resistor in the air makes VHF contacts too.

Unfortunately, the debate in this matter tends to go religious and that
excludes any real possibility to neither debunk nor confirm the EH. Pity.

You dismiss my comments as stupid, but you chose to respond to them
instead of Tom's professional testing results. That speaks a good
deal about religious affiliation.

You also skipped my technical discussion to focus on the
inconsequential. This is self-fulfilling about being stupid. There
are measured results out there that exhibit the eh as being a poor
performer compared to the short monopole it would compete with
(nevermind the full antenna it is supposed to replace).

Basically, if you cannot see the antenna, you can't hear it.
Fortunately you can stick anything in the air at VHF to compete on
this basis. Unfortunately (for the eh/cfa/what-have-you) both the
price and complexity don't stand a chance in competition with the
rubber duckie - that's pretty stupid too.

What is this religion called?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Frank's wrote:

I think the EH is the same idea as the CFA; in which case the following
paper
says it all: http://www.fi.uba.ar/materias/6654/d...CFAantenna.pdf.

It is hard to imagine going to these lengths to debunk nonsense, but I guess
it is the only way.

And, as we periodically see here, even going to these lengths aren't
completely adequate.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:
Frank's wrote:

I think the EH is the same idea as the CFA; in which case the following
paper
says it all: http://www.fi.uba.ar/materias/6654/d...CFAantenna.pdf.

It is hard to imagine going to these lengths to debunk nonsense, but I guess
it is the only way.

And, as we periodically see here, even going to these lengths aren't
completely adequate.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

That's because the EH antenna and the CFA antenna are based on a
religion or faith, not on science.

No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

73 Tom

wrote:
No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Frank's" wrote in message
news:2yUXf.18997$B_1.11490@edtnps89...
Recently heard about EH antennas and have done some research into them
including reading some articles in this newsgroup. It is begining ti
sound very much like my friends homemade FM/TV antenna. My friend being
short on money fastened an old bicycle rim to a piece of galvanized
pipe( axel stuck in the pipe) Feedline was connected from the center o
the wheel to a point on the outer rim. I had repeated told my friend
that something like this would never work and he demonstrated to me
that it did.. I theink the EH antenna is a lot like this old wheel,
just about anything placed on a mast with work to some degree. In this
case a very poor antenna allowed my friend to receive 2 TV stations and
4 or 5 FM radio stations. This was a vast improvement over the 0 tv and
Fm stations he was receving before putting up his "antenna" Would it be
appropriate to say that an EH antenna is more like a coupler that
utilises the antenna support structure(tower/mast) and feedline as the
radiating elements of the antenna?.

I think the EH is the same idea as the CFA; in which case the following
paper
says it all: http://www.fi.uba.ar/materias/6654/d...CFAantenna.pdf.

It is hard to imagine going to these lengths to debunk nonsense, but I
guess
it is the only way.

Frank

I have to admit that at one time I too thought a viable antenna could me
made from lumped values of inductance and capacitance. I was about 12 or 13
at the time. I am also thinking my analogy with the bicycle rim antenna may
not be so far off. LOL

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.

:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)


Aww Cecil, does every thread have to turn into that? 8^)

-73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Cecil Moore wrote:

wrote:

No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.


:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)

Cecil

Please drop it. Not every subject is an attack on you, and the rest
should not be used as an opportunity for your propoganda.

It is very tiring.

tom
K0TAR

wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
No matter what facts multiple independent sources submit, those who
have faith will ignore the facts.
:-) That apparently includes individuals with faith in the
lumped circuit model under conditions where it is known to
fail. :-)

Aww Cecil, does every thread have to turn into that? 8^)


At least it isn't fractals, although it is getting almost that bad.


Yeah, at least Cecil isn't threatening to sue anyone! ;^)

- 73 de mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:
Yeah, at least Cecil isn't threatening to sue anyone! ;^)

Sue asked me not to do that. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp