On Sun, 14 May 2006 14:43:53 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Buck wrote:
. . .
If it performs as well as you claim it does, or if it is similar to
the performance of an EH per size,(for example, hypothetically
speaking, a 3 foot antenna performs as well as a 1/2 wave vertical 20
meter antenna), and if the cost and skill level required for building
the antenna is suitable to me, I might be interested in purchasing the
plans for your antenna.
. . .

You must mean, "If it performs as well as the EH antenna claims to
perform." If it can do that, it's miraculous indeed. It's no trick to
make an antenna perform as well as an EH -- a 3 foot high (fat) vertical
performs as well as a 3 foot high EH.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


You got it right. I take it you aren't a fan of the EH design?

I would love to see the EH and the RoomCap in an antenna shootout
against the screwdriver and texas bugcatcher.


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

HERE A FEW RESULTS:

QRV with RoomCap antenna on 80m

On May 15th, 2006 I was QRV on 80 m during 1 1/2 hour.
Tcvr: TS-50 (100 W PEP), QRG = 3.770 - 3.787 Mhz
Antenna: RoomCap with 1.66m radiator length
installed on my car. SWR = 1.0
QTH: Peripheral part of city of Basel.

Conditions: The band was weak with a lot of QRN.

Here follows the contacts and the
received signal reports:

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT


With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX

Felix wrote:

Roy Lewallen Wrote:

Buck wrote:
. . .
If it performs as well as you claim it does, or if it is similar to
the performance of an EH per size,(for example, hypothetically
speaking, a 3 foot antenna performs as well as a 1/2 wave vertical
20
meter antenna), and if the cost and skill level required for building
the antenna is suitable to me, I might be interested in purchasing
the
plans for your antenna.
. . .

You must mean, "If it performs as well as the EH antenna claims to
perform." If it can do that, it's miraculous indeed. It's no trick to
make an antenna perform as well as an EH -- a 3 foot high (fat)
vertical
performs as well as a 3 foot high EH.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


HERE A FEW RESULTS:

QRV with RoomCap antenna on 80m

On May 15th, 2006 I was QRV on 80 m during 1 1/2 hour.
Tcvr: TS-50 (100 W PEP), QRG = 3.770 - 3.787 Mhz
Antenna: RoomCap with 1.66m radiator length
installed on my car. SWR = 1.0
QTH: Peripheral part of city of Basel.

Conditions: The band was weak with a lot of QRN.

Here follows the contacts and the
received signal reports:

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT


With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX



Small mobile antennas (in terms of wavelength) aren't generally very
efficient. The above test only shows you can make contacts. It
doesn't address efficiency or field strength in relation to
a similar, but larger antenna. Have you put the plans online
for this thing, or are you just using them to augment your
net worth?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Ah, the "it works because I made contacts with the following DX"
antenna argument.

This may be an extremely compelling way of measuring performance of an
antenna system if done correctly.

It's certainly the most compelling kind of marketing argument snagging
prospective "magic antenna" buyers, especially those who don't have
another antenna up for comparison. But is there a way to make such an
anecdotal claim and have it mean something?

I'm thinking something along the lines of probability of making contact
with a station with identical equipment, averaged over a very very long
time.

If you know the statistical ionospheric loss for the path, the power
levels involved, and antenna gain (or LOSS) you can calculate such a
thing.

I've heard an argument recently that a particular antenna system must
not be too inefficient because it was able to produce contacts with
stations in Australia and New Zealand. The data below are in the same
category.

How do you know that the RoomCap antenna contacts were not made because
the stations on the OTHER END have much MUCH better antennas?

The dynamic range of signals present on the amateur bands is enormous.
You could have an antenna with a gain of -35dBi and still make regular
contacts. That doesn't mean it's good. How about if we stick to dB
gain relative to some simple reference antenna or the isotropic for
antenna reporting?

Don't get me wrong, you can have tons of fun with a bad antenna. I'm
sure that all the great DX I can work with my 100 feet of magnet wire
at 30 feet is largely due to the stations on the other end, and if
you're doing the best you can given the limitations of the situation,
then you're holding up your end of the DX bargain.

I worked 9M2CNC the other day on 17m with my antenna system! Does that
mean I get to sell it for $190 to suckers? Or does it just mean that
the propagation was good, the station on the other end was good, and
I'm managing to not turn all of my 100W into local heating?

73,
Dan
N3OX






HERE A FEW RESULTS:

QRV with RoomCap antenna on 80m

On May 15th, 2006 I was QRV on 80 m during 1 1/2 hour.
Tcvr: TS-50 (100 W PEP), QRG = 3.770 - 3.787 Mhz
Antenna: RoomCap with 1.66m radiator length
installed on my car. SWR = 1.0
QTH: Peripheral part of city of Basel.

Conditions: The band was weak with a lot of QRN.

Here follows the contacts and the
received signal reports:

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT


With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX



Small mobile antennas (in terms of wavelength) aren't generally very
efficient. The above test only shows you can make contacts. It
doesn't address efficiency or field strength in relation to
a similar, but larger antenna. Have you put the plans online
for this thing, or are you just using them to augment your
net worth?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Felix HB9ABX



Small mobile antennas (in terms of wavelength) aren't generally very
efficient. The above test only shows you can make contacts. It
doesn't address efficiency or field strength in relation to
a similar, but larger antenna. Have you put the plans online
for this thing, or are you just using them to augment your
net worth?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH


He is definitely holding them hostage to his profit. You will note
that he has not responded to the fact that he requires the buyer to
abide by his agreement BEFORE he will show them the agreement.


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Dear friends,

I am very well aware of what you mean.
Read my part "Evaluation of HF Antennas" on my homepage
and then, the many comparisons of the RoomCap with
many other, well known antennes, which were made
side on side, also found on my page.

I think, the real comparitive results is the only one that counts
for an antenna.

With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX

I think, the real comparitive results is the only one that counts
for an antenna.

With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX


That is only the indication that antenna works.

The REAL comparative results are the measurements done on the test range and
compared to antenna that you claim to be as good or better.
Another indication of performance would be to model the antenna in question
vs. "standard" like full size vertical.
Another meaningful test would be to compare RoomCap antenna to another
efficient mobile antenna like TexasBugcatcher or Screwdriver, on the same
car, taking field strength measurements.

If it is so good as you claim, normally one would apply for patent and make
millions by selling it. Claiming miracles and asking for money to find out
what it is, is fishing for fools.

Hams are (or were) known to be honest, gentlemen and willing to share their
ideas with others for advancement of our art. Looks like lately we have
influx of "magicians" claiming to outperform real antennas with some
miniatures. So far no winners!

Good Luck.

Yuri, K3BU, ex OK3BU

On Tue, 16 May 2006 11:24:00 +0000, Felix
wrote:


Here follows the contacts and the
received signal reports:

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT


With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX


Felix, first of all, there needs to be a comparison with other
antennas over a number of different days with different conditions.
Secondly, I can't believe 59 reports from DX stations (I know, this
puts you into a handicap situation.) The problem is that many DX
stations will report 59 and ask you to repeat your call or name a
hundred times. The test really needs to be handled in an antenna
shootout of sorts. I have a 20 meter hamstick on my car and I often
get 59 reports from dx as well as CONUS stations. When band
conditions are well, I can get a 59 signal from a qrp rig. The real
test of the antenna will be with comparing the reception and reports
with the weakest stations. It takes a tremendous power change to
change a strong signal's report.



Additionally, you claim to be the creator of this antenna. This is
also a problem since you are trying to profit from it's plans. You
don't have calibrated or calculated gain/loss, bandwidth or radiation
patterns. What's to say your antenna is any better than the grasswire
antenna if you haven't compared them?




--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:36:28 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:


Hams are (or were) known to be honest, gentlemen and willing to share their
ideas with others for advancement of our art. Looks like lately we have
influx of "magicians" claiming to outperform real antennas with some
miniatures. So far no winners!

Good Luck.

Do you remember the antenna that came out in the middle to late 70's?
It was a dipole antenna with a specially designed cobra-head that
tuned it to any HF frequency. The SWR was virtually flat across all
bands from 160 meters to 10 meters regardless of the length of wire.
No tuner needed! Several companies bought one and tried to
disassemble them. The result was always a mess of broken parts.
x-rays were fooled by the number of parts, but someone was successful
in taking one apart and yet leaving the actual connected parts of the
antenna together. It turns out the antenna was nothing but a 50 ohm
resister surrounded by many useless, broken parts frozen in the epoxy
used to seal and hide the true design of the antenna.

I wonder if that genius is still alive and well?


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

"Buck" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:36:28 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:


Hams are (or were) known to be honest, gentlemen and willing to share
their
ideas with others for advancement of our art. Looks like lately we have
influx of "magicians" claiming to outperform real antennas with some
miniatures. So far no winners!

Good Luck.

Do you remember the antenna that came out in the middle to late 70's?
It was a dipole antenna with a specially designed cobra-head that
tuned it to any HF frequency. The SWR was virtually flat across all
bands from 160 meters to 10 meters regardless of the length of wire.
No tuner needed! Several companies bought one and tried to
disassemble them. The result was always a mess of broken parts.
x-rays were fooled by the number of parts, but someone was successful
in taking one apart and yet leaving the actual connected parts of the
antenna together. It turns out the antenna was nothing but a 50 ohm
resister surrounded by many useless, broken parts frozen in the epoxy
used to seal and hide the true design of the antenna.

I wonder if that genius is still alive and well?
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW


Yea, it was and believe still is MAXCOM magik flat antenna :-)
You can fool some people.....

Yuri