|
Just an update for anyone following this thread. I tried the pvc lower half
with good results. I just did a very loose spiral of copper wire around the pvc. I was wrong on a couple of things, though. The antenna in the picture has 12" of copper pipe at the bottom, not 18". The pvc section was 18". Anyway, there was no difference in performance but it's still not flexible enough for the trunk mount. The other thing I did was compare it to a trunk-mounted 3 ft. antenna by antenna specialists. The 2 signal reports I got showed that my antenna won. The numbers I got from 2 people in different directions were 5 and 2 db on my antenna and 2 .5 and 1 on the Antenna Specialists. It's up rather close to the rear window. I wonder if either antenna would do better closer to the back of the trunk. Chris "Chris" wrote in message nk.net... I have constructed a homeade antenna that is mounted on a trunk-lip mount on a Nissan Sentra. The bottom is 18" of 1/2" copper pipe with a 3/8" theaded adapter soldered in the bottom. There is a 9" long peice of pvc with a 2" diameter 6ga. copper coil around it. Then there is 4" more copper pipe with a 3ft' stainless tip on top. The problem is that it would be too easy to bend the trunk with copper pipe. I thought about a spring but then the whole thing would bend too much when the trunk is opened. If I move the coil down below roof level, the SWR goes way up. I thought about using pvc for the lower part but I can't quite figure out how to construct it. I may take some pictures of what I have. Stay tuned...... |
|
Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. Frank as well as you still believes the earth is flat. |
|
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 05:10:57 -0400, wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004 19:53:19 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: wrote: Huh......... A bent over 9 foot whip has a very noticeable Loss compared to a efficient 4 or 5 foot vertical. how do you know have you modeled it hoople head? Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech In your opinion. The subject has nothing to do with that. It has to do with a bent over antenna becoming a poor antenna. Yeah, if you really want to improve the efficiency of your antenna, bend it over and put the high voltage node close to a large mass of metal. LOL. |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:00:56 -0500, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote: Lancer wrote in news:4drtc0tu0hje27kmlo8lgcqkhqhgmk5k68@ 4ax.com: Yeah, if you really want to improve the efficiency of your antenna, bend it over and put the high voltage node close to a large mass of metal. LOL. What do you think happens when you drive down the road with a coil antenna, the whip folds back and almost touches itself. Well mine doesn't and a decent antenna would have a stiff enough whip not to do that. He was talking about bending it over like the "Barney Phife" mobile. |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:01:39 -0500, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote: Lancer wrote in news:nartc0lgg15n6sbnhpalkg87uup40v96o8@ 4ax.com: Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? Yes, very many. I thought I was responding to I Am Not George. Too many Georges around here to keep track of.. |
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)itoldyouiamnotiamnotge wrote:
Lancer wrote in news:nartc0lgg15n6sbnhpalkg87uup40v96o8@ 4ax.com: Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? take it away lil bro, ROTFLMMFAO |
Lancer wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 05:10:57 -0400, wrote: On 14 Jun 2004 19:53:19 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: wrote: Huh......... A bent over 9 foot whip has a very noticeable Loss compared to a efficient 4 or 5 foot vertical. how do you know have you modeled it hoople head? Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech In your opinion. The subject has nothing to do with that. It has to do with a bent over antenna becoming a poor antenna. Yeah, if you really want to improve the efficiency of your antenna, bend it over and put the high voltage node close to a large mass of metal. LOL. I didnt say the whip was close to a large mass of metal I said bent over like a bow and that means in free space, assteroid. |
Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. |
|
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:14:44 -0400, (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: Landshark wrote: LOL!!! I love it. All I do is type Ditto to "LMAO" and notice Geo calls ME a hypocrite. He should talk, right BP. He defends Doug a known Felon, repeater jammer, porn poster, spammer, nut case. Leland defends Doug too, so George has no legs to stand on when calling other people hypocrites. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark _ Frank and Hall and both ran to defend N8WWM on many occasions, too. This little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell, "AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order. I have also NEVER defended any actions that Doug has been proven guilty of. That's only because you claim those reported by the FCC on the rainreport do not constitute guilt of which the FCC claims.. Nevertheless,,,here are but a few of your defenses of Dogie. As pertaining to his bust, taken from "king of clowns busted" and "n8wwm makes rainreport"" N3CVJ wrote: " .......the complaint was withdrawn because there was either insufficient evidence, or it was shown that Doug was not the person doing the jamming." No,,the complaint was NOT withdrawn, as is standard procedure, Dogie was sent a warning via certified snail mail, like the majority of other first time offenders. Here's my personal favorite personification fo what makes you the grand mastah poobah who holds court in the Hypocrite Hall....the one of you justifying Dogie's illegal actions by pointing to others....... "Whatever he did, he did because he doesn't like people like you, who have little respect for the law. Of course, we have the more entertaining, liberal, tear-jerking, choker you wrote in regards to Doug getting busted.... : I have a habit of standing up for the little guy, when a bunch of people gang up on them. especially when the little guy is right. Hahaha...no you don't Davie. In fact, you can illustrate NO thread, NO topic in which you "stood up for the little guy" where a " bunch of people gang up" on him. And Dogie was not right, at any time. The ONLY people you have ever defended in here have been N8, Lelnad, and Frank. In fact, google Dogie's call, along with "sandbagger" and you are right there in each and every thread, arguing vehemently and acting like Dogie's arm-chair lawyer,,,,joined by the three stooges of Frank, Lelnad, and Geogre. But,,,,let's illustrate how close you actually claimed you were to the situation........you wrote: "........there are people, that are in the know, that have filled me in on some of the smaller details". The FCC were the ones "in the know",,,not your mysterious non-existent "people". The complaint came from club members (those "in-the-know"). And then here is the one where you claim it could be Chuck-eye who was impersonating Dogie to frame him and the possibility was being investigated by the FCC.......hehhhehe......ah, never mind,,the post is there in those threads for all to enjoy,,,,, but don't say you didn't defend Dogie when he got busted. It's an outright lie. |
"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. I did the same thing with scaled down versions of the Saturn 5 booster for the moon program, but they only went to Geo's neighborhood. One of 'em hit him in the head. |
"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... "I ain't George either" wrote in : "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. I did the same thing with scaled down versions of the Saturn 5 booster for the moon program, but they only went to Geo's neighborhood. One of 'em hit him in the head. How long did it take you to think of that one randy? 6 seconds. Much less time than you dreaming you have a research facility in your trailer. |
"I ain't George either" wrote in message ... "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... "I ain't George either" wrote in : "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. I did the same thing with scaled down versions of the Saturn 5 booster for the moon program, but they only went to Geo's neighborhood. One of 'em hit him in the head. How long did it take you to think of that one randy? 6 seconds. Much less time than you dreaming you have a research facility in your trailer. Geo, I'm quite quick on my feet, and I'm an asshole. But then again, I'm not a malicious asshole. Most things I do are in good fun. The way I see things, albeit sometimes myopic, is that people need to understand that they don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. That's my purpose with most of my comments. Any of us could leave Earth tomorrow, and would it matter? Not a bit. To our families and friends, yes, but in the bigger picture, not at all. That's why I *sometimes* enjoy hassling you and others here. I have no hate for anyone here. You can't hurt me. The only individuals who *can* do that are people you allow to do so. Toodles until I again deem you worth my time, Randy |
In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Dave*Hall) On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:14:44 -0400, (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: Landshark wrote: LOL!!! I love it. All I do is type Ditto to "LMAO" and notice Geo calls ME a hypocrite. He should talk, right BP. He defends Doug a known Felon, repeater jammer, porn poster, spammer, nut case. Leland defends Doug too, so George has no legs to stand on when calling other people hypocrites. ****************Landshark _ Frank and Hall and both ran to defend N8WWM on many occasions, too. ......hmmmm, when did I ever do that? I seem to recall as early as Jan of 2001 that I didn't agree with his methods, but I also pointed out that he was just mirroring the behavior of those that didn't like his pro-legal position. And one of those people (and probably several of your "internet personalities") was you, Twisty. If I was defending him then I was also defending you. So what are you whining about? This little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell, "AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order. Oh really? I don't think I have ever typed "akc" in any of my posts until now. But just for kicks, let's see where this term originated: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...rp1. deja.com And if you want the first occurance of "AKC" in rrcb then: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...1.news.aol.com So have you found a job yet? Or do you still make your mommy work two jobs to support you? ============= http://tinyurl.com/ytcah http://tinyurl.com/2yor7 http://tinyurl.com/2sapq (Twisty cast the first stone) ============= "...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and are both too small to admit it." "...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough." "Athis is how proper communication wroks..." ---- Twistedhed ---- ============= -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:52:36 -0500, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote: wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. Stay on topic......What CB mobile antennas have you tested? |
itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge )
wrote: (I Am Not George) wrote in om: take it away lil bro, ROTFLMMFAO sorry to step on your toes. you know me and my antennas. no problem be my guest. these guys use watergates and s-meter readings to validate there so called tests lol |
In , wrote:
Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. Frank as well as you still believes the earth is flat. http://www.art.com/asp/sp.asp?PD=10036654&RFID=490797 -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
"I ain't George either" wrote in message ... "I ain't George either" wrote in message ... "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... "I ain't George either" wrote in : "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. I did the same thing with scaled down versions of the Saturn 5 booster for the moon program, but they only went to Geo's neighborhood. One of 'em hit him in the head. How long did it take you to think of that one randy? 6 seconds. Much less time than you dreaming you have a research facility in your trailer. Geo, I'm quite quick on my feet, and I'm an asshole. But then again, I'm not a malicious asshole. Most things I do are in good fun. The way I see things, albeit sometimes myopic, is that people need to understand that they don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. That's my purpose with most of my comments. Any of us could leave Earth tomorrow, and would it matter? Not a bit. To our families and friends, yes, but in the bigger picture, not at all. That's why I *sometimes* enjoy hassling you and others here. I have no hate for anyone here. You can't hurt me. The only individuals who *can* do that are people you allow to do so. Toodles until I again deem you worth my time, Randy Very well said Randy, Thank you!!!! Landshark -- Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. |
"Steveo" wrote in message ... itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge wrote: wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. Show pictures or stfu with your lies. LMAO!!! I can picture a Forrest Gump looking George Busch wa3moj sitting there trying to build his Revel models yelling "Momma" Landshark Now watch the foul language hate filled post come from him. -- That does suck..sometimes you're the windshield..sometimes you're the bug. |
|
|
Stay on topic......What CB mobile antennas have you tested? wilson 1000, wilson 5000, Firestick,dr.crow, 10k, 102 whip. workman, big momma, mr.coily, golden rod, homebrew, 55, aluminum 1/4 wave. these are off the top of my head. Good. Now what procedure did you use to test the antennas? |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 17:04:38 -0400,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Dave*Hall) On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:14:44 -0400, (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: Landshark wrote: LOL!!! I love it. All I do is type Ditto to "LMAO" and notice Geo calls ME a hypocrite. He should talk, right BP. He defends Doug a known Felon, repeater jammer, porn poster, spammer, nut case. Leland defends Doug too, so George has no legs to stand on when calling other people hypocrites. ****************Landshark _ Frank and Hall and both ran to defend N8WWM on many occasions, too. This little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell, "AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order. I have also NEVER defended any actions that Doug has been proven guilty of. That's only because you claim those reported by the FCC on the rainreport do not constitute guilt of which the FCC claims.. You are the one who is quick to point out that a criminal is not a true criminal until convicted. Yet you seem to conveniently forget that when the shoe is on the other foot. Nevertheless,,,here are but a few of your defenses of Dogie. As pertaining to his bust, taken from "king of clowns busted" and "n8wwm makes rainreport"" N3CVJ wrote: " .......the complaint was withdrawn because there was either insufficient evidence, or it was shown that Doug was not the person doing the jamming." I was merely offering an alternative explanations. No,,the complaint was NOT withdrawn, as is standard procedure, Dogie was sent a warning via certified snail mail, like the majority of other first time offenders. And just how would you know what Doug received? Here's my personal favorite personification fo what makes you the grand mastah poobah who holds court in the Hypocrite Hall....the one of you justifying Dogie's illegal actions by pointing to others....... "Whatever he did, he did because he doesn't like people like you, who have little respect for the law. Taken out of context, in the manner in which you presented it, that could apply to just about anyone. Of course, we have the more entertaining, liberal, tear-jerking, choker you wrote in regards to Doug getting busted.... : I have a habit of standing up for the little guy, when a bunch of people gang up on them. especially when the little guy is right. Hahaha...no you don't Davie. In fact, you can illustrate NO thread, NO topic in which you "stood up for the little guy" where a " bunch of people gang up" on him. You obviously are incapable of finding them. In the very beginning, I took a stand against those who ganged up on CBers for no other reason than they were "different". Later on, when it became apparent that the tide had shifted, I took the stand to support the rights of legal operators. And Dogie was not right, at any time. Maybe not his methods, but his attitude with respect to illegal CB operators is pretty much on the mark. The ONLY people you have ever defended in here have been N8, Lelnad, and Frank. When you and other like minded simpletons bring unfounded accusations and pure unadulterated lies forth and attempt to present them as truth, then yes, I will defend the honor of those you wish to smear. In fact, google Dogie's call, along with "sandbagger" and you are right there in each and every thread, arguing vehemently and acting like Dogie's arm-chair lawyer If not an outright lie, it is an extreme exaggeration. I do not condone some of the things which have happened here that you have attributed to Doug (Which there is still no solid proof of). The fact that my name appears in the same thread means nothing. Google Doug's call and "Twistedhed", and you will see similar results. Does this mean that you defend Doug too? But,,,,let's illustrate how close you actually claimed you were to the situation........you wrote: "........there are people, that are in the know, that have filled me in on some of the smaller details". Yea so? Since I do not know the intimate details of the situation, certain people kindly brought me up to speed. The FCC were the ones "in the know",,,not your mysterious non-existent "people". The FCC was one party to one of the issues. But they were not the only ones involved. There are other people who personally know people involved with the alleged "jamming" incident. They are in a far better position to offer insight than guys like you who only know what you read on the internet. The complaint came from club members (those "in-the-know"). Now you're catching on....... And then here is the one where you claim it could be Chuck-eye who was impersonating Dogie to frame him and the possibility was being investigated by the FCC. That's a lie. I don't even know Chuck. Unless it was offered as a hypothetical speculation in response to something equally preposterous. ......hehhhehe......ah, never mind,,the post is there in those threads for all to enjoy,,,,, but don't say you didn't defend Dogie when he got busted. It's an outright lie. I haven't defended anyone. I have only offered alternative explanations for certain events. YOU, of all people, who stand up for the rights of criminals to be criminals, (until they are convicted!) to stand here and accuse me of refusing to drive a guilty stake through the heart of another person (who just happens to be someone you don't like) before all the facts are in and the courts have ruled. I guess by this logic then you really ARE a federal criminal. The sign of a true sociopath. Abandon core principles when it suits you. THAT sir, makes you a grade "A" hypocrite. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |
"Landshark" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message ... itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge wrote: wrote in : Not really, have you tested any antennas? I have tested many antennas , have you? I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test? Name them. Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are repeatable. Show pictures or stfu with your lies. LMAO!!! I can picture a Forrest Gump looking George Busch wa3moj sitting there trying to build his Revel models yelling "Momma" Landshark Now watch the foul language hate filled post come from him. LOL, "mom, i glued my fingers to my pecker again"!" -- I won't retire, but I might retread. |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:22:33 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. Frank Did you try it in Barney Phife mode? The start of this thread was on car, it was suggested that you tie it down like a bow. Bows are bent 180 degrees, so it would have to be tied down to the same level as the base. I tried it and the minimum SWR point moved lower in frequency. Modeling it showed that the take off angle also increased. Maybe causing the effect you were seeing. |
Lancer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:22:33 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. Frank Did you try it in Barney Phife mode? The start of this thread was on car, it was suggested that you tie it down like a bow. Bows are bent 180 degrees, so it would have to be tied down to the same level as the base. I tried it and the minimum SWR point moved lower in frequency. Modeling it showed that the take off angle also increased. Maybe causing the effect you were seeing. Think you could talk flatside dx with it in that position? Which direction did it talk best? -- I won't retire, but I might retread. |
On 16 Jun 2004 12:18:50 GMT, Steveo
wrote: Lancer wrote: On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:22:33 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. Frank Did you try it in Barney Phife mode? The start of this thread was on car, it was suggested that you tie it down like a bow. Bows are bent 180 degrees, so it would have to be tied down to the same level as the base. I tried it and the minimum SWR point moved lower in frequency. Modeling it showed that the take off angle also increased. Maybe causing the effect you were seeing. Think you could talk flatside dx with it in that position? Which direction did it talk best? Steve; I didn't play with it all that much to see which direction it talked the best. Modeling, showed that the Max Horizontal field is broadside to the antenna and Max vertical is more inline with the direction that its bent. Does your news server carry alt.binaries.pictures.radio? I put a jpeg of it there. Red is The Hor field, Black is the Vert |
Lancer wrote:
Steve; I didn't play with it all that much to see which direction it talked the best. Modeling, showed that the Max Horizontal field is broadside to the antenna and Max vertical is more inline with the direction that its bent. Does your news server carry alt.binaries.pictures.radio? I put a jpeg of it there. Red is The Hor field, Black is the Vert Cool..thanks. -- I won't retire, but I might retread. |
|
From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech (Frank never tested any of the antennas.) I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. But,,,,there is supposed to be no skip... Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. =A0 It is. You failed to account for, or at least detail, a myriad of factors. Were you in a free zone? How near was the closest object? Did you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests? Did you repeat the test with the antenna on the opposite side of the vehicle? Did you move the vehicle around? A single day's atmospheric condition for a single test? One perfunctory test is meaningless in the context of science. (=A0Frank as well as you still believes the earth is flat.) -----=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =3D----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----=3D=3D Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =3D----- |
From: (I=A0Am=A0Not=A0George)
Frank Gilliland wrote: I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. i do that all the time praying it will flush it away lol _ Mercy sakes,,,,they say talking to one's self is no problem, it's when one begins answering one's self does the character flaw manifest. Geo's germ was caught by Frank. And how! |
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 17:04:38 -0400, (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Dave=A0Hall) On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:14:44 -0400, (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: Landshark wrote: LOL!!! I love it. All I do is type Ditto to "LMAO" and notice Geo calls ME a hypocrite. He should talk, right BP. He defends Doug a known Felon, repeater jammer, porn poster, spammer, nut case. Leland defends Doug too, so George has no legs to stand on when calling other people hypocrites. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark _ Frank and Hall and both ran to defend N8WWM on many occasions, too. This little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell, "AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order. I have also NEVER defended any actions that Doug has been proven guilty of. That's only because you claim those reported by the FCC on the rainreport do not constitute guilt of which the FCC claims.. You are the one who is quick to point out that a criminal is not a true criminal until convicted. Non-sequitur. Yet you seem to conveniently forget that when the shoe is on the other foot. It sure is,,each time the FCC makes a bust you agree with. _ Nevertheless,,,here are but a few of your defenses of Dogie. As pertaining to his bust, taken from "king of clowns busted" and "n8wwm makes rainreport"" N3CVJ wrote: " .......the complaint was withdrawn because there was either insufficient evidence, or it was shown that Doug was not the person doing the jamming." I was merely offering an alternative explanations. No,,the complaint was NOT withdrawn, as is standard procedure, Dogie was sent a warning via certified snail mail, like the majority of other first time offenders. And just how would you know what Doug received? What difference does that make? Try and remain relevant. The FCC lists all actions taken. You have maintained that once a person receives an NAL, that's it,,,you're guilty. You choose to agree with the FCC and their actions except when it occurs to one whom you defended vehemently. _ Here's my personal favorite personification fo what makes you the grand mastah poobah who holds court in the Hypocrite Hall....the one of you justifying Dogie's illegal actions by pointing to others....... "Whatever he did, he did because he doesn't like people like you, who have little respect for the law. Taken out of context, in the manner in which you presented it, that could apply to just about anyone. No Dave,,it's not taken out of context, as you referred to Dogie and his bust,,,,not "anyone". Yes, it could apply to just about anyone, but it applied to Dogie,,,,,so why attempt and obfuscate differently? You defended his behavior by pointing to another. In fact, you say it's MY fault for his behavior. _ Of course, we have the more entertaining, liberal, tear-jerking, choker you wrote in regards to Doug getting busted.... : I have a habit of standing up for the little guy, when a bunch of people gang up on them. especially when the little guy is right. Hahaha...no you don't Davie. In fact, you can illustrate NO thread, NO topic in which you "stood up for the little guy" where a " bunch of people gang up" on him. You obviously are incapable of finding them. In the very beginning, I took a stand against those who ganged up on CBers for no other reason than they were "different". Later on, when it became apparent that the tide had shifted, I took the stand to support the rights of legal operators. And Dogie was not right, at any time. Maybe not his methods, but his attitude with respect to illegal CB operators is pretty much on the mark. The ONLY people you have ever defended in here have been N8, Lelnad, and Frank. When you and other like minded simpletons bring unfounded accusations and pure unadulterated lies forth and attempt to present them as truth, then yes, I will defend the honor of those you wish to smear. =A0 Well, by all means, attempt to defend anyone you wish, but calling names is not the manner in which to justify your bull****, davie. That's almost as bad as pointing to another to justify one's behvavior. _ =A0In fact, google Dogie's call, along with "sandbagger" and you are right there in each and every thread, arguing vehemently and acting like Dogie's arm-chair lawyer If not an outright lie, it is an extreme exaggeration. I do not condone some of the things which have happened here that you have attributed to Doug (Which there is still no solid proof of). The fact that my name appears in the same thread means nothing. Google Doug's call and "Twistedhed", and you will see similar results. Does this mean that you defend Doug too? Difference is, once the google search is doen, one can read for themselves and see what took place, not what you tell people, as it has been illustrtaed time and time again that you say one thing and have to be shown you said the opposite at another point in time. In fact, your posts are chock full of contradictions and lies. _ But,,,,let's illustrate how close you actually claimed you were to the situation........you wrote: "........there are people, that are in the know, that have filled me in on some of the smaller details". Yea so? Since I do not know the intimate details of the situation, certain people kindly brought me up to speed. Yea? Tell ya' what...you name names and I'll name names..since you asked me first of how I knew what happened with Dogie.Who brought you up to speed, Davie,,,as only those involved know what took place...of course, one could read the FCC files, but you say that means nothing. _ The FCC were the ones "in the know",,,not your mysterious non-existent "people". The FCC was one party to one of the issues. But they were not the only ones involved. Same with just about every other action taken against those busted for interference. Of course there has to be other parties involved. Try and remain lucid and relevant. There are other people who personally know people involved with the alleged "jamming" incident. Damn,,,ya' think? They are in a far better position to offer insight than guys like you who only know what you read on the internet. There you go again,,ASSuming. The complaint came from club members (those "in-the-know"). Now you're catching on....... Catching on? Taht's rich. I'm the one that brought such to your attention back when you were talking **** and defending this felon. And then here is the one where you claim it could be Chuck-eye who was impersonating Dogie to frame him and the possibility was being investigated by the FCC. That's a lie. I don't even know Chuck. Unless it was offered as a hypothetical speculation in response to something equally preposterous. .. Whatever....,,it's there,,,you most certainly said it,,,,,,you also said it was your understanding that the FCC would investigate this angle........... .....hehhhehe......ah, never mind,,the post is there in those threads for all to enjoy,,,,, but don't say you didn't defend Dogie when he got busted. It's an outright lie. I haven't defended anyone. I have only offered alternative explanations for certain events. No Davie,,,,,you blamed me for Dogie's actions. You said he did what he did because of people like myself...that most certainly was not only a pathetic excuse, but a desperate and pathetic defense of one that was busted by the FCC. Odd how you always maintain one is a criminal for daring to speak about freebanding and talking dx, but when N8WWM is busted by the FCC, you offer reasons why he shouldn't be called a criminal. I am quite satisfied with your replies in this thread, Davie. You are shining. YOU, of all people, who stand up for the rights of criminals to be criminals, (until they are convicted!) to stand here and accuse me of refusing to drive a guilty stake through the heart of another person Here comes that exaggeration again you spoke of, davie. (who just happens to be someone you don't like) before all the facts are in and the courts have ruled. You are the one that ran to his defense. I didnt bring this matter to you,,,you entered yourself into the thread to blame me for n8's behaviors, case closed. I guess by this logic then you really ARE a federal criminal. Your logic. Only you and Geogre and Lelnad and Frank have called those who dx and freeband "federal criminals",..you have cried and cried that the term applies, illustratting your supreme ignorance of the term. Yet, when a federal entity (FCC), charged with carrying out punishments with no court hearings says N8WWM is guilty, you defend him, deny you did so, then defned him some more. Issues, Davie,,,,you have serious issues. The sign of a true sociopath. You're getting angry again and non-lucid. ASSuming status you neither have nor can attain is non-productive, delusional, and off-topic. Abandon core principles when it suits you. You have done just that by defending N8's repeated jamming actions while calling others a "federal criminal" for exercising their speech of topics of dx and freeband. A whack job and a hypocrite you are indeed. THAT sir, makes you a grade "A" hypocrite. Dave N3CVJ "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj Forest for the trees,,no wonder you and Frank adhere to each other like dingleberries. |
In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Frank*Gilliland) This little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell, "AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order. Oh really? I don't think I have ever typed "akc" in any of my posts until now. Results 1 - 10 of about 402 for "Sparky" "akc". (0.60 seconds)* Sorted by relevance* *Sort by date Related groups:**rec.radio.cb Very good, Twist. Now search through each one and count how many of those occurances were quoted from another post instead of typed by me. ============= http://tinyurl.com/ytcah http://tinyurl.com/2yor7 http://tinyurl.com/2sapq (Twisty cast the first stone) ============= "...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and are both too small to admit it." "...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough." "Athis is how proper communication wroks..." ---- Twistedhed ---- ============= -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
In , Lancer
wrote: On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:22:33 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech Frank never tested any of the antennas. I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. Frank Did you try it in Barney Phife mode? The start of this thread was on car, it was suggested that you tie it down like a bow. Bows are bent 180 degrees, so it would have to be tied down to the same level as the base. I tried it and the minimum SWR point moved lower in frequency. I didn't pull it over 180 degrees. I don't even know if it will bend like that without taking off the spring. But it seems like if it goes over 180 the top capacitance to ground would increase, as well as the inductive reactance due to the bend, which might explain the drop in frequency. IOW, it might result in a crude form of linear-loading. Modeling it showed that the take off angle also increased. Maybe causing the effect you were seeing. Possible. But with a 90 degree bend it seems more likely that it was just a polarity issue. I wouldn't even begin to guess how the polarity would be affected in a 'Barney bend'. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Frank*Gilliland) In , wrote: Many times...........even tested them. Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a voodoo tech (Frank never tested any of the antennas.) I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna straight up.......; SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the lanyard. But,,,,there is supposed to be no skip... Who said anything about skip, Twist? Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were lost. Looks like it's a compromise situation. * It is. You failed to account for, or at least detail, a myriad of factors. Were you in a free zone? No, I pay taxes just like every other homeowner. How near was the closest object? The curb was right next to the truck. Gee, maybe that messed up my test..... Did you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests? Yes I did. Did I use it? No. Did you repeat the test with the antenna on the opposite side of the vehicle? The antenna not mounted on either side of the vehicle. It was mounted on the front of the vehicle, which I clearly stated and you couldn't comprehend because of your communication deficit. Did you move the vehicle around? Why yes, it started break-dancing as soon as I keyed the mic. A single day's atmospheric condition for a single test? Sunny, 74 degrees, 20% humidity, 29.96 in/Hg, tree and grass pollen were moderate, weed pollen was low, mold spores were high, no measurable seismic activity and the aurora monitor was quiet. One perfunctory test is meaningless in the context of science. Unless the test is conclusive. Once again you are confusing inductive and deductive logic, but that's no suprise since the only part of the book you studied was the chapter on logical fallacies. ============= http://tinyurl.com/ytcah http://tinyurl.com/2yor7 http://tinyurl.com/2sapq (Twisty cast the first stone) ============= "...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and are both too small to admit it." "...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough." "Athis is how proper communication wroks..." ---- Twistedhed ---- ============= -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
lol remember I said
if you want efficient youd be using a 9 ft whip. even bent over like a bow the 9 ft is more efficient than a 4 ft loaded open air coil model. then asshole said wrote Huh......... A bent over 9 foot whip has a very noticeable Loss compared to a efficient 4 or 5 foot vertical. now hoople head says wrote Modeling, showed that the Max Horizontal field is broadside to the antenna and Max vertical is more inline with the direction that its bent. Does your news server carry alt.binaries.pictures.radio? I put a jpeg of it there. Red is The Hor field, Black is the Vert I dont see any big loss there tnom I see only gain gain and more gain. Yes clip your whip Barney style and point the car in the direction you want to talk and you got gain, no illegal amp needed lol |
Hey tnom and lancer you have proven Barney Phife was pretty cool he
knew the secret of adding gain AND obeying the law. Just bend a 9 ft whip like a bow in the direction you want to talk. No amps no 4 ft open air coil antennas for him lol |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com