|
|
|
|
In , Lancer
wrote: snip 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 I got the day off so I took the truck out in the field, did a Barney-bend to the windshield-wiper, and did a 10 degree (36-point) field-strength test. Your jpeg is pretty close to what I got, except: I see sharper lobes; the measured horizontal was weaker relative to the vertical (possibly due to a higher take-off angle -- FSM was about 200' downrange), and; forward has more gain than aft (not forgetting that my mount is on the bow). While driving the truck in a circle for the tests I noticed that some stations would null. My guess is that the Barney-bend acts like a loop antenna with its characteristic null, but because it is only a half-loop it has a horizontal component. We really should summon Jay for this discussion. -----= 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 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not
George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. LOL!! what a dumbass, you don't know what ax.com is? Damn, We are both Frank too, he posts with ax.com.. What a dimwit. |
On 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not
George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. By the way I already did a open coil simulation, the links were in one of my first posts to this thread. The same links you read when you responded to tnom about his tests. |
In , Lancer
wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. LOL!! what a dumbass, you don't know what ax.com is? Damn, We are both Frank too, he posts with ax.com.. What a dimwit. That's Twisty-logic. He thought Leland and myself were the same person because we both posted through Supernews. -----= 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! =----- |
when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. Are you paranoid. iamnotlancer |
lol here is the barney bend
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...ayberryPD2.jpg http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg |
|
Lancer wrote:
On 16 Jun 2004 14:25:35 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: wrote in message . .. Are you paranoid. iamnotlancer Dont blame me blame Twistedhed he started the obsession with identities I just commented that ax.com was in your and lancers headers and you are both humping my leg within minutes of each other lol ax.com means we are using agent. I took the ax.com out for you. If you need help understanding headers, ask, someone will be more than happy to laugh at you lol whatever you say leghumper |
"Lancer" wrote in message ... On 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. LOL!! what a dumbass, you don't know what ax.com is? Damn, We are both Frank too, he posts with ax.com.. What a dimwit. You mean he didn't know that was a post made with Forte Agent? I thought George knew how to read headers? LMAO!!!! Landshark -- Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. |
Landshark" wrote:
"Lancer" wrote in message .. . On 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. LOL!! what a dumbass, you don't know what ax.com is? Damn, We are both Frank too, he posts with ax.com.. What a dimwit. You mean he didn't know that was a post made with Forte Agent? I thought George knew how to read headers? LMAO!!!! Landshark You shouldnt even be reading these posts what happened to your nonexistant killfile lol |
From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In , (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Frank=A0Gilliland) 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)=A0 Sorted by relevance=A0 =A0Sort by date Related groups:=A0=A0rec.radio.cb Very good, Twist. LOL. Hey Frank, you should use a webtv somewhere some time. You're having problems following who's who and need to understand how the thing works. Now search through each one and count how many of those occurances were quoted from another post instead of typed by me. Process of elimination serves quite nicely here. Check only those in the search that are from you which contain the term "akc". You've used the term quite regularly. Sobriety would permit return of your retainment and not have you lying and claiming otherwise. |
From: (iamnotiamnotgeorge2004)
In , (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: 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. owever, 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? Go to the local flea market and buy a cheap webtv, Frank. You're cornfused again and are calling everyone "twist". What is "the toilet bowl"? I was assuming you referred to 6 since you have a perpetual menstruation concerning skip and big radios. Since you were listening to 6, you were hearing skip, as you damn sure weren't listening local. Some weak signals disappeared while others came in that weren't there before. And those "weak" signals must have been local, since you are playing semantic word games and essentially claiming there was no skip. 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? No, I pay taxes just like every other homeowner. All you had to say was you were wrong, you don;t have to cry about it. After all, one wouldn't expect any experiment performed by yourself yield anything other than subjective results. _ How near was the closest object? The curb was right next to the truck. Gee, maybe that messed up my test..... Your incompetence did that. _ Did you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests? Yes I did. Did I use it? No. Flawing your subjected reportings even further. 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. To be fair, you need spoon fed and asked may things twice, because you have problems making yourself clear and once you say something, you often must reclarify yourself because you maintain what you wrote wasn't esxactly what you meant. Add to this your repeated homage via liberal quoting of myself, and there we have it. Did you move the vehicle around? Why yes, it started break-dancing as soon as I keyed the mic. =A0=A0 LOL,,,,,no need for the sarcasm,,,,I understand your reluctance to discuss your limitations. None really needed me to point out your flawed test, as most caught it as soon as you posted your incompetence. 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. Now duplicate your tests in addition to your climate. =A0=A0One perfunctory test is meaningless in the context of science. Unless the test is conclusive. One test can never be be conclusive in such applied logistics. Once again you are confusing inductive and deductive logic, Not at all, you''re confusing my objective logic with your subjective results. but that's no suprise since the only part of the book you studied was the chapter on logical fallacies. Toss all the one liner insults you need in order to soothe your low self-esteem. If I wouldn't have pointed out your incompetence concerning your monkey acts, ignorance, and inability to differentiate between objective and subjective results, another most certainly would have. |
From: (iamnotlancer2004)
In , Lancer wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 13:01:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: in wrote: On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:45 -0700, (I Am Not George) wrote: 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 =A0=A0Modeling, 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 _ I didn't write "modeling....." from above, but it is common sense that when an antenna rotates away from its vertical polarization it also rotates away from its original vertical gain. _ This is really bizare Tnom and Lancer post within minutes of each other and both from ax.com too lol. I tell you what tnom or lancer or whatever you call youself now you need to model a 4 foot open coil type antenna sitting on a Barney police car and compare it to a full 9 ft in a Barney Bend configuration on the same police car. No watergates and whistling auuudio into echo mikes and watching the swang do it right this time. (LOL!! what a dumbass, you don't know what ax.com is? Damn, We are both Frank too, he posts with ax.com.. What a dimwit. ) _ That's Twisty-logic. Hehehe,,,poor Frank,,,invoking twist at all costs. Couple this with his alcoholism and the old boy is off and runing. He thought Leland and myself were the same person because we both posted through Supernews. Yet, here you are blaming another for your own actions. The fact that you felt such logic good enough to put into practice for yourself illustrates your homage, but I like the manner which you need blame someone else for your actions, to the point of sharing with us how "Twisty-logic" has a hold of you and how Twistedmania has run wild on you. Hope you find sobriety, Frank. You weren't nearly as obsessed with me as you are when you drink. Each day and in all your posts, I'm in your thoughts, emails,,,,lol,,,,,you do get a free pass on your behavior, though, as alcoholism is a disease, thereby rendering you incompetent and in need. -----=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =3D----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! |
|
NNTP-Posting-Date: =A0=A0 Thu, Jun 17, 2004, 7:58am (EDT-1) Group:
=A0=A0 rec.radio.cb Subject: =A0=A0 Ideas for a homemade mobile antenna. From: =A0=A0 itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge User-Agent: =A0=A0 Xnews/06.08.25 X-No-Archive: =A0=A0 yes Date: =A0=A0 Thu, Jun 17, 2004, 7:58am (EDT-1) X-Trace: =A0=A0 sv3-GTj7aWRCp7VrPD0ZIBLy5A9hv6WaWzW8uL0LAUH0qHyvVvZSbF aLeqHftl/LkJlBZW//Fi= fPyrd5gI5!57+bvlK2MfFAUaRxIUIFnkbF36psVt/mxnM6jipX99wKrTxuI7sDNKd3thIbQokn= vQawfA=3D=3D X-Complaints-To: =A0=A0 X-DMCA-Complaints-To: =A0=A0 X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: =A0=A0 Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: =A0=A0 Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: =A0=A0 1.1 (I Am Not George) wrote in m: You shouldnt even be reading these posts what happened to your nonexistant killfile lol That is what i was thinkin to Jim Calling Frank "Jim" and desperately and redundantly claiming "Frank isn't Iamnotgerge2004" simply won't make it so. Move on from yourself. You're a louse and are being made to live with it. |
"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: You shouldnt even be reading these posts what happened to your nonexistant killfile lol That is what i was thinkin to Jim My name is Frank get it right little bro. |
wrote in message . ..
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! =----- frank........twistie is a big skip talker ...didn't you know that??? he talks on channel 6......he is a big strapper........ |
|
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote in news:8058-
: From: (itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge) "Landshark" wrote in news:7h9Ac.4268$sv7.451 @newssvr27.news.prodigy.com: ****************You mean he didn't know that was a post made with Forte Agent? I thought George knew how to read headers? LMAO!!!! ******************Landshark Thats too funny, the guy you call george didnt make that claim. iamnotgeorge made that post and twisty said he was Frank. Never happened. Twist said Frank was Iamnotgeorge2004. It is the same person, his nic is iamnotgeorge his email is iamnotgeorge2004 so yes you did call him Frank. It did happen even though your to stupid to relaize who you are calling what. You stupid fuqqing assclown From: (I Am Not George) Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb So which one of you is wrong You are. is he frank, leland or is he george. Frank is Iamnotgeorge2004. Twisty is confused I told you I am not George I am Iamnotgeorge2004 but ItoldyouIamnotgeorge is not george wa3moj and Frank is not I Am Not George who is not "george" at all but is just Frank. now read closely assclowns I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank I am not Frank pay attention steveo because I am deprograming you keyclowns from all the hynosis Twisty has given you I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj I am not wa3moj ok one last step and your free, lol legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good legal cb is good |
"Frank Gilliland" in message-id:
wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me |
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. Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss just from this antenna being bent. Yet you stated.................................... "vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair." When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge. Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas will easily beat your -3db antenna. |
|
In ,
(gw) wrote: snip frank........twistie is a big skip talker ...didn't you know that??? he talks on channel 6......he is a big strapper........ That's the only way he can feel important -- imagining himself as a 'big man on the bowl'. -----= 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 , wrote:
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. Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. Wrong. That represents an antenna with -both- horizontal and vertical polarization. The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss just from this antenna being bent. Wrong. The theoretical gain of the antenna for a given polarity is a function equal to the sum of the gains of equally spaced tangents along the curve of the antenna. Yet you stated.................................... "vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair." As measured by my FSM. When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge. Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas will easily beat your -3db antenna. I did not say that it dropped by 3dB. The phrase "by a hair" is not my words but the words of my spotter, and both of us generally use that phrase to describe a meter shift approximately equal to the width of the needle. And since the FSM used was only a 'relative' FSM (as opposed to a CISPR quasi-peak detector), there is no way to quantify "by a hair", nor did I attempt to do so. -----= 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 , (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. LOL. Hey Frank, you should use a webtv somewhere some time. You're having problems following who's who and need to understand how the thing works. Now search through each one and count how many of those occurances were quoted from another post instead of typed by me. Process of elimination serves quite nicely here. Check only those in the search that are from you which contain the term "akc". You've used the term quite regularly. Sobriety would permit return of your retainment and not have you lying and claiming otherwise. I guess you need another example of your communication deficit. In the post at the following link, notice that I did not use the term "AKC" but merely quoted the text that someone else typed: http://tinyurl.com/33r6x Since the post included the term, it will naturally be listed in any search for "AKC" with me as the author -regardless- of whether I typed it or not. Now, find some posts where I actually typed the term, and find enough of them to back up your claims that it is one of my "favorite terms" and/or that I "pioneered it". ============= 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 blh1d01c2jc37p88751sl43a8hrefoj4ku@2355323778, Lancer
wrote: snip You fooled for minute with you nic. Glad that the your results were close to the simulation. When I first started modeling I started with a loop, cut it in half, moved it down to ground level and raised the tip up. That would explain the results. Second the motion on getting Jay back here. Yeah, well, he'd probably start harping on me again for being rude. All the better. -----= 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! =----- |
Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. Wrong. That represents an antenna with -both- horizontal and vertical polarization. Are you trying to misrepresent my statement? My statement is not wrong. A antenna bent in the above fashion is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. Such an antenna always has fields in both polarizations. I never stated it didn't The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss just from this antenna being bent. Wrong. The theoretical gain of the antenna for a given polarity is a function equal to the sum of the gains of equally spaced tangents along the curve of the antenna. Not wrong at all. A diagonal antennas field strength drops to .707 of its original when the receiving antenna stays vertical. Yet you stated.................................... "vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair." As measured by my FSM. When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge. Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas will easily beat your -3db antenna. I did not say that it dropped by 3dB. The phrase "by a hair" is not my words but the words of my spotter, and both of us generally use that phrase to describe a meter shift approximately equal to the width of the needle. And since the FSM used was only a 'relative' FSM (as opposed to a CISPR quasi-peak detector), there is no way to quantify "by a hair", nor did I attempt to do so. Ok..........so your test is quantified by "hairs". Now I get it. My tests which were performed with much more detail were chastised by you. Yet your test (the hair method) gets validity. I see how this works now. |
"I Am Not George" wrote in message ... (itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge) wrote: Your too much big bro . roflmao 2x lol, high five. Good God man, grow a life. |
(I Am Not George) wrote in message om...
"Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... |
"gw" wrote in message om... (I Am Not George) wrote in message om... "Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... GW, first, learn to use caps, second, crawl back under the central Texas limestone from whence you post. |
"I ain't George either" wrote:
"gw" wrote in message . com... (I Am Not George) wrote in message . com... "Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... GW, first, learn to use caps, second, crawl back under the central Texas limestone from whence you post. randy why you always attacking any one who disses twistedhed. must be those cravings for the white monster getting you irritable lol |
"I Am Not George" wrote in message m... "I ain't George either" wrote: "gw" wrote in message . com... (I Am Not George) wrote in message . com... "Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... GW, first, learn to use caps, second, crawl back under the central Texas limestone from whence you post. randy why you always attacking any one who disses twistedhed. must be those cravings for the white monster getting you irritable lol Not at all. I have had issues with Twist in the past. I don't care any more or less if you attack him. He can defend himself. You, on the other hand, are an idiot. You have no hope of defending yourself, in person or verbally. |
"I ain't George either" wrote:
"I Am Not George" wrote in message om... "I ain't George either" wrote: "gw" wrote in message . com... (I Am Not George) wrote in message . com... "Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... GW, first, learn to use caps, second, crawl back under the central Texas limestone from whence you post. randy why you always attacking any one who disses twistedhed. must be those cravings for the white monster getting you irritable lol Not at all. I have had issues with Twist in the past. I don't care any more or less if you attack him. He can defend himself. You, on the other hand, are an idiot. You have no hope of defending yourself, in person or verbally. how long since you last smoked crack? be honest |
"I Am Not George" wrote in message m... "I ain't George either" wrote: "I Am Not George" wrote in message om... "I ain't George either" wrote: "gw" wrote in message . com... (I Am Not George) wrote in message . com... "Frank Gilliland" in message-id: wrote: "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... (I Am Not George) wrote in m: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...-Delmont88.jpg heheheh hehehe uhh that's cool. So is this little bro. http://www.bway.net/nambla.org/ definitely a forgery of Frank by someone who believes he is me probably twistinutts dave ..... GW, first, learn to use caps, second, crawl back under the central Texas limestone from whence you post. randy why you always attacking any one who disses twistedhed. must be those cravings for the white monster getting you irritable lol Not at all. I have had issues with Twist in the past. I don't care any more or less if you attack him. He can defend himself. You, on the other hand, are an idiot. You have no hope of defending yourself, in person or verbally. how long since you last smoked crack? be honest Nancy and I had some last night. |
In , wrote:
Let's see..............An antennas bent so that the tip is parallel to the ground?.............That represents an antenna that is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. Wrong. That represents an antenna with -both- horizontal and vertical polarization. Are you trying to misrepresent my statement? My statement is not wrong. A antenna bent in the above fashion is now midway between horizontal and vertical polarization. Such an antenna always has fields in both polarizations. I never stated it didn't First off, you are making a leap from 'having both polarities' to an antenna being "midway between horizontal and vertical polarization", whatever that means. From your explanation below I can only assume you mean 'diagonal' polarization. But you can't get linear polarization from a curved radiator, and the only straight sections of the antenna were either horizontal or vertical. Maybe you can source your "midway" polarization somewhere, huh? Second, the whip has a larger diameter at the base than it does at the tip, and is therefore more flexibile at the top than at the bottom. Because of this the whip bent into a shape somewhat distorted from an ideal 90 degree arc; i.e, the point on the arc at which the tangent of the arc was 45 degrees to both vertical and horizontal was most certainly -not- "midway" between the base and tip. So even if you -could- source your "midway" polarization (and you can't) it would probably not apply in this case. Third, polarity is a 3-dimensional vectoral quantity. (Actually it's a 4-dim quantity if you include the scalar component. Regardless...) This means that the "polar compatibility" (for lack of a better term) between any two antennas is a factor not just of 'vertical' and 'horizontal', but also of wavelength/antenna length. This fact is proven all the time with the use of some long-wire antennas which, while clearly horizontal, are quite adept at receiving signals with vertical polarity; and not only that but some are most efficient when the wire is pointed directly at the source of the signal. IOW, contrary to the popular (but mistaken) notion that antenna polarity is as simple as 'vertical vs. horizontal', antennas exist which have a polarity that is perpendicular to the signal in not just one, but -two- dimensions, and they work quite well. Also, polarity is a vectoral sum, which is not a -real- quantity but an -effective- quantity. IOW, you can't bend a vertical antenna 90 degrees at the center and proclaim that the antenna has diagonal (45 degree) polarization. The fact is that you still have -seperate- vertical and horizontal polarizations, but their -sum- is 45 degrees. And that's true only in one dimension (don't forget that this is a 3-dimensional quantity). Any deviation from the one thin line that is perpendicular to both polar components and the vectoral sum (the -effective- polarity) will NOT be 45 degrees. This is not the case for a straight radiator which, at any given point, will exhibit polarity in TWO dimensions (a plane) that is fully perpendicular to the axis. Even if you -did- bend the antenna 90 degrees at the center, that's no evidence that the vertical and horizontal components will share the same signal load. In a 1/4 wave vertical the top half of the whip is primarily capacitive while the bottom half is inductive. Taken seperately the bottom half is more efficient because it conducts the most current. Bending the antenna in half would result in an antenna with a strong vertical component and a weak horizontal component (which is better than no horizontal component at all, and both results are exactly what I observed in my test). And should there be an -electrical- midpoint it would be much closer to the bottom of the whip and not above the physical 'midpoint', the latter being the case with the bend on my whip. Finally, my antenna is a 1/4 wave, stainless-steel, vertical whip (bent at the time) mounted on the front of an old Dodge truck. It is certainly not an ideal example of laboratory precision, and I never suggested it was. I did a test, I posted my observations, and I came to my conclusion based on those results. I never suggested that my test should be included in CRC's Handbook of Chemistry and Physics or Van Nostrands encyclopedia. I never declared that a straight antenna was better than a bent antenna or vice-versa. I never said that anyone should or should not bend their antenna. In fact, I made no definitive conclusion about my test other than what I stated -- the antenna had both vertical and horizontal polarity. And you agreed. The theoretical gain of that antenna should be equal between polarizations. When such a scenario is in place the field strength should drop to .707 of it's original. That represents a 3db loss just from this antenna being bent. Wrong. The theoretical gain of the antenna for a given polarity is a function equal to the sum of the gains of equally spaced tangents along the curve of the antenna. Not wrong at all. A diagonal antennas field strength drops to .707 of its original when the receiving antenna stays vertical. That's only true if the receiving antenna is a half-wavelength. Yet you stated.................................... "vertically polarized field strength dropped by a hair." As measured by my FSM. When testing mobile antennas a 3db loss is huge. Most all well designed efficient non bent antennas will easily beat your -3db antenna. I did not say that it dropped by 3dB. The phrase "by a hair" is not my words but the words of my spotter, and both of us generally use that phrase to describe a meter shift approximately equal to the width of the needle. And since the FSM used was only a 'relative' FSM (as opposed to a CISPR quasi-peak detector), there is no way to quantify "by a hair", nor did I attempt to do so. Ok..........so your test is quantified by "hairs". Now I get it. I doubt it. My tests which were performed with much more detail were chastised by you. Yet your test (the hair method) gets validity. I see how this works now. No, you don't. But you will..... The stated objective of your tests was to evaluate and quantify the performance of various antennas, drawing conclusions that could be extended beyond your testing conditions. However, the technical level of the tests exceeded the limitations of your equipment, education and experience. Your methods were less than scientific, your data was superficial and contradictory, and your conclusions were few and highly subjective. When the data from your first test didn't meet your expectations you provided excuses. Your second test proved that your excuses were wrong, so you made new excuses. Your data could not be quantified, yet you proclaimed that x antenna was better than y antenna was better than z antenna. You clearly failed to meet the objective of your tests. You don't know why you failed, so you made excuses for your failure. When you bragged about your tests in the newsgroup I evaluated your failures one by one. You then blamed -me- because you can't accept and correct your own failures. OTOH, I did a simple test for fun, posted my observations, and provided my very limited conclusion WITH WHICH YOU AGREED. So according to -YOU- my test was both valid and conclusive. Yet your obsession with me pushed you to try -- once again -- to discredit me in a technical discussion. And once again you failed. And once again you will blame me for your failure. If anything you should be asking questions instead of trying to act like some sort of radio guru (which you definitely are not). NOW do you see how this works? -----= 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! =----- |
From: (iamnotN7VCF)
In , (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Frank=A0Gilliland) In , (Nicolai Carpathia) wrote: From: (Frank=A0Gilliland) 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)=A0 Sorted by relevance=A0 =A0Sort by date Related groups:=A0=A0rec.radio.cb Very good, Twist. LOL. Hey Frank, you should use a webtv somewhere some time. You're having problems following who's who and need to understand how the thing works. Now search through each one and count how many of those occurances were quoted from another post instead of typed by me. Process of elimination serves quite nicely here. Check only those in the search that are from you which contain the term "akc". You've used the term quite regularly. Sobriety would permit return of your retainment and not have you lying and claiming otherwise. I guess you need another example of your communication deficit. I'm not the one making offtopic posts all day long with another as my subject header... In the post at the following link, notice that I did not use the term "AKC" but merely quoted the text that someone else typed: http://tinyurl.com/33r6x Your link as nothing to do with it. Check "sparky" and "akc" and you most certainly talk of AKC in countless posts. Denying it only further illustrtates you have no self-control. Since the post included the term, it will naturally be listed in any search for "AKC" with me as the author -regardless- of whether I typed it or not. Now, find some posts where I actually typed the term, and find enough of them to back up your claims that it is one of my "favorite terms" and/or that I "pioneered it". Not interested in what you believe, Frank, so there is no inclination for me to persue your begs concerning this any longer. You have used the term on many occasions,,again, a blanket google search with "sparky" in the "from" and "akc" in body of the post yields enough posts from you usig the term to keep your attention captivated until your next bottle. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D http://tinyurl.com/ytcah http://tinyurl.com/2yor7 http://tinyurl.com/2sapq =A0 =A0(Twisty cast the first stone) Hehhee,,,gee, Frank, thanks for posting the link showing Lelnad getting busted. In addition, you began puberty long before the dates on any of those tiny urls' you presented with your offtopic rants and whines and presonal attacks. You began menstruating and casting stones long before the dates you presented. Always hlding yourself a victim,,,and somehow, you have locked onto this fanatasy that I am responsible for all that has gone bad in your life...LOL....lately, you hvae been all consumed with me,,,,I mean, you have always made me your topic, but lately, your emails to others concerning myself have reached a frenzy,,,a regular mania. Losing your sobriety really wrecked you this time, Frank. I hope you can recover from this psychotic episode and your slip back into dependency. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D "...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..." =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0---- Twistedhed ---- =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D "I work for an organization that is legally authorized to use the freeband" Frank Gilliland Sure you do, Frank. One needs only look to the radio stations in the Spokane area assigned thie freeband you speak of to decimate your lies, broken psyche, and twisted, low self-esteem. "I have admitted lying in this newsgroup, and on more than one occcasion' Frank Gilliland .....the story of your life. -----=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----- |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com