|
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:14:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: If you read the ARRL manual sometime you might learn that the hobby comprises a little bit more than hooking up prefab components. But if you want to waste your money and learn nothing about the hobby then that's your choice, just like it's your choice to put me in your killfile (LOL!). There are a lot of ham appliance operators. While it smacks at the original intended purpose of the service, there's nothing expressly prohibited about it. There are also those guys who are subject matter experts on one facet of the hobby, and who know very little about others. Such is the nature of such a multi-faceted service. And if part of the hobby is to learn about radio comm, why ask a CB group for tech info when there are countless resources available for hams? Because the Imax, is for my CB, and this is a CB group. So does that mean a CB antenna operates on different priciples than a ham antenna? I can't speak for Lancer, but I know there are many people who think that people should do their -own- homework. It's just plain lazy for you, a General Class amateur, to hop on a CB group and ask if your antenna needs a ground plane, especially when you can take five minutes to learn -by yourself- what they are, what they do, and whether your antenna needs one or not. Did you even read the instructions that came with the antenna? Sheesh. A few things. First off, despite what this group has devolved into in the last few years, it originally was a place to discuss experiences with different aspects of radio. It's one thing to read a 2-dimensional book about a subject. It's another thing to actually talk with people who have "been there and done that". Tapping that experience is far more rewarding than generalized book comments. I would also be skeptical about the antenna's instructions. The company has a pecuniary interest in promoting "accessories" which have questionable value from a performance standpoint. Remember that the paper never refuses ink. Just because something is printed in a book, does not mean that it is 100% true, or accurate in all cases. My hat's off to Vinnie for trying to at least swing the discussions back to radio related topics, as opposed to the sniping and bickering over politics and who's gay. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:26:18 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:41:07 -0400, Vinnie S. wrote in : snip Should I return it? Probably. If you want a decent antenna that you can use for both CB -and- ham you should check out that link for the $4 cheapie (that I provided in a post without insult). It will probably cost -you- about $20 more because it requires a tuner which you probably don't have. The idea is to just throw a couple wires in the trees and load them up with the tuner -- that's it. It works better than any Imax or Antron, it can be used for whatever power and spectrum is handled by the tuner (usually 2-30 MHz), you can change the antenna at any time, you don't have to worry about SWR, it's cheap, and it's so easy even a Geico customer can do it. A tuner-fed non-resonent length dipole is not the best solution for CB. It is woefully inefficient and would be the wrong polarity for the majority of CB work. They worked well on the ham bands because most H.F contacts are DX in nature and you're relying on atmospheric propagation to do most of the work. Try to work another ham 30 miles away on the H.F bands and it is surprising how difficult it can be with those wire antennas. I ran a home brewed wire dipole on CB years ago, and used it in addition to my main 5/8th wave antenna. While the dipole worked well when the skip was running, locally, the signal from the dipole was a few "S" units less than the ground plane. With 4 watts of power, you don't get much range on a horizontal wire dipole strung in a tree. For ham band use, I agree with you, just not for CB. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:05:25 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:26:18 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:41:07 -0400, Vinnie S. wrote in : snip Should I return it? Probably. If you want a decent antenna that you can use for both CB -and- ham you should check out that link for the $4 cheapie (that I provided in a post without insult). It will probably cost -you- about $20 more because it requires a tuner which you probably don't have. The idea is to just throw a couple wires in the trees and load them up with the tuner -- that's it. It works better than any Imax or Antron, it can be used for whatever power and spectrum is handled by the tuner (usually 2-30 MHz), you can change the antenna at any time, you don't have to worry about SWR, it's cheap, and it's so easy even a Geico customer can do it. A tuner-fed non-resonent length dipole is not the best solution for CB. Neither is an Imax. It is woefully inefficient Compared to what.... a 7-el beam? and would be the wrong polarity for the majority of CB work. Doesn't matter. It gets the best of both worlds. That is, unless you are so anal that you think any dipole must be both horizontal and perfectly straight. They worked well on the ham bands because most H.F contacts are DX in nature and you're relying on atmospheric propagation to do most of the work. Try to work another ham 30 miles away on the H.F bands and it is surprising how difficult it can be with those wire antennas. Maybe you had difficulty, but there are a very large number of hams -and- CBers who don't share your ineptitude. I've done this type of antenna myself and never had any problems with local contacts -- in fact, it worked a lot better than the 9' whip on the truck. I ran a home brewed wire dipole on CB years ago, and used it in addition to my main 5/8th wave antenna. While the dipole worked well when the skip was running, locally, the signal from the dipole was a few "S" units less than the ground plane. With 4 watts of power, you don't get much range on a horizontal wire dipole strung in a tree. Well there's your problem, Dave -- I didn't say anything about horizontal. On the contrary, it's better if it isn't. Like I said before, just throw some wire up into the trees (or whatever tall object happens to be available). Didn't you read the link I posted? For ham band use, I agree with you, just not for CB. What's the name of that tech school, Dave? ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
From: (Landshark)
"I AmnotGeorgeBush" wrote in message ... From: (Landshark) "Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 19:20:17 -0500, landsharkdeepthroatsmen wrote in : Frank Gilliland wrote in : On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:53:15 -0400, Vinnie the Helpless Ham wrote: snip Vinnie's not a bad guy Frank, So I used to think as well, until he lost personal control. We all have at one time or another. Yes, but......Tthe difference is, a decent human being can admit he's wrong and offer an apology for such. You've done it, in addition to many other regs here. Some have these -ego- problems that will not permit it. You saying he is not a bad guy is akin of me saying the same thing about Geo regarding his attacks on you, Maybe, but far cry on accusations twist, so you are comparing apples with oranges. Unprovoked attacks accompanied with school yard name calling is what I refer.... the nature of such unprovoked attacks notwithstanding. Did you miss Vinny blowing of his top? Nope, but that was the way he felt. The you viewed his hypocrisy in singling one person out for a typo. If he truly felt this way, his posts would be chock full of such complaints and emotional uncontrols. The fact that his posts lack this, illustrate another problem he is experiencing, one that goes well beyond a typo and the way he feels about such. I think it was a little over board, but nothing that couldn't be overcome The guy came apart over a typo that had nothing to do with him. Again, I've seen the same thing from almost everyone here =A0=A0I never see the majority crying and carrying on about typos. ...perhaps that was his malfunction for the day, but it shows the guy's true self I don't think it show his "true self", but does show a flaw that can't be cured. He exercised an optional choice to attack a poster as opposed to the topic of the post, blamed it on a typo, and was called on it. Shows how he was moved by a simple posting of a url. Maybe if it was you he attacked for no reason other than incompetence Maybe, but I have been the target so long, as you, It really doesn't bother to much anymore. It never bothered me. In fact, once I realized how much energy these type devote to causes of which they are impotent, it became not just entertaining, but amusing because of the control they willingly but not consciously give up. In fact, those who go as far as to actually place blame on other usenet particapants as the cause of their personal woes, all share the same characteristics. Dogie blames Moped for his problems, Geo blames you, and Dave blames me. While Geo seems to be more of a loner, Dave and Dogie actually -look- to others for support. Such is recognized by their deliberate misattributing quotes (Dave) to others, lies (the three of them, including Lelnad) and the invocation of un-named and unsolicited sources as supporting their positions (Dave and Dogie). I suppose if that was the case, but I don't see him chasing Franks posts, posting false accusation, harassing every post he makes, big difference. Check again. He's replying to those he claims are killfiled and calling names in each post, taking about people's families and the such. you two should talk more radio, you'll probably find a lot more in common. Now Geo I see is still obsessed with me and male sex........pretty sad. Now,,I invoke to you the same exact reasoning you use for many of your complaints with Geo Why would Doug, Geo, Frank (in the past), Dave among others do the same to you? Because they didn't like you're ideology? Freebanding? political views? our were they just plain trolling? Ok. Since you asked, I'm going to spill some beans, here. Doug lost control when he came on here. When it was found that he had real problems of the mind, I immediately backed off my responses to him. It's not fair and it's not right to hit a child because they hit you. A simple reprimand every once in a while is sufficient. Mopar handles that quite well. In fact, the mere fact that Mopar handles Dogie as he does, is testament how serious he takes Dogie's threats. =A0=A0Frank?.....well, Frank and I went around concerning the legality issue. Now that the dx is much more sporadic and less, I'm more legal than Dave or Leland. After a few emails, I found Frank to be not that different from myself regarding certain key life skills, education. Even when we disagreed, I could learn something from Frank, as he was at least consistent with all his positions. Dave, otoh, has self-contradicted himself so many times and is known on this group by the majority as a major hypocrite. Such instantly compromises whatever integrity he managed to retain, which, after taking his posts concerning the defense of Dogie into consideration, is zero. Twist, I'm not going to go around with you on this. I'm sure just like Mopar & Frank, things got off to a bad start, hopefully in the future things will be better, though one of them most likely have to breakdown and bury the hatchet. ,,,,why would one attack another for no reason? Frank has a very condescending type of tone, but unfortunately when typing one can't tell the " tone" of the type if they haven't been around it for a while. That's another parallel. Frank went as far as to come out and say "I'm an asshole" on occasion. Way back during my infancy of arrival, I stated I do not play well with others, do not much care what others think for the most part, and work better alone. This leads to self-created problems for a certain type of personality when they encounter people such as Frank or myself, especially when they possess a controlling personality, an unquenchable yearning and hunger for status, and are used to most people in their world deferring to them. Dave falls into this category. He speaks of other's feelings being hurt because -his- feelings are hurt. He projects and regurgitates all over usenet, just as he did in trying to say he never blamed anyone for the Dogie/Geo mess. He most certianly has, on many occasion, and has used the legality/illegality as his excuse to act the fool. =A0=A0Lelnad,,well, his hatred of cb is well documented, yet he remains here for the education. If that isn't enough, his unprovoked attacks against dxers (Nebo comes to mind immediately, just for starters) confirms his agenda. There are those who have perfectly acceptable beefs concerning legalties and illegalities. The beefs belonging to the type of which I speak, are personal. Vinnie appears to be in this category. I base this opinion only on HIS comments and continual unprovoked attacks and responses to those he somehow feels are in his killfile. Nevertheless,....... ...when is your next fishing trip down south? =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0L andshark |
David T. Hall jr. (sandbagger) N3CVJ wrote:
I admit that I get a certain amount of pleasure tweaking Twisty, Shouting your ignorance to the world concerning you not knowing the difference between civil and criminal law as relates to your hobby and referring to it as "tweaking" another when that person educates you, is your right. as his responses are so predictable. =A0 =A0Sure they are, and everyone is aware my posts are predictable when responding to your inept claims, as my responses are a sound and accurate education regarding the law you fail to comprehend as relates to criminal and civil matters, laws, and disobediences. : )~ |
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:34:53 GMT, Lancer wrote:
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:14:16 -0400, Vinnie S. wrote: Do you have a problem with that? Show me the rules on antenna requirements, please. Vinnie S. Of course there aren't any Vinnie, you come into the group, ask questions about antennas. When someone trys to give you ideas about building one or how it works, you don't want to hear anything about it. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with you making comments about me "thinking" of installing an antenna. Making comments snide comments about buying antennas. That is perfectly my choice. You have in your mind what you want, come here ask questions, and when the anwers aren't what you expected, you take it personal. Maybe they should just answer the question. Hint, when I asked about a ground plane on an antenna, you answer "why don't you experiment and build your own antenna?". Vinnie S. |
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 08:53:34 -0400, Dave Hall wrote:
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:14:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: If you read the ARRL manual sometime you might learn that the hobby comprises a little bit more than hooking up prefab components. I took the hobby up a little over a month ago. I don't have a Frank intelligence pill, which I swallow and am all knowledgable in 2 hours. But if you want to waste your money and learn nothing about the hobby then that's your choice, just like it's your choice to put me in your killfile (LOL!). I want to get on the air in as short time as possible. Starting to build stuff from scratch, when you just entered the hobby, isn't the way to do tit. Snipped the rest of the useless babble. Vinnie S. |
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:51:23 GMT, Lancer wrote:
As far as Lancer, I don't know what is up his ass. I don't know him from a hole in the wall, but from some reason, he cracks on me like I ****ed his wife or something. Making comments about how I "think" about installing an antenna, or cracking because I won't build one from scratch. All because I asked about a ground plane question in a CB newsgroup. First of all, learn to quote. Second, nothing is up my ass. I wouldn't call my responses to you as cracking on you. My only response to you about the Imax was " neither one" Because neither ground plane kits you listed would make a signicant difference to your antenna. I have also not made any wise ass cracks about ****ing my wife. Maybe you should look back through the archives. The worst comment I have made to you is that 'I didn't mean to **** you off" Go through your list "Your family get-togethers must be a blast." Cracking on me and my family Vinnie? Right. I remember perfectly well. That was because you cracked on my because I quoted the Firestik website as th antennas being an electrical 5/8. You made a snide comment, finished off by an LOL. You could have simply said the website was innaccurate. But no. You have to make the comment. The only thing I questioned was why that made you laugh out loud. And I said if that made you laugh so hard, you family gatherings must be a blast. Vinnie S. |
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:01:34 GMT, Lancer wrote:
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:32:59 -0400, Vinnie S. wrote: On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 17:15:08 GMT, Lancer wrote: Frank, while you are at it, get me a beer. And Lancer, I didn't **** your wife, nor anyone of your family, nor do I know wnyone in your family. So when you want to tell eveyone here why you hate me so much, please do so. I sure eveyone is curious. Vinnie S. Poor baby, get off my wife and family, if you can? BTW, I'm not worried about you ****ing my wife or family. I don't **** anybody's wife, except my own. You would need an instruction manual for that, and we all know you don't read instruction manuals. Good one !!!!!! Do what you always do, ask the group, and then when you don't get the exact answer you were looking for, get mad.... Keep it going. Let everyone see. Vinnie S. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com