"WA8ULX" wrote:

Big difference, you know nothing about the subject matter,
your Licenses is nothing more than a FREE WELFARE
HANDOUT, that is given out to the MIND Challenged
people.


So, according to you, every single American who receives a ham license
from this day forward is actually receiving a welfare handout because he or
she is mind challenged? Hardly, Bruce. The only mind challenged people
around here are those with views similar to yours.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Dick Carroll wrote:

JJ wrote:


Some claimed there is no such thing as a 1/4 wave
dipole, I simply stated there is, I never made any claims it would be a good
antenna.


Ok. Since it was me who said there is no such thing as a 1/4 wave dipole, I'll
modify my statement to read "There is no such thing as a 1/4 wave dipole other
than at the station of a clueless ham who knows no better".

That should take care of it.

Probably not!

I think this thread should be forwarded to the F.C.C. as an example of
why the testing requirement might be at a bit too low of a level right
now. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think this thread should be forwarded to the F.C.C. as an example of
why the testing requirement might be at a bit too low of a level right
now. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA

Sad part is its worse than that, TIT is a Techplus, and doesnt have the
slighest idea how a simple Dipole works.

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

All dipoles are 1/4 wave at some frequency. You just wouldn't want to
use them.

Thanks for proving my point, I never made ANY claims on the performance of a
1/4 wave dipole. Some said there was no such thing, I simply stated there
is. So you admit the same I stated earlier in the thread, any dipole is a
quarter wave at some frequency.

Dwight Stewart wrote in message ...
"WA8ULX" wrote:

Big difference, you know nothing about the subject matter,
your Licenses is nothing more than a FREE WELFARE
HANDOUT, that is given out to the MIND Challenged
people.


So, according to you, every single American who receives a ham license
from this day forward is actually receiving a welfare handout because he or
she is mind challenged? Hardly, Bruce. The only mind challenged people
around here are those with views similar to yours.


You have to have a mind to be mind challenged, that leaves brucie out.

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
JJ wrote:
Brian Kelly wrote in message ...

Bilge. All of it. A 66 foot dipole is roughly a *half wave* dipole
on 40M and a 134 foot dipole is roughly a *half wave* dipole on
80M. A 33 foot long center-fed dipole is a quarter wavelength long
on 40M but it is not resonant on 40M and ya better not get stupid
and feed it with coax then just plug it into the back of yer radio
if ya wanna work anybody with it.



A search on google on quarter wave dipole will give plenty of
sources.


That's where we started on this sorry thread. Go back and read the
posts, including my 1/4 vs 1/2 wave dipole design done in EZNEC, and
then let us know how well a 1/4 wave dipole works.

Then why don't you build a 1/4 wave dipole for whatever band gets you
into Central PA. We'll do a sked, and see how well your antenna works.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Why bother ? I just used my 20 meter dipole, coax fed with 50 ohm cable on
7.030. The SWR was off the scale.

I then hit the tune button on my FT-1000mp and that piece of junk wouldn't
tune it. So I called CQ for a couple of hours. No replies.

I then called my buddy across town to fire up and give me a listen. I was
S1 and almost in the noise.

So, for an experiment, knowing it was just a lark because the Texas Twit
said so, I hooked up my 40 meter half wave, center fed with 50 ohm coax.
My signal was now 30 db over S9.

Can you get the Texas Twit to explain this for me please.

Dan/W4NTI

"WA8ULX" wrote in message
...
I think this thread should be forwarded to the F.C.C. as an example of
why the testing requirement might be at a bit too low of a level right
now. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA

Sad part is its worse than that, TIT is a Techplus, and doesnt have the
slighest idea how a simple Dipole works.

Its even worse than that Bruce. Give a listen to the 'Ektra' subbands on
75 some night. Now there is a eye opener.

Dan/W4NTI

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

Then came his buddy, another one, who stated that the reason g5rv's
"work" is because they're "trap antennas". I asked him to show me the
traps in the 40M g5rv we'd put up. "I don't know where they are but
they have to be there somewhere."

N2EY was there too . .

And neither of us have been back to run FD with that pack of 21st
Century nitwits.

Tell us all how it feels to be an 1896 Nitwit, nitwit.

Beep, beep.

Why not regale us with some tales of your years as an uninvolved nitwit,
Netwit?

Dave K8MN

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


JJ wrote:

Some claimed there is no such thing as a 1/4 wave
dipole, I simply stated there is, I never made any claims it would be a
good
antenna.

Ok. Since it was me who said there is no such thing as a 1/4 wave dipole,
I'll
modify my statement to read "There is no such thing as a 1/4 wave dipole
other
than at the station of a clueless ham who knows no better".

That should take care of it.


JJ:

I just read the posts in this thread. It's pretty comical. These folks are
just plain desperate...not even worth the strokes of your fingers...

Kim W5TIT