"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


charlesb wrote:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...

The point is, Why would anyone deliberately construct a 1/4 wave
dipole?
Since they woiuldn't for obvious reasons, the fact that a dipole
designed
for a
certain frequency just happens to be 1/4 wavelength at half that
frequency
doesn't
automatically make it a 1/4 wave dipole. An antenna is what it was
designed to be, not
what some wag-troll declares.

Sure, anyone *could* construct a 1/4 wave dipole, if he was that
ignorant.
No one does. So
there aren't any around.


Well now you've let the cat out of the bag, Dick. Somebody had convinced
this Troll to use a 1/4 wave dipole, and now here you go, letting them
know
that they've been snookered.

They just couldn't understand why the radio kept frying its finals and
they
never could seem to get a good signal out, even when the radio did
work....
Now they know why! - And its all your fault!

Party pooper.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Well Charlie, they probably think that an antenna tuner will solve their
ignorance. Heh
heh! Maybe they should read the specs on that tuner's
data sheet, then get into the books to see what they're actually
attempting to match!

With a little luck they'll get a signal to actually radiate, a little
sometimes, between
arcs inside that tuner.

Hope it's not the internal autotuner in their high$$ rig!

Dick



Well, DICK, hopefully you can get an antenna to radiate because I'm pretty
darned sure nothing else is radiating there.

I have used my DXCC antenna many, many times over the years on MARS nets,
with a Yaesu transceiver with automatic tuner. Now, maybe it's not a
"constructed" dipole, but it was used nevertheless. Also, what's the big
deal with a 1/4 wave dipole? Dipole simply means design of the
antenna...granted, usually for 1/2 wave, which, as you know, doesn't require
a groundplane. But there is no reason a 1/2 wave dipole could not be
constructed.

Also, perhaps you could tell me the resonant frequency of a long-wire
antenna? Eh?

Kim W5TIT