|
Trucker antenna
"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote in message m... Thanks, but don't put too much stock in the idiot. You sure put a lot of stock into the idiots Dave Ruff, Shawn and realitytrasher and the lies you post prove that asshole. So why are you calling anybody else an idiot when you put so much stock into Idiots just like Dave Ruff, Shawn realitytrasher and John/nightruanch do? More at: http://MTT.JusticeGoneWild.com |
Trucker antenna
In article ,
Dave wrote: richard wrote: Do you know the wavelength of 11 meters? This is a joke, right? It's called sarcasm. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Trucker antenna
"richard" wrote in message
... On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:51:28 -0500, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" wrote: "Zeke" wrote in message ... uuuuhhhh..... you're wrong as usual Bulli****. Top was career Military and got his commo expertise there. IIRC he's not a truck driver at all. Exactly, a matter of public record here that Richard has seen several times previously, and just forgot. Since this thread is going to groups who do not know me, I will try to clairify the lies here. snicker Here's Richard's esteemed military career (and how he was caught lying about it): http://bolo_bullis.tripod.com/ First, that is an exact copy of my dd214 acquired under the FOIA. It states I served. Unlike the lies that promulgate from it that says I did not. 2nd, why is the word before "discharge" blacked out? No one wonders "why". You've had three or four decades to get a new one, and you don't, and we -know- why. That was not done by the US goverment. It was done to make it look more damning. I never claimed to be anything I was not. I said I never got beyond boot camp and my highest rank was E1. The dd214 confirms that. I said I had enlisted for the ASA but never got involved with it. While others claimed I had claimed to be super secret spy or in special forces. Most of those lies were all created by "Just Taylor". What's amazing is that Richard and I were just discussing what a total, absolute and complete asshole he makes himself look like every time he tries to make himself look tough or smart at anyone's expense. I'm not saying I am smarter than many, in this thread I have been trying to point out that a lot of information given in this thread is totally wrong. As have others. Why don't you pick on them, asshole. But whether you're right or wrong, Richard, you can't state anything without a demeaning attack on others, usually embarrassingly incorrect, like you just did to Top. It's because of your angst and poor self-esteem, probably because of the inbreeding. And not man enough to correct yourself, from your flagrantly idiotic rant about Top being "billy bigrigger" (when he doesn't drive truck), a term you use frequently, that describes, well, you and Roger, more than anyone else here. If Top was wrong, you could have -easily- made your point without being abrasive, as others did, yet you attacked. Which is why -you're- always attacked. Because you DESERVE it, Richard. You actively -earn- the animosity of others, because you CAN'T KEEP YOUR ****ING MOUTH SHUT. Of course he can't hear a word of that, and immediately starts this. Richard, who is also a career pedophile and damn proud of it, has had, and will always have, the same problem, and that's that he just can't keep his festering gob shut. Pedophile being defined here No, Richard. No. Not "pedophile being defined" however it's convenient to you. Pedophile -has- a definition, and I've posted it many times, with your grossly inapropriate posting history. It's a matter of -permanent- record, Richard, and you can't spin puppy **** into butterscotch pudding. as a person who others claim is a pedophile because the damning word sticks to more feeble brains than any other word. No one has ever proven, in 10 years, that I am, have been, or currently am, a true pedophile. It's nothing more than ill words on a screen. What amazes me is that he's skunked a dozen usenet groups over the years, is internationally know as a scumbag, but still sees the world through his own rose colored glasses, like we might have forgotten his previous and extensive bombast and flummery. While ****heads like you keep wanting to let the world know about the past anyway they can. No proof, just a lot of hot air. I just state the facts, -with- the proof. You're the one with the revolving definitions and X-files DD214. You could clear that discharge up -anytime-, and choose to make excuses instead. We -know- why, Richard. Funny, or sad? Sad boy you are If I was any happier, I'd have to be -two- people. and you wore a uniform? Yeah, for an entire enlistment, imagine that. I know that's a foriegn concept to you. God help us all. Worry about yourself, dude. -- Popeye "Best thing for him, really. His therapy was going nowhere," -Hannibal Lector. www.finalprotectivefire.com http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762 |
Trucker antenna
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:06:53 -0800, (Dave Platt)
wrote: Planning to use the "Officer, it's only for emergency use" response, when challenged, could be a very expensive tactic. You might find out, the hard way, that the local regulatory body takes a "possession is considered proof of intent to use" approach... even if you don't get hit with criminal charges or a civil forfeiture order, you could find that your radios are considered de facto "contraband" and are subject to being seized without warning. ....That only works under two conditions: 1) The Gestapo Pig is able to recognize when a 2-way radio is anything *other* than a CB Radio. Those Fifes are actually pretty rare these days, and probably less than 2% of them can recognize a 2-Meter rig when they see one. These days, they could care less if you've got a CB in your car because CB is unlicensed. 2) And then there's the issue of "possession with intent". In this case, if they bust you for it, then they have to deal with the FCC. This requires about *nine* different forms to be filled out, and essentially doubles - and in some cases *triples* - the paperwork the poor little Piggies have to process. They don't like paperwork because it takes away from their donut time. ,,,So while there *is* a danger, there isn't anywhere near as much a danger as the Hams would *love* for you to believe. That's part of the deterrent that's necessary to keep the bumbling FCC out of the Hams' own internal politics, and perpetuate the myth that their self-policing wields more power than Uncle Charlie and a pink slip book. OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
Trucker antenna
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:58:56 -0500, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick"
wrote: Contrary to Stupid Richard's rantings, I've never seen an FCC roadblock in 35 years of driving. ....They actually *tried* that something like four times in three different test locations back in 1976, and while they did bust a lot of truckers for running footwarmers, they had to drop the program when the Carter Misadministration neutered the FCC by slicing their budget to damn near next to nothing - the only smart act Mr. Peanut's reign of idiocy accomplished! By the time the number of CB channels was increased from 23 to 40, the maximum number of FCC field agents was reduced from a max of 100 in some states to a maximum of *two* for each state(*). This occurred at the same time the courts ruled that the FCC didn't have the right to levy fines, and some 14,000 CBers who'd been fined for breaking some of Part 95's more bull**** rules - QSOs longer than 5 minutes, failure to use callsigns, using profanity, talking over the 60-mile limit in areas where the metropolitan region was *over* 60 miles as the crow flies, etc, etc - suddenly found they had their cases overturned and those who paid fines during a specified period were issued refunds and license reinstatements were applicable. (*) I never did get this confirmed, but one report was that Montana and Wyoming had to share one field agent, and he was only a part-time employee! OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
Trucker antenna
"The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge" wrote in message ... "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" wrote in message m... Thanks, but don't put too much stock in the idiot. You sure put a lot of stock into the idiots Dave Ruff, Shawn and realitytrasher and the lies you post prove that asshole. So why are you calling anybody else an idiot when you put so much stock into Idiots just like Dave Ruff, Shawn realitytrasher and John/nightruanch do? More at: http://MTT.DogwasherGoneWild.com Quit your crying and get over your loss coward, and just go and buy a new boyfriend doll.. |
Trucker antenna
richard wrote in
: On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 23:55:02 -0800, (Dave Platt) wrote: In article , Top wrote: Cophase being omindirectional? You need to do some more reading before you try to correct anything. The directionality of a broadside array (with the two radiators fed exactly in phase) depends very strongly on the separation between the two antennas. For separations of 1/4 wavelength or less, there's very little directionality - the pattern is very close to omnidirectional. Every dual-antenna truck setup I've seen has been a side-by-side mounting (e.g. one on the left mirror and one on the right), and the harness feeds them both in-phase. I've been assuming that this was what was being meant by "co-phase". If so, I stand by my statement that two CB antennas, fed in phase through a co-phase harness (i.e. no phase difference between the two), and separated by only 54 inches, produces a nearly-omnidirectional signal. The two antennas need to be further apart, before the pattern becomes significantly directional. Take a look at the NEC plots at http://www.cosjwt.com/index.php?a=20 to see... the 4.5-foot separation model produces a pattern which is almost circular. There is little gain towards the front and back, and very little loss off to the sides. These plots seem to jibe well with other references I've read (Terman, Kraus, and the graphs in the ARRL Antenna Book). The other alternative is an end-fire array, with the antennas fed signals of opposite phase - with these then there can be significant directionality even with close spacing of the antennas. In a truck-antenna system, this would require placing the antennas one in front of the other, separating them by several feet, and inverting the phase of the signal sent to one of the two antennas (perhaps by having the feed coax to one antenna be 1/2-wavelength longer than the other). You could get several dB of gain this way... but the close spacing will cause the antenna feedpoint impedance to drop a lot, and some form of matching network will certainly be required to keep the radio happy and develop maximum power from the transmitter. The two bottom plots on the site I mentioned above, show the effect of feeding the antennas with signals of different phase. In these examples, the pattern is being skewed off to one side - the difference in feedline length is converting the antenna from a broadside array to an end-fire array. With the right amount of phase shift, you end up with a cardioid pattern, with a broad lobe in one direction and a very deep null in the other. Ya gots to understand with whom you are trying to communicate. "Top" is the master know it all who has absolutely no background in electronics. He just drives a truck and thinks that gives him the knowledge. You've heard of "Billy Big Rigger"? You just met the dude. Top just goes along with what other truckers have said over the years. I have the actual working experience to back me up with. The only thing Top knows about CB is how to yack on it. Dave let's agree to our own experiences. Now to Richard You forgot who you are talking to again. Nothing unusual for you to get things wrong. I don't drive a truck unless you are talking about a pickup. As far as electronics backround I was in communications in the Army. I spent a good bit of time in the field in sitiuations where I had no backup so I had to know enough to make things work when they broke. I don't mean simple backpack radios either. Then there was the year I spent teaching radio wave propagation. Another year teaching programming small and meduim size telephone switches. In 2005 (well after I had retired) I spent the year assembling boards to build MRI machines. If you think I have no electronics knowledge then as usual you brain is no bigger than you little toe. |
Trucker antenna
richard wrote in
: On 2 Dec 2008 06:15:20 GMT, Top wrote: (Dave Platt) wrote in : In article , Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick wrote: I suspect you'd get more bang for your buck by simply mounting a single antenna in a better location (e.g. roof mount) and paying attention to making the antenna's grounding to the chassis/groundplane as direct and solid as possible. Cophase being omindirectional? You need to do some more reading before you try to correct anything. IF the cophased antennas are less than 1/4 wave apart, there is virtually no change. I love it when you make an ass of yourself. |
Trucker antenna
Top wrote:
richard wrote: IF the cophased antennas are less than 1/4 wave apart, there is virtually no change. I love it when you make an ass of yourself. The ARRL Antenna Book says that with 1/8WL spacing, one can achieve 4.1 dB gain with a high F/B ratio. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:55 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com