RHF wrote:

[stuff]

RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here
which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ...

I had a chit load of ignorance (still do in many areas, including this
one!), you don't know until you do ... we are all here on differing
levels, we can all get along. When Roy, Cecil and others make
statements, I LISTEN, may not understand it, but I listen! :-)

I understand; trust me, you have done nothing to either make me like
you, or not ... that may or may not come later.

Now, this discussion continues ...

Warm regards,
JS

In article ,
Dave wrote:

John Smith wrote:
wrote:


Well, sure, but what does transmitting have to do with
anything? We are not talking about transmitting.
...

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, it is the same communication, both
ways, simply in reverse ... like I have stated before, the exact same
laws of physics governing the antenna makes it equally acceptable to
both transmitting and receiving. The same pattern seen in the signal
transmitted will be seen in the signal(s) received.

Your argument is the equivalent to arguing that a car designed to go
forward would not be acceptable when backing up ... simply ridiculous!

Regards,
JS
How does one transmit MW with a ferrite bar antenna?

An MW ferrite antenna:
Transmit antenna rating poor.
Coffee mug warmer rating excellent.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
John Smith wrote:

Telamon wrote:

...
Yeah but we don't care about transmitting goofball, we care about
receiving and so that statement "A random wire (e.g. inverted L)
transmits nicely if you use a tuner at the feed point" by Dave is
relevant where you are not.


You ridiculous fool. You are the most complete brain dead example of a
sub-human which has ever been presented to me ...

You dumb twit. We don't care about transmitting.

Receiving is EQUALLY as important as the transmitting element in the
above.

Again you dumb twit, we don't care about transmitting.

Or, to explain it to the necessary point, for a mental midget, such
as yourself: "If the signal being transmitted is low power, or there
are bad conditions, and, perhaps, the guy is in Australia, I'd better
have the "best" antenna possible. However, if I am receiving the
"50,000 watt atmosphere burner", 50 miles away, a rusty coat-hanger,
most likely, would work ..."

You are one funny guy I'll give you that.

However, you mileage may vary with you "magical antenna logic!" grin

The only magic around here is spouted by you. Your experience is
"magically" different than anyone else's and your antenna theory is
simplistic at best not to mention the great job you do of putting words
in peoples mouthes never spoken but what else can we expect from the
comprehension impaired.

I'll tell you what is "magical" and that's the conversations you seem to
have in your head before you post.

You hit me as a guy attempting to pass off "magical physics" to
kindergarten-ers; but then, even that is, most likely, a challenge for
you ... sad, so very, very sad ... :-(

Yeah, very sad of you to keep plonking and then continue to read me.

What a goofball.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Dave wrote:

John Smith wrote:

However, in side-by-side comparisons on 10-6-2m antennas I have built,
comparing a 5/8 against the 1/2 (construction methods/materials and
matching components identical) ... the actual difference, in the real
world, must be less than the width of a meter needle in the readings ...
or, put simply, I no longer deal with the extra length required of the
5/8 ... your mileage may vary ...

The advantage of a physical height (antenna length) between 180 and 215
degrees (see previous post regarding the magic number being around 195
degrees) is improved take-off angle and reduced skywave-groundwave
interaction, not dramatic nearfield voltage increases.

Regarding Mr. Smith's comments above my experience and others is the
opposite. 5/8 is a much better performing antenna than a 1/2 wave for
local VHF and UHF communications. Well worth the effort to build a 5/8
wave antenna over a 1/2 wave. The 5/8 had some kind of series load coil
part way up the whip where the 1/2 wave match/compensation was done at
the base so the whip was solid. Sorry I can't more specific then that as
those experiments were many years ago.

Mr. Smith is still lost in space.


5/8 wavelength antennas do not require a ground plane, do they?

In message , Dave
writes
Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Dave wrote:

John Smith wrote:

However, in side-by-side comparisons on 10-6-2m antennas I have
built, comparing a 5/8 against the 1/2 (construction
methods/materials and matching components identical) ... the actual
difference, in the real world, must be less than the width of a
meter needle in the readings ... or, put simply, I no longer deal
with the extra length required of the 5/8 ... your mileage may vary ...

The advantage of a physical height (antenna length) between 180 and
215 degrees (see previous post regarding the magic number being
around 195 degrees) is improved take-off angle and reduced
skywave-groundwave interaction, not dramatic nearfield voltage increases.
Regarding Mr. Smith's comments above my experience and others is the
opposite. 5/8 is a much better performing antenna than a 1/2 wave for
local VHF and UHF communications. Well worth the effort to build a 5/8
wave antenna over a 1/2 wave. The 5/8 had some kind of series load
coil part way up the whip where the 1/2 wave match/compensation was
done at the base so the whip was solid. Sorry I can't more specific
then that as those experiments were many years ago.
Mr. Smith is still lost in space.


5/8 wavelength antennas do not require a ground plane, do they?

Oh yes they do.
--
Ian

RHF wrote:


This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" :
The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices
related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating.
* All Praise Be To Them That Do.
-but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old
shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling
"k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical

I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires. I
enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. My work involves
UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go
300-500 feet (flawlessly). This is very similar to my hobby (what I
enjoy). I can't believe they pay me to do this.

John Smith wrote:


Now, let me give you a mechanical example, so those willing and/or able
may grasp the concept, in fact, let me give you a couple:

1) The neighbors light is shining in my window(s), it is too bright too
sleep--I place a thick blanket over the window--WAALAA, "masked" the
problem!

2) The neighbors stereo is too loud. I plug my ears, again, WAALAAA,
problem fixed!

3) [add your own example here]

telemundo is an argumentative idiot with a poor working knowledge of
what discussions he engages in ... :-(

But then, if you don't possess the knowledge/experience to be able to
realize this, no one can blame you for being fooled ... later.

Regards,
JS
Telemundo is a subsidiary of General Electric.

Your analogies don't hold up. You cannot transmit with a Beveridge and
you cannot transmit with a ferrite loop.

On Dec 28, 8:38*pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,
*John Smith wrote:

RHF wrote:

[stuff]

RHF, I have no bone to pick with you, don't fall victim to trolls here
which just wish to "stir up chit", to mask their ignorance ...

SNIP

- Now that is funny. One Trolling idiot posting
- a response to another trolling idiot "don't fall
- victim to the Trolls".
-
- --
- Telamon
- Ventura, California

Ah Telamon - You know me all too well ~ RHF

On Dec 29, 5:50*am, Dave wrote:
RHF wrote:

This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" :
The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices
related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating.
* All Praise Be To Them That Do.
-but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old
shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling
"k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical

- I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires.
*I
- enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. *My work
involves
- UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go
- 300-500 feet (flawlessly).
-*This is very similar to my hobby (what I enjoy).
-*I can't believe they pay me to do this.

Dave - You Are One of The Lucky Ones. - enjoy ~ RHF

RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:50 am, Dave wrote:
RHF wrote:

This is Why I refer to Amateur Radio as "The Craft" :
The Mastery* of the Body of Knowledge and Practices
related to the Science and Art of Radio Operating.
* All Praise Be To Them That Do.
-but- that is not me : for i remain simply a plain old
shortwave radio listener : who keeps his swling
"k-i-s-a-p" = keep/ing it simply and practical
- I enjoy sending intelligence from point A to point B without wires.
I
- enjoy making spikes (not Xmas trees) on my FSH-313. My work
involves
- UHF FM transmitters of between 10 mW and 250 mW. These need to go
- 300-500 feet (flawlessly).
- This is very similar to my hobby (what I enjoy).
- I can't believe they pay me to do this.

Dave - You Are One of The Lucky Ones. - enjoy ~ RHF
.

I do. Thanks.