>Here is an idea for an enterpriser--or a coop of those interested enough
>to guarantee the costs: why not an independent "lab" to model and/or test
>all antennas on a consistent modeling and/or test system?
I, for one, would like to see a really "independent" lab test antennas.
There has been plenty of "dB-inflation" over the years. In fact, ARRL will
still not allow gain or F/B claims in QST ads. It was proposed a few years
ago, that QST advertisers be allowed to include gain claims based upon
accurate computer models (NEC, etc.) since ARRL does not have any way to
verify gain claims on a range. It was totally shot down by the ARRL Board
of Directors, on the basis that accurate programs were not generally
available to the public!! At that time, NEC-2 was in the public domain,
and YO, NEC for Wires and other codes had been in use for several years.
Admittedly, NEC-2 had (and still has) a problem with tapered elements,
however NEC-4 is now available (for $850) and most of the other codes have
provisions to convert tapered elements to cylindrical ones. So what is the
problem at ARRL?
Roger, WB0DGF
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|