Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Response to W8JI's comments about using a K2AV foldedcounte

To: Topband List <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Response to W8JI's comments about using a K2AV foldedcounterpoise at VK6VZ
From: Bob K6UJ <k6uj@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:02:57 -0700
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Tom,

FWIW, I have been following this discussion and will agree that your intended 
points somehow get changed.

Also, I totally agree with your statement "when multiple things are changed in 
a randomly cluttered environment it is impossible to 
single out a single factor"    I am guilty of making multiple changes to an 
antenna system and then making assumptions as to 
what caused the change.  My process now is only change one thing at a time, 
then evaluate and continue on.  :-)

73,
Bob




On Sep 24, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Tom W8JI wrote:

>> FWIW, I have not heard or seen K2AV making unreasonable "claims" of 
>> performance.
> 
> Neither have I, nor have I ever inferred he did.
> 
> My point, which was addressed to Steve, was pretty basic stuff. I don't 
> understand how it gets changed so much.
> 
> My point was, when we change **everything** in a system, including where the 
> main vertical element is located in a very cluttered environment, and 
> especially when we have a station that historically has reported over many 
> years having a problem getting any vertical to work as well as a horizontal 
> antenna, it is a very large leap to single out a ground system change as 
> making a few days of operating performance feel good.
> 
> There isn't any reason to extrapolate things so simple and basic into 
> something no one said.
> 
> I think it is appropriate and necessary to mention the following general 
> facts:
> 
> 1.) When multiple things are changed in a randomly cluttered environment, it 
> is impossible to single out a single factor
> 
> 2.) When a system or location has a history of being sensitive to antenna 
> styles, it is probably not the most reliable performance evaluation site
> 
> 3.) A few days or weeks of contacts don't mean much on any band, let alone 
> 160. We all probably know this  :-)
> 
> No one should be offended by anyone's efforts to keep technical discussions 
> grounded in reality, and it certainly should not be changed to something that 
> was never said or implied.
> 
> 73 Tom 
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>