At 03:15 PM 7/26/2007, n7ka@comcast.net wrote:
>WOW.
>
>Another answer was to look at the Jim, K9YC, tutorial for info. I
>plan to do that so see if a little knowledge will sink into my
>retired brain. Also,thanks
>
>I have been wearing out my mouse deleting messages that went into
>another galaxy.
>
>IS IT TIME TO HAVE 2 RELECTORS, 1 FOR THE PRACTICAL HOME BUILDER WHO
>ASKS FOR IDEAS AND 1 FOR THE THEORITICAL ENGINEER TO DISCUSS THE
>MERIT OF 0.01 dBi?
>
>I do not own the $30,000 (more or less) worth of test equipment
>needed, so some say, just to make a working choke that might cost
>all of $15.00 to build. Nor do I want to own it. And if I go back
>a number of years I would not think of having anything except
>TEKTRONIX (I worked for then in the 60/70s) equipment in my
>home.though they did not build every kind of test equipment. HP
>built stuff TEKdid not anad we should have all said thanks to thenm
>and others who made test equipment of various types. (Lets see,
>where is my FLUKE DMM, SIMPSON 260, and my TRIPLETT VOM?)
I think the take home message is that you don't need the equipment to
build a choke, if it's from a design that someone else HAS
measured. If you want to try something new, and it works,
great. However, without some systematic testing, you'll never know
whether it was a fluke, or peculiar to your particular installation,
or whether it's a generally good design useful for others. Ham lore
is full of miracle antennas that apparently worked great or horrible
diasters, but the test was perturbed in some way, and someone else
does exactly the same thing, and gets different practical
results. (leading to long, long discussions on forums like this..)
Good quality test equipment and good experimental design gives you
good objective evidence one way or the other. You can know not only
that it works (or not), but WHY. You can do systematic tests with 1
core, 2 cores, 3 cores, etc. and 1 turn, 2 turns, 3 turns, etc. and
come up with data that lets you reasonably change the design and know
what to expect.
>I am glad progress has been made in equipment and ideas but think
>about those of us who go at this hobby from a practical
>approach. We do not need to understand the intricate details of
>something to use it or build it. Yes, its nice to learn
>"something"as we go but!"
>
>If I had to know the REASON in detail before a situation occurs I
>would have to delve deep into propagation to understand why I worked
>S5 on 6M in June at the bottom of the solar cycle, hey with 5el and
>100W from NM guess thats NOT TO SHABBY. I do not know how it
>happened, but the QSL card I received proved it did happen and thats
>good enough for me. Yes, I did learn a little from it and will be
>applying that knowledge in the future, so all is not lost. I also
>learned I needed an amp to help overcome the noise level at the
>other end; S5 was not the only station I heard, just the only one I worked.
While you might need not need to know the reason, it does help that
someone else does, and this list provides a suitable forum to blend
the copious practical experience with theory and measurement.
That's what's great here.. sure, some topics sort of diverge..
someone asks a simple question, and that provides a starting point
for a discussion of a related topic. However, as you say, that's
what the delete key is for. I didn't pay a heck of a lot of
attention to the muffler clamp discussion, deleting those as fast as
I could figure out that's what they were. However, I'm sure that 2
years hence, when all of a sudden I *need* a clamp, I'll remember
that it was here, do a quick check of the archives, and post a
question to find out if there's anything new.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|