On 10/1/2017 5:26 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
It's a hobby . We get to choose our own metrics.
We can certainly decide what's important to us, but Mother Nature will
decide how things work.
Did you compare your antennas on a calibrated range operated by
skilled people?
There are other good ways to evaluate (or at least compare) antenna
performance. 1) Skilled contesters can get a pretty good idea about how
one antenna compares to another by using both in a contest.
2) The Reverse Beacon Network can be used to compare two antennas simply
by transmitting into both at the same time using different callsigns,
then averaging and analyzing a very large number of signal reports over
a long test interval.
3) Carefully constructed models are generally pretty good if rules for
the modeling method are followed and the model accurately describes the
antenna and considers other variables like soil and surrounding objects.
A few years ago, W6GJB and I found very good correlation between #2 and
#3 (using NEC2) comparing an 80M inverted vee with apeax at 44 ft with a
70 ft vertical that was center fed with top and bottom loading.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|