And also the axiom that if your antenna didnt come down in the winter it wasn't big enough.
Sent from my iPhone On Mar 7, 2013, at 10:15 AM, bruce whitney <[email protected]> wrote: > Tom, > It is a very well known fact that an antenna erected hastily in harsh > conditions always outperforms one erected leisurely -nice warm day, no wind, > lots of planning and help, etc.. Every Ham I know - is well aware of this. I > can cite example after example - including temporary Field Day antennas > erected in rainy windstorms that outperformed much larger home station > arrays. > > In fact, to take advantage of this - I have been waiting and watching the > weather reports for the worst, blinding snow storm of the season - to be > absolutely sure that my next antenna project will outperform everything else > I have at present. > > Then, you come along and inject all this thinking about objective reasoning, > science and engineering into the mix to challenge many of the popular truths > - it's just demoralizing... Don't be surprised if there are people that will > feel violated or compromised in some way and will lash back. > 73, Bruce W8RA > > > > > > --- On Wed, 3/6/13, Tom W8JI <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Tom W8JI <[email protected]> > Subject: Topband: Comparison testing > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013, 1:25 PM > > > This reminds me of an experience I had with a new antenna. After working > several days installing a new antenna, I attached it to an a/b switch to > compare it with my old antenna. I was delighted, the new antenna was always > better !!! Then to my dismay I saw I had the switch reversed ... oh boy... I > changed the feeds, and continued the test. Guess what.. the new antenna was > still always better. > Lesson learned .... human nature and switching antennas in face of QSB.>>> > > There is more truth to that than most of us realize. > > I put up a G5RV about 100 feet in the air, and I used a pretty good feedline. > Doing tests against a dipole on 75 meters, the antenna I called a "G5RV" > would almost always get a worse report than the antenna I called a "dipole", > even during the times when I called the antennas by the opposite names of > what they really were. > > When I would do a test using "antenna 1" or "antenna 2", they were almost > even. > > The most extraordinary thing was with a good friend who just absolutely hated > G5RV antennas. He would say "your audio sounds worse on the "G5RV" " . This > was true even when I called the dipole a G5RV, or didn't change antennas at > all and just said I was changing. > > I really think this is why I installed a 300-foot tower just so I could have > a high dipole. I "distinctly remembered' how well a 300-foot high dipole I > had worked, and I wanted another one. After I installed the dipole here and > compared it to a vertical and other antennas for a year or two, I finally > remembered how well my old 1/4 wave vertical worked. :) > > This was eye opening to me. > > 73 Tom > _________________ > Topband Reflector > _________________ > Topband Reflector _________________ Topband Reflector
