BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Pat Byrne <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 31 Aug 2013 12:56:25 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Alan,
I believe that most of us agree with your point, but when you don't 
have adequate test equipment or perhaps the expertise to utilize it, 
on the air results indicate success or failure.  My Carolina Windem 
and G5RV antennaes are separated by perhaps forty-five feet and run 
in essentially the same directions, but when I installed the second 
wire there appeared to be no degradation in the way that the first 
antenna performed and the added antenna seems to work well also.  And 
both wires allow me successful contacts as often as not, so 
unscientifically, I declare both antennaes a success.
thanks.
Pat, K9JAUAt 12:34 PM 8/31/2013, you wrote:
>Good morning all,
>
>
>
>My point was simply that it is not possible to declare an antenna as working
>on the basis of such a limited data set.  There is an awful lot more
>involved to just declare some antenna as working just because you were able
>to carry on a local QSO, probably thru a repeater at that.
>
>
>
>73
>
>
>
>
>
>Alan R. Downing
>
>Phoenix, AZ
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2