On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 21:59:39 GMT, "stefano" wrote:

Hi Richard,
I think you missed some important facts.

Hi Stefano,

No, I did not miss ANY facts. They are quoted as follows. This is
the DATA! not excuses, not explanations, not translations! It is
understandable that this is very complex for you to understand. The
science of antenna design can actually be reduced to simple analysis
of results shown in the report. The numbers below are exact
confirmation of the LOSS and POOR EFFICIENCY that confirm the eh is
like any other small lossy and inefficient antenna. It also
demonstrates that EVERY claim made for the eh is totally FALSE.


Let's look at several so that you can understand how poor the eh
antenna is:
point# Std Field eh Field eh Loss
1 310 275 -1.04dB
2 295 220 -2.55dB
3 66 43 -3.72dB
4 46 30 -3.71dB
5 36 24 -3.52dB
6 23 17.5 -2.37dB
7 20.1 12 -4.48dB
8 19.9 11.6 -4.69dB

As you can plainly see from the data taken, the further you go out the
worse the efficiency becomes. Point 8 is less than 3kM away and
compared to the antenna in the background:
the eh/tower/top-hat has an efficiency of 58%.
The antenna in the background has an efficiency of 100%

There are many charts, and on EVERY one there is in the last column a
description of eh efficiency and if we choose the efficiency of the
antenna at the last point or at least 10 miles (where the audience
is):
035° 2mS 67%
075° 2mS 61%
135° 3mS 65%
210° 1mS 81%
260° 0.1mS 120%
320° 1.5mS 59%

It is evident that the eh/tower/top-hat was compared to 5 different
FCC antenna curves! NONE of them were for the FCC mapped value of 4mS
ground conductivity even when Eatonton is in the middle of that
region. We can also see that there is a 29.5dB variation between
those curves! Where is the greatest variation? Pointed directly at
the nearby radiator of the standard antenna. If that antenna, and
power lines, and tower, and top-hat were gone (use a wood mast with
nylon rope and a choked transmission line); then the eh would be dead
on arrival.

The data simply says the eh is a dog.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


The fact that the conductivity is changed for what ever reason does
not change the fact that the eh/tower/top-hat IS ALWAYS INFERIOR.
The numbers prove this whatever anything else appears to be said!

Sorry, Stefano, you have to accept the data: the eh is a dog.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC