On 07 Feb 2004 19:47:26 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

K3BU:
[snip]
|
|I used the knowledge to design more efficient mobile antenna for 160.


KB7QHC:
What design did you start with and at what efficiency?
What design did you end up with and at what efficiency?
What was the improvement in efficiency?

N7WS:

So now it's 0.51% efficient instead of only 0.49% right? [g]


Might not be reflected in your modeling results, but reality
speaks.

Hi Yuri,

The long and short of it is that you have absolutely nothing to back
up your assertions of vastly improved efficiency - that's the reality
compared to your testimonials that wouldn't get a vote on American
Idol.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

The long and short of it is that you have absolutely nothing to back
up your assertions of vastly improved efficiency - that's the reality
compared to your testimonials that wouldn't get a vote on American
Idol.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC




You are right, and you uncovered me. Shocks!
Yep, the real life results mean nothing!
Long live flat earth!

Bring your mobile 160m setup to shootout with mine and let's see your .01 dB
difference.
Can we stick to arguments without ridicule? Or is W8JI disease spreading
around?

I am grateful for the "wisdom" displayed here, for it illustrates the level of
knowledge and experience. I will use it in my article for the benefit of those
who will appreciate it. Some of the jabs will end up looking silly. Again,
Cecil, my hat off to you for your help and patience.

Yuri da BUm

On 07 Feb 2004 20:56:12 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

Long live flat earth!
....
Can we stick to arguments without ridicule?

Hi Yuri,

What are the answers to the technical questions:
What design did you start with and at what efficiency?
What design did you end up with and at what efficiency?
What was the improvement in efficiency?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

What are the answers to the technical questions:
What design did you start with and at what efficiency?

Classical mobile whip with 160m loading coil and whip.

What design did you end up with and at what efficiency?

Improved K3BU design based on knowledge gained from current distribution in a
loading coils.
Details can be obtained against non-disclosure agreement.

What was the improvement in efficiency?

Significant, from S0 to S7 - S9.


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

73 Yuri, K3BU/m

On 07 Feb 2004 21:21:50 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:
Details can be obtained against non-disclosure agreement.
Uh-huh. chip offers the same data and opportunity.

Richard Clark wrote:
I offered an EZNEC analysis that supported (circumspectly) Yuri's
position, but he blew it off chasing rainbows.

Don't know about anybody else, but that posting never appeared on
my news-server. That's the first time I have ever seen it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Clark wrote:
The long and short of it is that you have absolutely nothing to back
up your assertions of vastly improved efficiency ...

Even it that were true, it wouldn't change the result of the argument
based on W8JI's assertion:

If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal.

The only question is: Do you support W8JI's position even though his
own measurements proved otherwise?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:30:06 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
I offered an EZNEC analysis that supported (circumspectly) Yuri's
position, but he blew it off chasing rainbows.
Don't know about anybody else, but that posting never appeared on
my news-server. That's the first time I have ever seen it.
You mean you actually read this group?

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:38:53 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:
The long and short of it is that you have absolutely nothing to back
up your assertions of vastly improved efficiency ...

Even it that were true
Even IF

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
The long and short of it is that you have absolutely nothing to back
up your assertions of vastly improved efficiency ...

Even it that were true

Even IF

Shirley, you understand a conditional statement, Richard. The following
is a logically true statement: "If the moon was made of green cheese,
then a cow could indeed jump over it." May I recommend a good logic
textbook? _Logic_, by Ruby.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----