When Klaus got involved with helix style antenna it was a great leap
forward
for antenna engineering. Klaus determined the best helix angle
empirically
and tho he made errors pertaining to gain, the empirical angles for a
helix
are still being used by even the most knoweledgable with respect
to antennas especially NASA. and the milititary
Why do the scientists still refer to these empirical figures instead
of using Maxwell's laws
to determine them? True, deviation from the exact angles does not have
serious
consequences in a lot of cases but why is science not willing to
update its procedures?
If Kraus was in error with respect to gains of long helices antennas
wouldn't it be advisable
to stay with Maxwellian figures?
The present thought is that the angle is somewhere between
10 and 15 degrees, and many dispute these figures. But we blindly
follow the books
on the understanding "all is known" and view in disdain the
"unlikely".
If this were true in WW2 we would surely have lost in the end
Fortuately,
all possibilities were kept on the table. Can we say that is true now
based
on what Wood has stated?.
Was Kraus a God?
Is Roy a God?
If so, must we excommunicate all those that differ, as with Gallileo?
It is well known in Old Europe as Rumsfield called it, that one had to
be carefull
how one viewed himself when taking a seat near the salt, and then to
be told he
actually was not worth his sal tand moved from his place, despite his
personal
thinking with respect to overstating his value.
Is "unlikely" a good reason to put a stake into the ground!
Should we still kill the messenger with respect to antennas?
Food for thought
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:42:36 -0800, art wrote:

he made errors pertaining to gain

Give a specific claim of gain that Kraus (you should really learn to
spell someone's name right if you are going to say he made errors)
made - this, of course, means a real number Kraus wrote.

Now tell us what that number should have been.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Art wrote:
"Why do the scientists still refer to the emperical instead of using
Maxwell`s laws to determine them?"

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Calculations symbolize
erformance. Measurements can be factual.

Kraus invented the axial mode helical antenna after an expert predicted
such an antenna could not work. Kraus immediately went home, wound some
wire around a form, hooked it to a generator and it was an instant
success. Analysis quickly followed his discovery. Kraus and his
associates produced all the math needed to make similar antennas. My
1950 edition of "Antennas" is rich with formulas and tables. With the
labs available at The Ohio State University and the expert though
inexpensive labor at hand to work on the new discovery, I`d bet my last
dollar they got the numbers and the formulas right.

The commercial helical antennas I`ve used in the 450 MHz band compared
favorably with the corner reflector antennas we also used in that band.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Art wrote:
"Was Kraus a God?"
Reminds me of an old story.

LBJ was racing around the Texas hill country near his ranch when he was
pulled over by a Texas Trooper.

Troper asks for drivers license.

LBJ flips off his Ray Bans and asks: "Son, you know who I am?"

Non-plussed Trooper can only stammer: Oh my god!"

Lyndon says: Wrong, son, but yoy`re getting warm."

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

In article ,
(Richard Harrison) wrote:

The commercial helical antennas I`ve used in the 450 MHz band compared
favorably with the corner reflector antennas we also used in that band.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

and if you mount the Driven Element in a Corner Reflector at a 45
degree angle, you will have an Oliptical Polorization, which will
seem like Circular Polorization to the receiver. We used this
technique all the time on terristrial links at 900 Mhz in alaska.

Bruce in alaska
--
add path before @