(Mark Keith) wrote in message

I know from modeling that what he
describes can work as far as the tuning device being able to tune the
dipole. "loop/cap/dipole combo. "
I tuned his 20m loop/dipole thing on all bands 20m-10m. I know the
exact cap values needed for each band.
Big deal....
But it's no different than any other dipole as far as pattern or gain.
It's no different than using an autotuner at the feed, T match, or
whatever. His loop and cap is a matching device. Nothing more, nothing
less.

g'day Keith

When it comes to modeling what you leave out is just as
important as what you put in, some times more so.
My money is still on Art.
Jaro.

(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message
g'day Keith

When it comes to modeling what you leave out is just as
important as what you put in, some times more so.
My money is still on Art.
Jaro.

To do what?
As far as modeling, I modeled exactly what he told me to. He ok'ed the
diagram of the antenna. As a matter of fact I still have it on my
server.
http://web.wt.net/~nm5k/loopole.jpg
MK

Mark you should have no room for complaints. I offered you unhindered access
to my work including the computor programing system which I would purchase
at my own expense together with the programing I used to substantiated my
findings. You refused that offer prefering to stay with the pack and
ridicule all. You have had access to the patent write ups many times as they
have been brought forward many times by members to serve at a ridicule
point and all you had to do was to click on what was supplied. They also
found a very old page that I had describing the loop/dipole antenna together
with the drawings and you are still complaining. I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,
and you are still complaining ,and now you bring up a drawing that you say
you put before me even tho you had the option of looking at the many
drawings available. I just looked at the drawing that you proffer and I defy
anybody to look at that and know what it represents. Time and time again I
tried to make peace with you but you chose to tag along with those who have
attacked many contributors in the past since they have a long winning record
in ousting many others. You decided on your nest a long time ago
so you really have no reason to complain as you still have your cohorts
around you that tend to belittle all. Your crying now falls on deaf ears.
Nuff said
'Good day' I think he said
Art


"Mark Keith" wrote in message
om...
(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message
g'day Keith

When it comes to modeling what you leave out is just as
important as what you put in, some times more so.
My money is still on Art.
Jaro.

To do what?
As far as modeling, I modeled exactly what he told me to. He ok'ed the
diagram of the antenna. As a matter of fact I still have it on my
server.
http://web.wt.net/~nm5k/loopole.jpg
MK

"aunwin" wrote in message news:RE66c.33727$po.297044@attbi_s52...
Mark you should have no room for complaints.

Who's complaining? I could really give a rats ass about you or your
antenna....

I offered you unhindered access
to my work including the computor programing system which I would purchase
at my own expense together with the programing I used to substantiated my
findings.

Why do I need yours? I have many programs. They all pretty much do the
same thing.

You refused that offer prefering to stay with the pack and
ridicule all.

I only ridicule horsecrap Art. I asked the guy a simple frigging
question..
WTF are you going to do, that his money is on? So far, he hasn't
answered. I don't think he knows. If that is ridicule,that just too
damn bad isn't it...What a whiny ass old fart you are, Art.

You have had access to the patent write ups many times as they
have been brought forward many times by members to serve at a ridicule
point and all you had to do was to click on what was supplied.

Are you talking about the rube goldberg looking thing? I've seen it...
They also
found a very old page that I had describing the loop/dipole antenna together
with the drawings and you are still complaining.

Complaining my ass.

I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work

Bull****, Art. Plain and simple.

but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,

They pretty much all use the same basic engines...

and you are still complaining ,

Again, bite me Art. Complaining my ass. You just wait till I'm REALLY
complaining you frigging fool. Don't screw with me. You **** me off,
and I WILL be your worst frigging nightmare. I'll stick to you like
dried turd particles on a baby's ass. Everything you say that is BS, I
will comment on. Is that what you really want? As is it, I only
comment on about 50% of it...

and now you bring up a drawing that you say
you put before me even tho you had the option of looking at the many
drawings available.

Art, you frigging fool, that is the picture from the modeling program
itself. I sent it to you. You looked at it, and ok'ed it.
I just looked at the drawing that you proffer and I defy
anybody to look at that and know what it represents.

Jeeze...What a frigging idiot you are, Art.

Time and time again I
tried to make peace with you but you chose to tag along with those who have
attacked many contributors in the past since they have a long winning record
in ousting many others.

No Art. I won't kiss your ass. Tag along? Tag along with whom? WTF are
you talking about?

You decided on your nest a long time ago

My nest? Crap....
so you really have no reason to complain as you still have your cohorts
around you that tend to belittle all.

Bite me Art. I could give a flying #$%^ what the others say or think.
That includes you, you old fart.

Your crying now falls on deaf ears.

You'll think crying...
Nuff said

Yea, I think so....
'Good day' I think he said
Art

Yea, later Art. MK

"aunwin" wrote in message I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,

BTW, since your memory is suspect, and seems to be failing...I did NOT
use EZNEC. I only have the eznec demo, and the demo did not have
enough segments to be able to model that with reliable results. "I
think it would have been good enough for gov work though." As far as
programming, what does that have to do with anything? I "program"
flight sim software. Not antenna modeling software. What does my
programming abilities have to do with your antenna, or the modeling of
it? Thats easy...None. MK

(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

On reflection, I guess I got a little testy with Art. But he provoked
me...
But I do apologize for the somewhat nasty comments.. But, I do not
suffer fools well.
Anyone can look in google, and read the threads themselves. When I
modeled that antenna, I nearly had to jump through hoops to get an
accurate description, but I finally got his ok, as all can read. I
modeled the thing exactly as he described, eventually, and the results
did not agree with his ideas. What was his only comment to the whole
ordeal and modeling exercise?

"quote"
"Good for you Mark! You have done a lot of good work on it' and you
got
so close.
So we put you down for " it won't work as stated,"Your opinion is as
good as any and you are not beating around the bush or hedging
Have a great week end
Art"

Unquote...

Note the "you came so close"....ONLY if I had results that agreed with
his, whole the results have been final. The results of the modeling
did not suit him, so he had no further comment. I see no claim above
that I "butchered" the model or diagram of the 20m dipole involved.
Only in the beginning, when I doubled the size to 40m. This was before
his thread "a tutorial", so I had no way of knowing what band he
wanted.

The links to the threads involved can be read at these URLS. They link
to my search, but will read the whole threads.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection. Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

On 18 Mar 2004 08:29:07 -0800, (Mark Keith) wrote:

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection.

Hi Mark,

What a novel concept! ...but then that would be the end of it and we
could roll the rock back over the sepulcher.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Art, KB9MZ wrote:
"Here he (Moxon) showed a combination loop dipole that could be used for
at least three bands. What was important to me was the importance of
coupling which brings up the issue that no where does it say that all
antennas must be based around wavelength and the accompanying series
circuit."

Just as surely, Moxon does not say that his loop and dipole antenna is
aperiodic.

Every piece of wire has a frequency of first resonance where its
distributed inductance and distributed capacitance have equal reactance
magnitudes. At this frequency, these reactances of opposite types
exactly cancel leaving only resistance to oppose antenna current.

Either side of resonance, antenna impedance rises sharply due to
reactance. Radiation resistance causes the Q to be low as compared to an
unloaded LC tuned circuit. An antenna may have a Q in the teens while an
unloaded LC circuit can have a Q in the hundreds.

Moxon may have assumed his readers understood such antennas as his were
resonant and sensitive to frequency (wavelength).

I don`t have Moxon`s diagram but from Art`s description of long ago, his
version conjoins loop and center-fed dipole rod. The feedline connects
directly to the loop or through a variable capacitor. In either case,
coupling seems complete to me.

I guess Moxon didn`t motorize the capacitance in his T / gamma matching
system, so Art patented it.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

Art, Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

G'day Keith
don't know where you get the idea that Art's whining
from, but from the way i read his last post he write's like someone
who knows exactly what he has got, and what it will do and is
confident that when the time comes he can prove it,and to answer your
question "that" is what my money is on.
To put it plainly far from whining i get the impression he
was telling you to "go take a jump",
Jaro.

On 20 Mar 2004 20:39:18 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:

and is confident that when the time comes he can prove it

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?

You obviously don't know when that "time" will be either.

I hear one of the biggest off track betting houses in Britain has
closed its books on taking bets about "is there life on Mars?" The
interviewer asked them about bets laid in the late 60's at a 1000:1
that may offer a return soon - if the bettor hadn't passed on in the
mean "time" that is. Take a lesson from this and if you have your
money riding on Art, be sure to save the betting slip where your
inheritors don't mistake it for a worn shopping list tucked into the
bottom of the pocket in your cardigan.

I would quote something about Time's Wingéd Chariot drawing near, but
that would ruffle the feathers of those who hate English Culture. Art
likens it to fractured English (?) - such ambivalence.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC