Yuri, I agree in general with your, not out of place, semi-technical
sentiments.

But regarding lossy wires, laid on the ground, as for a Beverage which is
often supposed to depend on ground loss, we must be very careful of making a
virtue out of a vice.

I venture to say the higher an LF Beverage was above the ground the more
efficient, both on receive and transmit, it would have become. The reason a
wire as long the Beverage was so near to the ground was because of the high
cost of a lot of very tall poles.

The rest is old-wives' tales.

Or have I inadvertently changed the subject?
---
Reg.

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
People can be wrong, and usually appreciate if they are corrected or shown
better way.

To be fair, W8JI usually slowly moves himself off his always/never
rail position to a more reasonable often/hardly-ever position. Some
time ago, he and others on this newsgroup asserted that absolutely
nothing changes when one moves the balun from the tuner output to
the tuner input. The subject came up recently on eHam.net.

W8JI wrote:
If you draw a floating network on paper and look at what happens,
you'll see moving the balun results in the same stress on the core
regardless of the side of the tuner the balun is on.

i.e. a paper solution indicates that nothing changes, but ...

In real life, stray capacitances from the network to ground modify
the behavior of the system when the balun is moved, but the change
is generally both small and unpreditable.

i.e. changes can and do actually happen in the real world.

As in any distributed network configuration with reflections, if the
balun changes the phase between the forward common-mode current and
the reflected common-mode current, that can shift the location of
the common-mode current nodes.
--
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! =-----

Dear Group:
I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for me
to know what is being contended. The statement mentions shooting,
stability, termination, and at least one wire as a Beverage (wave)
antenna.
As we all know, Beverage's wave antenna is used on receiving for its
directivity and rarely is used as a transmitting antenna.

My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

73 Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin - Michigan USA
Home:


"The only thing that prevents people from shooting themselves
in the foot with the wire below the Beverage is the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy, and of course that means it doesn't help with
stability or termination."

Can you send me label from your last issue and how much do I owe you?


No I can't. I junked the copies I had.

Interesting that most noise about Radiosporting is made by people who
didn't subscribe but are somehow "cheated".


I wasn't one of them if you want people on this NG to believe that. I
did subscribe.

Henry WA0GOZ


I have the printouts of all issues that were sent out. According to my records
you received last free issue of Radiosporting 8601 - Jan. 1986. The only
subscribers with WA0 calls were WA0JRP, WA0NPK and later WA0WOF. You and WA0EUP
received only freebies and I have no record of subscriptions. Somebody is
making things up or dreaming and making false accusations.

Just wonder what the Radiosporting has to do with my posting?

73 Yuri

Reg,
the subject of discussion on TopBand reflector was conductivity of earth under
the beverage or effect of wire placed on the ground and its effect on the
preformance of the Beverage antenna (above). Here is the repeat of W8JI portion
of the posting on this subject:

The only thing that prevents people from shooting themselves
in the foot with the wire below the Beverage is the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy, and of course that means it doesn't help with
stability or termination.

- "" wire below the Beverage"" there is aconsiderable discussion on this
subject there.
My problem is with the statement " the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy"
As far as I know, to make wire lossy, one must increase resistance by some
means. In my book, wire maintains its conductivity regardless what it is laying
on, and that overrides the effect of lossy ground underneath.

Speaking of Beverages and their poor performance over good ground or salt
water, most people find it is true, some claim still good performance on LF and
MF. While operating from VE1ZZ place and using his beverages, he has one that
is running over the rocky ground, slightly down hill, 90 deg towards the salt
water and it is terminated via resistor into the stainless steel hubcap in the
salt water. That sucker beats anything else we tried, pair of staggered
beverages or phased ones. So it appears that Beverage stretched over poor
ground but terminated in the good ground beats their "better" cousins. We are
talking about 160 - 40m and definitely not using it for transmit.
This is reality in by old wives.

Regards, Yuri, K3BU.us



Yuri, I agree in general with your, not out of place, semi-technical
sentiments.

But regarding lossy wires, laid on the ground, as for a Beverage which is
often supposed to depend on ground loss, we must be very careful of making a
virtue out of a vice.

I venture to say the higher an LF Beverage was above the ground the more
efficient, both on receive and transmit, it would have become. The reason a
wire as long the Beverage was so near to the ground was because of the high
cost of a lot of very tall poles.

The rest is old-wives' tales.

Or have I inadvertently changed the subject?
---
Reg.

I just looked through a bunch of old mags and found one from you. I is
the April/May 1989 issue. Funny how I didn't subscribe, but I have a
copy with a mailing label with a date later than your "records". mmmmmm.

Henry WA0GOZ



Yuri Blanarovich wrote:


Can you send me label from your last issue and how much do I owe you?


No I can't. I junked the copies I had.

Interesting that most noise about Radiosporting is made by people who
didn't subscribe but are somehow "cheated".


I wasn't one of them if you want people on this NG to believe that. I
did subscribe.

Henry WA0GOZ


I have the printouts of all issues that were sent out. According to my records
you received last free issue of Radiosporting 8601 - Jan. 1986. The only
subscribers with WA0 calls were WA0JRP, WA0NPK and later WA0WOF. You and WA0EUP
received only freebies and I have no record of subscriptions. Somebody is
making things up or dreaming and making false accusations.

Just wonder what the Radiosporting has to do with my posting?

73 Yuri

My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

73 Mac N8TT

Judge by yourself, here is the complete posting, rest of the discussion is on
http://lists.contesting.com/archives...-08/index.html
Yuri


I'd say that given "average" elevation angles for DX, you
should treat both
arrival elevation angle and tilt from ground loss as being
roughly equal
factors.

None of that matters anyway Chuck when the pattern of the
antenna isn't any good. We know a lot more about antenna
patterns and how antennas respond over earth than we did
back in the earlier part of the 20th century.

The fact is we want the horizontal area of the antenna to
have as much response as possible. If we put a wire below
the antenna that *really* changed things we know by where it
is located it could only make things worse.

A Beverage responds in the horizontal area only because of
the high loss in the media below the antenna. Without a
highly conductive media below the antenna, it's a cloverleaf
with a null off the ends caused by the vertical ends
dominating the response.
It's all in the antenna pattern. We can have all the tilted
wave we like but if the antenna has a zero response slice
looking at it and major lobes 20dB stronger 45 degrees to
either and off both ends, we won't be very happy with the
results.

The only thing that prevents people from shooting themselves
in the foot with the wire below the Beverage is the wire
couples to the lossy media below it so well it becomes very
lossy, and of course that means it doesn't help with
stability or termination.

If you think it does, lay a very long wire on the ground and
measure the input impedance. See how it looks compared to a
~50 ohm ground rod connection....I guarantee it won't look
pretty.

73 Tom

This is reality in by old wives.


Huh? :-)
Maybe I was trying to say "This is reality even by old wives?"

I must be watching US beach volleyball chicks in their bikinis too much. They
won anyway and go to finals for gold. GO US!

Yuri, K3BUm

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:51:47 -0400, "J. McLaughlin"
wrote:

I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for me
to know what is being contended.
....
My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

Hi Mac,

The danger of this is these "arguments" (offered on the behalf of a
otherwise silent party) is that they have every chance of being under
reported, and over extended. It quickly devolves to "so-and-so
thinks...." to triumphantly prove it-just-ain't-so.

It reminds me of past statements offered as V9SRB's logic in his
behalf that never were suggested by him nor even intimated. As a
one-time shot against a full statement, I suppose that is enough to
critique, but I have seen this hothouse orchid bloom into fully
fleshed philosophies projected onto the silent protagonist by
unrelated statements forced into continuity by the critic presuming a
sub-context.

If Yuri, you have some beef against Tom, I can fully concur in his
personality taking you there. Has he offered howlers? You bet! Is
he guilty of other rhetorical shenanigans - don't we know. Is he
demonstrably skilled? Well, yes, that too.

[warning to readers, metaphors employed to a sly comic interlude]

Suffice it to say no Radio Moscow program ever interviewed a Radio
Free Europe commentator to serious issues - why would you expect such
a re-alignment of the heavens for your sake?

Ask George W for help; you might find he would take on the evil Dr.
Joyce Brothers to solve our moral problems with Howard Stern. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Dear Richard and others:
You have helped me to understand what the issues are likely to be,
what they could be, and even a glimpse of what they might become.
I shall file in my list of
interesting-things-to-think-about-in-a-serious-way the issue of what
happens to the behavior a wave antenna having a "wire" on the ground
directly under the antenna wire. I do recall dealing with a similar
issue where I was verifying a modeling issue by testing the Zo of a very
long wire over a conducting plane. Might be a paper in there somewhere.

It reminds me of a fundamentals of mathematics class that I took
from Prof. Halmos. Perhaps his greatest genius was his ability
frequently to suggest interesting problems.

I shall exit stage right 'till I have "thunk" through the
interesting bits. Thank you for your assistance.

73 Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin - Michigan USA
Home:

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:51:47 -0400, "J. McLaughlin"
wrote:

I have read several times the quotation that has prompted
discussion. (see below) The statement uses "it" too many times for
me
to know what is being contended.
...
My request is to see a clear statement in Standard English (BCC
English is ok) of what W8JI is contending.

Hi Mac,

The danger of this is these "arguments" (offered on the behalf of a
otherwise silent party) is that they have every chance of being under
reported, and over extended. It quickly devolves to "so-and-so
thinks...." to triumphantly prove it-just-ain't-so.

It reminds me of past statements offered as V9SRB's logic in his
behalf that never were suggested by him nor even intimated. As a
one-time shot against a full statement, I suppose that is enough to
critique, but I have seen this hothouse orchid bloom into fully
fleshed philosophies projected onto the silent protagonist by
unrelated statements forced into continuity by the critic presuming a
sub-context.

If Yuri, you have some beef against Tom, I can fully concur in his
personality taking you there. Has he offered howlers? You bet! Is
he guilty of other rhetorical shenanigans - don't we know. Is he
demonstrably skilled? Well, yes, that too.

[warning to readers, metaphors employed to a sly comic interlude]

Suffice it to say no Radio Moscow program ever interviewed a Radio
Free Europe commentator to serious issues - why would you expect such
a re-alignment of the heavens for your sake?

Ask George W for help; you might find he would take on the evil Dr.
Joyce Brothers to solve our moral problems with Howard Stern. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC