Lancer wrote:
Steve;
I didn't play with it all that much to see which direction it
talked the best. Modeling, showed that the Max Horizontal field is
broadside to the antenna and Max vertical is more inline with the
direction that its bent. Does your news server carry
alt.binaries.pictures.radio? I put a jpeg of it there.
Red is The Hor field, Black is the Vert

Cool..thanks.

--
I won't retire, but I might retread.

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
This
little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell,
"AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who
pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order.


Oh really? I don't think I have ever typed "akc"

in any of my posts until now.


Results 1 - 10 of about 402 for "Sparky" "akc". (0.60 seconds)=A0
Sorted by relevance=A0 =A0Sort by date
Related groups:=A0=A0rec.radio.cb

From: (Frank=A0Gilliland)
In , wrote:
Many times...........even tested them.

Sorry your tests results were debunked by

Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a

voodoo tech


(Frank never tested any of the antennas.)


I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the

roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the

top was parallel with the ground (pointing

East, if that makes a difference).

Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically

polarized field strength dropped by a hair.

However, horizontally polarized field strength

made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I

listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the

lanyard.




But,,,,there is supposed to be no skip...


Some weak signals disappeared while others

came in that weren't there before. Let the whip
go back to vertical and the old signals came

back while the new signals were lost.

Looks like it's a compromise situation.
=A0



It is. You failed to account for, or at least detail, a myriad of
factors. Were you in a free zone? How near was the closest object? Did
you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests? Did
you repeat the test with the antenna on the opposite side of the
vehicle? Did you move the vehicle around? A single day's atmospheric
condition for a single test? One perfunctory test is meaningless in the
context of science.




(=A0Frank as well as you still
believes the earth is flat.)




-----=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =3D-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----=3D=3D Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =3D-----

From: (I=A0Am=A0Not=A0George)
Frank Gilliland wrote:
I listened to the toilet bowl

while pulling on the lanyard.

i do that all the time praying it will flush it away lol
_

Mercy sakes,,,,they say talking to one's self is no problem, it's when
one begins answering one's self does the character flaw manifest. Geo's
germ was caught by Frank. And how!

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 17:04:38 -0400, (Nicolai
Carpathia) wrote:
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:14:44 -0400, (Nicolai
Carpathia) wrote:
Landshark wrote:
LOL!!! I love it. All I do is type Ditto to "LMAO" and notice Geo calls
ME a hypocrite. He should talk, right BP. He defends Doug a known Felon,
repeater jammer, porn poster, spammer, nut case. Leland defends Doug
too, so George has no legs to stand on when calling other people
hypocrites.
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark
_
Frank and Hall and both ran to defend N8WWM on many occasions, too. This
little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell,
"AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who
pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order.

I have also NEVER

defended any actions that Doug has been

proven guilty of.

That's only because you claim those reported by the FCC on the
rainreport
do not constitute guilt of which the FCC claims..
You are the one who is quick to point out that

a criminal is not a true criminal until convicted.

Non-sequitur.



Yet you seem to conveniently forget that when
the shoe is on the other foot.



It sure is,,each time the FCC makes a bust you agree with.


_
Nevertheless,,,here are but a few of your defenses of Dogie. As
pertaining to his bust, taken from "king of clowns busted" and "n8wwm
makes rainreport""

N3CVJ wrote:
" .......the complaint was withdrawn because there was either
insufficient evidence, or it was
shown that Doug was not the person doing the jamming."

I was merely offering an alternative

explanations.


No,,the complaint was NOT withdrawn, as is standard procedure, Dogie was
sent a warning via certified snail mail, like the majority of other
first time offenders.

And just how would you know what Doug

received?




What difference does that make? Try and remain relevant.
The FCC lists all actions taken. You have maintained that once a person
receives an NAL, that's it,,,you're guilty. You choose to agree with the
FCC and their actions except when it occurs to one whom you defended
vehemently.




_
Here's my personal favorite personification fo what makes you the grand
mastah poobah who holds court in the Hypocrite Hall....the one of you
justifying Dogie's illegal actions by pointing to others.......
"Whatever he did, he did because he doesn't like people like you, who
have little respect for the law.


Taken out of context, in the manner in which

you presented it, that could apply to just about
anyone.




No Dave,,it's not taken out of context, as you referred to Dogie and his
bust,,,,not "anyone". Yes, it could apply to just about anyone, but it
applied to Dogie,,,,,so why attempt and obfuscate differently? You
defended his behavior by pointing to another. In fact, you say it's MY
fault for his behavior.





_
Of course, we have the more entertaining, liberal, tear-jerking, choker
you wrote in regards to Doug getting busted.... :
I have a habit of standing up for the little guy, when a bunch of people
gang up on them.
especially when the little guy is right.





Hahaha...no you don't Davie. In fact, you can illustrate NO thread, NO
topic in which you "stood up for the little guy" where a " bunch of
people gang up" on him.


You obviously are incapable of finding them.

In the very beginning, I took a stand against

those who ganged up on CBers for no other

reason than they were "different". Later on,

when it became apparent that the tide had

shifted, I took the stand to support the rights of
legal operators.


And Dogie was not right, at any time.

Maybe not his methods, but his attitude with

respect to illegal CB operators is pretty much

on the mark.


The ONLY people you have ever defended in here have been N8, Lelnad, and
Frank.

When you and other like minded simpletons

bring unfounded accusations and pure

unadulterated lies forth and attempt to present
them as truth, then yes, I will defend the honor
of those you wish to smear.
=A0


Well, by all means, attempt to defend anyone you wish, but calling names
is not the manner in which to justify your bull****, davie. That's
almost as bad as pointing to another to justify one's behvavior.



_
=A0In fact, google Dogie's call, along with "sandbagger" and you are
right there in each and every thread, arguing vehemently and acting like
Dogie's arm-chair lawyer


If not an outright lie, it is an extreme

exaggeration. I do not condone some of the

things which have happened here that you

have attributed to Doug (Which there is still no
solid proof of). The fact that my name appears
in the same thread means nothing. Google

Doug's call and "Twistedhed", and you will see
similar results. Does this mean that you

defend Doug too?




Difference is, once the google search is doen, one can read for
themselves and see what took place, not what you tell people, as it has
been illustrtaed time and time again that you say one thing and have to
be shown you said the opposite at another point in time. In fact, your
posts are chock full of contradictions and lies.



_
But,,,,let's illustrate how close you actually claimed you were to the
situation........you wrote:
"........there are people, that are in the know, that have filled me in
on some of the smaller details".

Yea so? Since I do not know the intimate

details of the situation, certain people kindly

brought me up to speed.



Yea? Tell ya' what...you name names and I'll name names..since you asked
me first of how I knew what happened with Dogie.Who brought you up to
speed, Davie,,,as only those involved know what took place...of course,
one could read the FCC files, but you say that means nothing.



_
The FCC were the ones "in the know",,,not your mysterious non-existent
"people".

The FCC was one party to one of the issues.

But they were not the only ones involved.



Same with just about every other action taken against those busted for
interference. Of course there has to be other parties involved. Try and
remain lucid and relevant.


There are other people who personally know

people involved with the alleged "jamming"

incident.




Damn,,,ya' think?


They are in a far better position to offer insight
than guys like you who only know what you

read on the internet.



There you go again,,ASSuming.


The complaint came from club members
(those "in-the-know").

Now you're catching on.......


Catching on? Taht's rich. I'm the one that brought such to your
attention back when you were talking **** and defending this felon.

And then here is the one where you claim it
could be Chuck-eye who was impersonating
Dogie to frame him and the possibility was being investigated by the
FCC.

That's a lie. I don't even know Chuck. Unless it
was offered as a hypothetical speculation in

response to something equally preposterous.
..


Whatever....,,it's there,,,you most certainly said it,,,,,,you also said
it was your understanding that the FCC would investigate this
angle...........
.....hehhhehe......ah, never mind,,the post is there in those threads
for all to enjoy,,,,, but don't say you didn't defend Dogie when he got
busted. It's an outright lie.

I haven't defended anyone. I have only offered
alternative explanations for certain events.



No Davie,,,,,you blamed me for Dogie's actions. You said he did what he
did because of people like myself...that most certainly was not only a
pathetic excuse, but a desperate and pathetic defense of one that was
busted by the FCC. Odd how you always maintain one is a criminal for
daring to speak about freebanding and talking dx, but when N8WWM is
busted by the FCC, you offer reasons why he shouldn't be called a
criminal. I am quite satisfied with your replies in this thread, Davie.
You are shining.



YOU, of all people, who stand up for the rights
of criminals to be criminals, (until they are

convicted!) to stand here and accuse me of

refusing to drive a guilty stake through the

heart of another person




Here comes that exaggeration again you spoke of, davie.



(who just happens to be someone you don't

like) before all the facts are in and the courts

have ruled.




You are the one that ran to his defense. I didnt
bring this matter to you,,,you entered yourself into the thread to blame
me for n8's behaviors, case closed.


I guess by this logic then you really ARE a

federal criminal.



Your logic. Only you and Geogre and Lelnad and Frank have called those
who dx and freeband "federal criminals",..you have cried and cried that
the term applies, illustratting your supreme ignorance of the term. Yet,
when a federal entity (FCC), charged with carrying out punishments with
no court hearings says N8WWM is guilty, you defend him, deny you did so,
then defned him some more. Issues, Davie,,,,you have serious issues.

The sign of a true sociopath.


You're getting angry again and non-lucid. ASSuming status you neither
have nor can attain is non-productive, delusional, and off-topic.



Abandon core

principles when it suits you.



You have done just that by defending N8's repeated jamming actions while
calling others a "federal criminal" for exercising their speech of
topics of dx and freeband. A whack job and a hypocrite you are indeed.



THAT sir, makes you a grade "A" hypocrite.

Dave

N3CVJ

"Sandbagger"

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj



Forest for the trees,,no wonder you and Frank adhere to each other like
dingleberries.

In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
This
little group is what comprises the "akc" that Frank always refers. Hell,
"AKC" is one of Frank's favorite terms,,google THAT term and see who
pioneered it,,,Doug, Frank, Lelnad, Geogre, and Hall..in that order.


Oh really? I don't think I have ever typed "akc"

in any of my posts until now.


Results 1 - 10 of about 402 for "Sparky" "akc". (0.60 seconds)*
Sorted by relevance* *Sort by date
Related groups:**rec.radio.cb


Very good, Twist. Now search through each one and count how many of
those occurances were quoted from another post instead of typed by me.





=============

http://tinyurl.com/ytcah
http://tinyurl.com/2yor7
http://tinyurl.com/2sapq
(Twisty cast the first stone)

=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."

"...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough."

"Athis is how proper communication wroks..."

---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= 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! =-----

In , Lancer
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:22:33 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

In , wrote:


Many times...........even tested them.


Sorry your tests results were debunked by Frank in the xterminator
thread, you are a voodoo tech

Frank never tested any of the antennas.


I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied
it back so the top was parallel with the ground (pointing East, if
that makes a difference). Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically polarized field strength
dropped by a hair. However, horizontally polarized field strength made
a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I listened to the toilet bowl
while pulling on the lanyard. Some weak signals disappeared while
others came in that weren't there before. Let the whip go back to
vertical and the old signals came back while the new signals were
lost.

Looks like it's a compromise situation.


Frank
Did you try it in Barney Phife mode? The start of this thread was
on car, it was suggested that you tie it down like a bow. Bows are
bent 180 degrees, so it would have to be tied down to the same level
as the base. I tried it and the minimum SWR point moved lower in
frequency.


I didn't pull it over 180 degrees. I don't even know if it will bend
like that without taking off the spring. But it seems like if it goes
over 180 the top capacitance to ground would increase, as well as the
inductive reactance due to the bend, which might explain the drop in
frequency. IOW, it might result in a crude form of linear-loading.


Modeling it showed that the take off angle also increased. Maybe
causing the effect you were seeing.


Possible. But with a 90 degree bend it seems more likely that it was
just a polarity issue. I wouldn't even begin to guess how the polarity
would be affected in a 'Barney bend'.






-----= 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! =-----

In ,
(Nicolai Carpathia) wrote:

From: (Frank*Gilliland)
In , wrote:
Many times...........even tested them.

Sorry your tests results were debunked by

Frank in the xterminator thread, you are a

voodoo tech


(Frank never tested any of the antennas.)


I just tested my 9' whip (mounted on the

roo-guard of my Dodge). Tied it back so the

top was parallel with the ground (pointing

East, if that makes a difference).

Measurements were compared to the antenna
straight up.......;

SWR didn't change at all, and vertically

polarized field strength dropped by a hair.

However, horizontally polarized field strength

made a huge jump to the good. Subjectively, I

listened to the toilet bowl while pulling on the

lanyard.




But,,,,there is supposed to be no skip...


Who said anything about skip, Twist?


Some weak signals disappeared while others

came in that weren't there before. Let the whip
go back to vertical and the old signals came

back while the new signals were lost.

Looks like it's a compromise situation.
*



It is. You failed to account for, or at least detail, a myriad of
factors. Were you in a free zone?


No, I pay taxes just like every other homeowner.


How near was the closest object?


The curb was right next to the truck. Gee, maybe that messed up my
test.....


Did
you have a duplicate antenna in which to compare duplicate tests?


Yes I did. Did I use it? No.


Did
you repeat the test with the antenna on the opposite side of the
vehicle?


The antenna not mounted on either side of the vehicle. It was mounted
on the front of the vehicle, which I clearly stated and you couldn't
comprehend because of your communication deficit.


Did you move the vehicle around?


Why yes, it started break-dancing as soon as I keyed the mic.


A single day's atmospheric
condition for a single test?


Sunny, 74 degrees, 20% humidity, 29.96 in/Hg, tree and grass pollen
were moderate, weed pollen was low, mold spores were high, no
measurable seismic activity and the aurora monitor was quiet.


One perfunctory test is meaningless in the
context of science.


Unless the test is conclusive. Once again you are confusing inductive
and deductive logic, but that's no suprise since the only part of the
book you studied was the chapter on logical fallacies.




=============

http://tinyurl.com/ytcah
http://tinyurl.com/2yor7
http://tinyurl.com/2sapq
(Twisty cast the first stone)

=============

"...but I admitted I was wrong, Like a man! Something you and QRM
have a problem with. You guys are wrong and you both know it and
are both too small to admit it."

"...but as usual, your best simpl isn;t good enough."

"Athis is how proper communication wroks..."

---- Twistedhed ----

=============


-----= 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! =-----

lol remember I said

if you want efficient youd be using a 9 ft whip. even bent over
like a bow the 9 ft is more efficient than a 4 ft loaded open air
coil model.

then asshole said

wrote
Huh......... A bent over 9 foot whip has a very noticeable Loss
compared to a efficient 4 or 5 foot vertical.

now hoople head says

wrote
Modeling, showed that the Max Horizontal field is
broadside to the antenna and Max vertical is more inline with the
direction that its bent. Does your news server carry
alt.binaries.pictures.radio? I put a jpeg of it there.
Red is The Hor field, Black is the Vert

I dont see any big loss there tnom I see only gain gain and more gain.
Yes clip your whip Barney style and point the car in the direction you
want to talk and you got gain, no illegal amp needed lol

Hey tnom and lancer you have proven Barney Phife was pretty cool he
knew the secret of adding gain AND obeying the law. Just bend a 9 ft
whip like a bow in the direction you want to talk. No amps no 4 ft
open air coil antennas for him lol