They have stray radiation that the FCC's computer can not model.
On 2/10/12 5:43 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: > Off top my head, it would seem the slant wire would work to create a > directional effect of one sort or other, depending on the specifics, but I > have no clue why the FCC dissed that one. They usually attach some > technical explanation to rulings. You have access to the specific > proceedings? I could come up with a dozen speculations about it, but > that's all they'd be. > > -- Guy. > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Herb Schoenbohm<[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2/10/2012 5:03 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: >>> The 120 comes from the watershed 1937 Brown Lewis and Eppstein study now >>> found in the IEEE journals. There were distinct characteristics to 120 >>> times 0.4 wl (actually 115) that improved results even vs. 60. >>> >>> That a deficient radial system on one side has any significant reduction >> in >>> that direction alone VS THE OTHER DIRECTIONS is a fairly well debunked >>> idea. That the missing radials reduce radiation in all directions, due >> to >>> diminished efficiency, is not disputed. >>> >>> 73, Guy. >>> >> Guy, >> >> What about the slant wire cause at least some directive component in the >> direction of the slant wire? >> >> >> Herb, KV4FZ >> _______________________________________________ >> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK >> > _______________________________________________ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK > _______________________________________________ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
