I noted that the recent ARRL book editor job requirements included a
degree in journalism.
I thought an electrical engineer, who knew how to write, might be a
better choice. But as the following post on the TowerTalk reflector
indicates, it looks like the QST and League publication tradition of
sound technical verification of printed content might be a relic of
the past. This is not something that leaves me filled with pride.
73,
Dick Norton, N6AA
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:06:04 -0700
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Vertical with 1 radial
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Message-ID: <4DCC3DAC.1000908@cis-broadband.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
For all practical purposes, a vertical with only one radial doesn't have
"gain" in one direction ... it merely has more loss in all other
directions. That may be useful if you need enough pattern to give you
discrimination in directions away from the radial due to QRM or QRN, but
it won't make you heard better than if you had radials in all directions.
I assume, however, that one of the articles you read was the one by
K7BKI in the latest issue of QST. That antenna really isn't as much a
vertical antenna with radials as it is a vertically polarized V-antenna
(which could theoretically offer some slight gain) since he has it
mounted 13 feet off the ground. Even in that case, though, take a look
at the max gain numbers in the EZNEC plots he included in the article
... 1.37 dbi is hardly what I would call "gain" over a traditional
vertical antenna, and at the takeoff angle of maximum F/B it's only 0.9
dbi. Personally, I think it was misguided of him to attribute his newly
improved ability to work DX to that antenna unless his previous yagi was
defective ... 30m isn't even the same band he was operating before.
But to answer your question, yes ... ARRL <is> pretty much publishing
just anything now and several of their articles over the last few years
have been technically misleading or even just plain flawed. I'd bet
that their editorial review process consists solely of grammar and context.
73,
Dave AB7E
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv