On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 01:35:31 -0700, John Smith
Post by John SmithYanno, every time I read that 10 PAGE PAPER! it just peeves me off ...
Take his statement, "If a mismatched antenna causes power to be
reflected back down the line, they reasoned, this power obviously wasn't
radiated by the antenna."
He is using this to "poke fun at dummies who don't know what they are
taking about", this gives you the hope that "this dummy" is going to
simplify, explain and dispel your ignorance on this subject--however,
during the next several pages he does NOTHING in this direction.
That statement can be stated more accurately as, "The LOAD is reflected
back down the line!" DUH!
However, it can be pictured as power being "reflected", because it sure
as heck doesn't get to the antenna where it is anywheres near useful!
It sure as heck is going to cause stress and heating in devices and
components. A simple FSM will prove this to you in short order! And,
just touch those finals to prove the stress and heat.
The guy could state it, stupendously more, accurately in two pages,
max--the paper is only a disclosure of the fact he doesn't understand
what he is proposing to "teach" others ...
If you can't make a SIMPLE statement (or paper), on a concept, which an
average layman can understand, you probably don't understand the
concept(s) yourself ... end of story.
The paper stands in tribute to that mans ego ... sad, but true ... :-(
Not prepared to go that far, but there was definitely little technical
light shed on the subject, mostly hand waving to be accepted at face
value, and a lot of fun had at the expense of those few who are as
clueless as the article implies is more the norm than it is in my
experience. The article builds and burns down more than its fair
share of straw men when it comes to debunking allegedly widely held
myths. Ignorance of SWR abounds, but the rank stupidity featured in
the article is far less common.
Which "RG-8" is the author referring to? Belden 8237, Belden 8267 or
Belden 9913? His cited loss figures are way too low for Belden 8267
(RG-213), probably the most common coax in use by hams on HF and high
for Belden 9913, a spiral wound largely air dielectric coax that's a
bitch to keep dry in outdoor use. He only cites the loss at 4MHz.
Loss at 14 MHz is almost 3dB and at 28 MHz exceeds it. I'll fix the
antenna before I'll use a tuner to fool the transmitter.
Those who can only put up one antenna don't have that choice, but the
article doesn't make it clear that that necessity is the base
assumption. Necessity is sometimes a mother.