[BC] Re: No Code Vs Code Vs cutting antenna

[CBoone]

> -----Original Message-----
> << either lengthen or shorten the physical antenna or employ 
> an  antenna tuning unit that fools the transmitter into think 
> that's what  you did. If you don't, you'll get reflected 
> power and that's not good no  matter which method you employ. 
> OK argue with that! >>
> 
> Larry 
> I cannot now, nor was I in my original post arguing with 
> that. What I was asking, that you have not answered, is why 
> you believe that building a match is inherently better than 
> cutting the antenna? You are simply restating what I said. 
> Both ways are valid, it just depends on the situation which 
> is best. Maybe there was something in your conversation with 
> that new ham that I just missed in your original comment.

Ahh it wasn't Larry's original comment....(I guess my name and call at the
end of the original message was missed or somehow deleted in transit...I
certainly saw it when it got to my inbox)

> How is it that this new Extra licensee "knows nothing" 
> because he has a different idea on how to match the antenna 
> to his rig? (or pick any other arbitrarily chosen theory 
> topic) At the most, we could say that the person is not 
> skilled in antenna theory. That hardly means that the person 
> is a lid or otherwise "knows nothing," now does it? 

Since I posted the original I take it this question is directed toward me,
right?? IIRC the Extra class ticket used to be given some credit on
commercial licenses..I think they do still give credit on the code but
thankfully not on the theory side anymore....

As to the antenna question, let me back up a second as it seems a lot of
people are NOT getting the point..
I was discussing a 1.4wave vertical antenna for the best radiation on a
single freq....this "Extra" kept arguing to trim for lowest SWR...HMMM NOW
if we do that, is the antenna a true 1/4 anymore?? 
Now fellow broadcasters, what happens to the pattern when the antenna is NOT
the proper length???(I would have expected everyone to get that one)....Now
we were NOT discussing operation on any particular band or multiple
freqs...I was testing his basic theory....in the amateur bands where you do
not have to ground mount a vertical with 120 radials, the BEST way to get a
decent SWR match AND radiation pattern is make the antenna the correct
length (which in theory will be about 36 ohms!) then angle the radials
downward to about a 45deg angle if you can to make a 50ohm match...now you
have a match with the correct radiator length. Leaving the vertical at 36
ohms is not a problem since the SWR would be about 1.4:1 and the additional
loss is minimum and the radiation pattern will be proper. Matching the xmtr
to the feedline using a tuner introduces higher losses in the coax feedline
(Note I said COAX here; though losses is not that much in good coax on HF
BUT higher SWR with certain power levels can cause problems as well) and if
the antenna is operated on a freq much removed from the original design, its
radiation pattern will not be the same....yet this Extra WAS arguing against
that....(all he did was read the study guide before the test and passed it
with about a 95% score...yet he could not answer simple questions like what
the correct max deviation level of audible tone signaling like DTMF, etc on
a FM transceiver; the proper way to set clipping or limiting in the same rig
using voice;  etc.)
 
There is much more but I was merely offering ONE example...and I see this in
a lot of "new" amateurs here every day who memorize the study guides and
learn nothing from them....BTW the Extra in question has been a ham for more
than 10 years but had just become an Extra recently...all because he could
read the answers and memorize them out of the book!...

MAYBE you don't see this in your area.....but alas, I DO.....I know a lot of
Extra class guys who I often wonder if they bought their licenses (it was
well known a number of years ago you could buy an Extra class test around
the Houston area for about $300 or so from some CB type VEC teams......this
was when code was still 20wpm) A lot of the older hams agewise or license
term (even some that came from the CB ranks in the 70s and early 80s) are
disgusted with it. If they try to offer to help in teaching, etc, they get
told "we don't need to know all that!" or "you sound like a smarta$$..and we
don't care about your opinion!" One of these older hams who tried to help
was a WELL respected TV/radio broadcast engineer who built one of the local
TV stations in the 50s and was the CE there until the 80s....that was total
disrespect (yet I see that all the time) The tests should not be so easy
that anyone who can memorize the test pass them and get their
ticket...otherwise, whats the value of the license?? Ham radio is supposed
to be a TECHNICAL pool...well in a lot of cases, I don't see that being true
anymore. All I see now is rubby ducky commandos who get their license and
then think they know everything and if you try to correct them or teach
them, they get upset!! And OH YES, this is the kind of ham who would forward
the email about Madalyn Murry OHair and RM2493...why? Because they got it
from one of their good buddies so it must be true!!! (forget about them
using their own brains!)

> This is what has always bothered me about the changes in the 
> licensing of hams. The _stupid_ incentive licensing makes me 
> gag. The "leader" in our study group wanted to take me out to 
> the back 40, string me up in a tree by my thumbs to allow me 
> to twist in the breeze until the birds picked the flesh from 
> my bones, because I was primarily interested in VHF and 
> wanted to go direct to my Tech license. Absolutely positively stupid. 

I have a lot of friends who are Techs....could be Generals or Extras NOW
because the code speed is down to 5wpm...
ONE did get upgraded because of the grandfathering (he was a WA5 tech from
the 60s)....but others don't seem to care...
And with all the operating I have done in the last 5 years, I could get by
with a Tech...but since I have my Advanced (and I never tried for the
Extra...never saw the need), I can still play in the HF bands..but I prefer
6m and the unused VHF/UHF bands (I like a challenge! :) Yes, that was
stupid.....however, incentive licensing is basically gone...

> The "I had to do it, so you have to do it" attitude has to 
> change. This is one of the things turns perspective people 
> off from ham radio. A person should be allowed to get the 
> license of choice based on interest, without going through 
> all the intermediate levels to get there. Today, the Morse 
> code requirement is obsolete. 

I agree there...Code HAS been obsolete for a long time....(and I was one of
the biggest code supporters for years)...
BUT there can be no excuse for someone with the proper license not knowing
basic theory, etc....too many of them have become appliance operators....if
they ever tried to troubleshoot a regular linear power supply, they would be
lost beyond checking the fuse!! (and Im not talking about those license just
last week either!..of course I have seen some broadcast engineers I could
throw in the same boat; I think we all have at one time or another! For some
reason, it seems to be getting worse these days in every field ;)

> Jeff Glass, Advanced
> WB9ETG since 1970 

Chris
WB5ITT - Advanced since Aug1974 
WN5ITT 1973-1974 :)