[BC] lpfm question

[RichardBJohnson at comcast.net]

I don't think I missed anything. I was intimately familiar with the
antenna pattern measurements made by Jampro as I previously explained.
Furthermore, before I went to college I worked for RCA Service company
and spent many long cold hours running around RCA's antenna test range
In Gibbsboro, New Jersey.

That said, if the antenna vendors are no longer testing antennas before
they ship, then somebody needs to rattle their cage. Nothing I said should
detract from whether or not a Lindenblad Antenna is suitable. Most antennas
developed by the amateur radio community are not suitable for broadcast
use because they are not "all weather" designs. However, if somebody took
the time to carefully characterize one as has been done by the vendors of
more conventional FM antennas, then they probably are suitable. BTW, a
crossed-dipole antenna, in my opinion doesn't deserve to have an "inventor name"
attached to it. It should be obvious to anybody in the art. When I "invented"
what eventually became known as a "rubber ducky," in spite of the fact that
antennas on portable equipment in those days were telescoping rods, It was
simply a "resonant spring" antenna until Caroline Kennedy renamed it.

Cheers,
Richard B. Johnson
Website http://AbominableFirebug.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "W2XJ" <broadcast at radiolists.net>

Richard

I think you miss the point of Mr. Fry's post. I the portion you edited, he
stated that the tower makes a tight vertical pattern very unpredictable at
various azimuths. His suggestion of a pole mount Lindenblad is an excellent
one; especially for an LPFM. A single bay panel would be another choice
although it is heavier and more costly than is the Lindenblad.