The folly of throwing away cruft from my desk last week caused concern for my mental health. Fortunately the bearing lives. This week I look at ball-bearings, no, antennas and how an Amateur License helps you understand the drivel that manufacturers use to describe their product and expose some of the fun and games associated with helping a fellow spectrum user. Foundations of Amateur Radio is a weekly radio podcast about the wonderful activity of ham radio and covers the 1000 different hobbies that make up this wonderful pursuit, one concept at a time. You can listen to the current and previous edition at http://podcasts.itmaze.com.au/foundations/ or on iTunes by searching for VK6FLAB.
W1YW, thanks for listening, but I'm unsure what's unclear. My 4 minute podcast explains the experience I had with an antenna that a friend brought along. The instructions and marketing material were filled with incorrect references to gain and comparisons with non-existent antennas. I pointed out several of the errors and went on to suggest that the CB community cannot be held accountable for the errors made by manufacturers and then advised that the manufacturing marketing department talk to the engineering department before sending out their brochures. Do I have something against antenna manufacturers? Not particularly. Do I have something against crazy and incorrect claims being made? Absolutely. Onno de VK6FLAB
Your OP has nothing that takes me there.... what does the video have to do with your OP? If you have something against incorrect claims well, then: show us. Its 2016. I don't know an antenna manufacturer that revels in false claims. Go name them and go show that the measurements say otherwise. There's a now infamous case where a former ham published a 'Small Antenna Handbook' a few years back, claiming that 'antennas on a chip' were bogus and pesudo science--- The latest published projections are for $2.2 billion USD in chip antennas by 2022... well over a billion right now. Your link is a library. How are we supposed to find this podcast? You don't name it or directly link it.
I'm unclear what you're referring to. There is no video. The podcast is audio only. The current episode is #78, which can be found on the link or by searching for my callsign in iTunes. 73, Onno de VK6FLAB
So taking your link I stumbled on the relevant podcast. What, exactly is your point here? You make several assertions about contradiction on gain-- for starters. There are LOTS of 'antenna gains'. Maybe theye should ALL be dBi, but they seldom are used that way professionally. Same with efficiency: the latest trend is so-called 'total antenna efficiency'. Good luck finding that in the IEEE Dictionary of Antenna Terms.. Exactly which ones--gains-- are you stating and how do they contradict each other? You can put pictures up here (product sheet?) to back up your assertions... Antenna manufacturers aren't stupid and have no interest in deliberately misleading customers....
Thank you for listening. I will not be naming and shaming a manufacturer, since that was not the point of the podcast. The specification sheet referred to several different gains in the same sentence, and I'll quote an example here: In my opinion, this is a statement that makes no sense what-so-ever, in any context. As I said in my podcast, if only the marketing department would talk to the engineering department before publishing their materials.
A ground independent monopole can easily have gain--in dBi-- over a 'grounded one'. What is usually meant by 'ground independent monopole ' is a vertical radiator with its own counterpoise plate acting as a partial or full (but not infinite)ground plane, as part of the 'antenna package'. You are asserting shame but present nothing to support the assertion. Just scan the sheet and block out the manufacturer's name. Otherwise how is anyone going to learn from --or believe--your assertions?
If you DEMONSTRATE the provenance of the assertion I will be delighted to debunk for you. All you have done is, IMO, make a smarmy accusation without the evidence to back it up. You can easily scan the alleged data sheet with the company name blacked out and place it here. You are avoiding this. BTW, I don't know of any PS antenna that uses a UHF connector--N's are standard but not unique--that then gets used at HF 'CB'.... IMO, at the moment, it looks like you made this up to feed your podcast. Delighted to see otherwise. Your move. 73 Chip W1YW
One thing you may consider, sometimes companies will hire or subcontract a person to write the instructions for an antenna, toaster or whatever. Those people are trainned just to write instrction manuals. Sometimes what is in the manual isnt what the guy who made the thing said to the writter. Also their are updates and someone forgets to update the instructions too. I went through this myself on an antenna I bought. I called the manufacturer about a part that was missing and it was determined it no longer was needed. We both laughed over it. In this case instead of going through all of this I would have simply called the company and talked them about it. It's possible someone made a mistake and no one knew about it. I have a lot of respect for those companies that make the antenna's, every time I have had a problem they took the time to talk to me or if something was missing when they shipped it they would send it to me the fastest way they could.
Good point Sir. Also, beyond the actual techincal realities, there may be language translations of varying accuracy. It seems to me that many things that should be left to a technical writer in the target language are not. Instructions, manuals and advertising should be coherent and QC'd as well as the product itself. 73, Ed
Many antenna companies are either owned, in part, by hams; run, in part, by hams; or have hams in high places within engineering, marketing and sales.There is no benefit whatsever in trying to bamboozle the customer. Thirty years ago, lotsa people bitched about Cushcraft's gain numbers. This started a myth that antenna companies were BS'ing about gains. That wasn't true then and it isn't true now. And, of course, Cushcraft changed ownership three times in that interval--now it is part of MFJ while the commercial division is part of Laird. Cushcraft makes fine products. Come to think of it, that was true thirty years ago too. I certainly don't always side with my competitors, but 'shaming without naming', without a basis nor evidence, is not what we should be teaching fellow hams as a 'foundation of amateur radio'. I know: some of you guys put me through that crapola for many years. Water over the bridge. FLAB, where is the product sheet scan OM? 73 Chip W1YW
