Search results

The program has features that will warn if things are "questionable" However, it still is a software...and it can be fooled....like the "diesel software" For that reason the user should be aware of what he provides for data. For some reason people seem to blame the software each time however...

Ha that explains it... i know (knew) a very clever guy who now is a woman.. thought se could be named sue by now hihi..

Oke..catching up...and found an example... like this: What i would like to ask.... whats the "fuzz" about tappering ? Nec2 is known to provide less accurate results regarding tappering (ps : says who ? With what accuracy?) yes, ! with large diameter differences if tappered elements are used...

I dont know a sue ? If never had someone constructing a radio for me.. Saying that... i think i maybe know who u r reffering to ? Hmm..... not sure... A very nice person...different ...like most of us hihi. Was it sue u mean ?

@ Marconi... which model u need online .? @ Marconi... Yes you have, and i will not forgive or forget. @ Marconi..(and u guys:-)) .. im on now...but not that often .. I do read from time to time, wont answer due to several reasons. one would be: i simply wont read all atm... and im not willing...

Hello ! Thank you for the reply and interest. If it were me...i would keep my eyes open a bit more for the Adams VFO which is more "known" and highly ....highly collectable hihi. Although im not really into CB radio at the moment, (restoring Wheel Horse "things" seems to be the primary...

As mentioned : I never said I wouldnt talk to you... Your response is rather amazing.... and I dont see how that replies to the context. Why would you respond like that ? What have i done wrong to you (or others?) I dont remember you telling me to go to the H location ? etc.. But if you...

(just to clarify...) @ Marconi... If you would post your main screen with your models...that would probably answer a lot of questions I might have too. When Henry was still talking to me, he used to ask me to do the same all the time, show the descriptions or the Average Gain. I agreed with...

Hi Marconi ! Agreed in aspect to EZNEC. EZNEC is indeed a fine tool. I use it "most" compared to others. It can indeed do almost anything, and if not: In most circumstances, there are ways to "deal" with it. Tend to think: It has an "easy learning curve" compared to others. ...besides...most...

It is the opposite Marconi, To calculate the gain of a dipole is relative simple. Heck, you could do that with a piece of pen and paper :-) Differences in calculations become more apparent in line with the complexity of the system. ANSOF uses cMoM EZnec etc uses MoM Both are based on the...

Hi ! That video isn't really focused indeed. I really hope you find some time to work with ANSOF. Its the Eznec versus 4NEC2 thingy... You need to pay for Eznec and for that primary reason people have faith in "it" (don't attack me on my words here...just speaking up loud) You don't need to...

Hi Marconi.... You are thinking to complicated hihi. Read post #22 from DB. Sorry for all the confusion i might have brought up ? ...I was just wondering why anyone would model AG over real earth ? I mean...if you "effect" the average gain figure ...that means there is loss. A "perfect" model...

If allowed.. from my perspective: I think you gave (and know) the answer.. Its either gonna be 2 or 1. I mentioned 2, cause in the past: I have used software named..ehm.. Antenna Model, think its called that? From Teri software based on MININEC . Anyway...I remember at a time I had the...

Hi Marconi ! The AGT function is an important tool to find out if the model is "correct" With that said... it still is possible to have a bad model with a good AGT, but ... If the AGT gives a bad indication... you know up front there is something wrong. It is important to roughly understand...

Dont think I have said that....:) At least it wasnt my intention. But now i think i understand what you guys are after .... You want to explore the AGT behaviour between "freespace" and "perfect earth" ? Speaking from my mind....above "perfect earth" the figure should be 2 in 4nec2 Does that...

Ehm... The difference in both is more or less only one step. Eznec only calculates the AGT if you run a 3d plot. Now, you can do this in sever ways.. Above real earth or perfect or the last one... as in free space. So, if you want to `know` the AGT...you know...it only can do that with a 3d...

Hi ! 4nec2 and Eznec have more or less the same `thing` going on. In order to calculate the AGT in 4nec2 you need to `highlight` a option. In order to calcualte the AGT in Enzec you need to run a 3d plot in freespace both are the same thing. As AGT is calculated in freespace on the amount of...

agt can not be calculated over real earth. So, the "line" : over ground the model is broke, and not even close to passing an AGT. I cam make adjustments that make small changes in the AGT, but nothing that gets it anywhere close. Makes me very worried, this is just...well... I dont know how to...

test 2 .... Funny thing is... when i tried to edit my post I couldnt "paste"... a additional plot... but with a new post I can.. Just "edit" copy plot and data, and paste... simple as that... works..

Hi Guys, As soon as you have one of those (or any other "plot") on screen... (the one in my previous posting) In the top bar you will find "edit"... underneath "edit" there is; copy plot and data... click on it... then go to this forum...enter your message and press the right mouse button...