I mostly try to do models to specs, but I do mess around with ideas presented to me. The problem I run into is trying to explain what I see.
I have been told that the bow in the radials has something to do with the match and possibly the angle, but if it was me building the A/P for sale back in the days and I knew some particular setup would produce the best gain at the lowest angle and also show a good match...that is what I would be building and selling.
For years what I typically heard in CB was chatter about some technical report that claimed an inexplicable difference...due to some design mode or doing this and that to our setups.
Where I saw such reports that looked 1/2 way legit to me, I often found the differences noted and well documented...might be supporting the claims, albeit the differences measured were typically far less than the CB stories suggested. Much of it reminded me of the "Old Fish Story" or CB BS, that we've all heard before.
This is basically why I got into modeling...so maybe I could test some of these ideas. I just didn't realize how difficult it would be trying to explain the results
It would be better if folks would ask specific questions...rather than me posting lots of words trying to explain...all-the-while folks eyes glaze over and say O'Boy.
On the other hand, folks may have a question about a specfic model and more often than not, can't give me a reference to the model, thinking surely I can remember.
LC, it not that I don't want to try...it is just a tough thing to do...and then when it might be days later...stuff just falls thru the cracks.
Sometimes this works better in private conversations, and then at some point in understanding...we can always take the conversation to the whole forum.
Look this stuff over and ask me if you have questions.
