Somewhere else I think you posted a link to the Cebik work noted above, but this post will do. I think you'll be interested in the results of a project I'm doing using as many suggestions as Cebik makes in this article on my I-10K model...which nobody seems to be interested in, by-the-way. And we hear all about how it's the top gun. I don't have any quarrel with my I-10K, it works fine, but I don't see the big deal either, as usual I guess.
As always with me whenever some one describes something with a difference and uses the word, I jump at the chance to ask............
HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? IS IT REALLY ENOUGH TO MATTER WITH GOVERNMENT WORK? IF NOT, WHY BOTHER?
So far I'm not seeing much improvement in my I-10K model, but it is better in almost all cases except for a little lowering of the apparent gain, and if I understand all these antenna guy's point on the issues for errors in modeling, I suppose a little reduction in the gain of my models...might be expected.
BTW, I didn't get upset with Roy Lewallen the other day when I asked him for some modeling advice on one of my models. He did me the same way Cebik did you, politely refuse. So I go on the best I can, with what the good Lord in Heaven has given me.
However this project turns out, I'll post the results anyway.
Thank's for your words,
