You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

I agree Mr M. I'm glad you pointed that out. I really wasn't trying to show the bad or worst case effects for a bad design or bad construction. I was hoping that a keen observer might see, besides the remarkably similar pattern, gain, and angle results compared to my New Vector 4K model, how a good model of a J-Pole might look.

IMO this was my way of suggesting both of these antennas might be very effective.

We've heard all about the bad ideas in design and function that bad press, CB world, and the "non-apparent collinear" guys have always claimed in the S4/NV4K discussion that has gone on for years. I also understand that there have been plenty of guys, out there in the real world, that have tried to make these antennas and failed...only to get terrible results.

I know the J-Pole is not a popular idea and models don't always pan out to suggest accurate real world results, but I was just trying to present another Point of View and a picture idea to consider in the defense of the J-Pole antenna...if a model could show good results.

<blockquote data-quote="Marconi" data-source="post: 513250" data-attributes="member: 903">I agree Mr M. I&#039;m glad you pointed that out. I really wasn&#039;t trying to show the bad or worst case effects for a bad design or bad construction. I was hoping that a keen observer might see, besides the remarkably similar pattern, gain, and angle results compared to my New Vector 4K model, how a good model of a J-Pole might look.IMO this was my way of suggesting both of these antennas might be very effective.We&#039;ve heard all about the bad ideas in design and function that bad press, CB world, and the &quot;non-apparent collinear&quot; guys have always claimed in the S4/NV4K discussion that has gone on for years. I also understand that there have been plenty of guys, out there in the real world, that have tried to make these antennas and failed...only to get terrible results.I know the J-Pole is not a popular idea and models don&#039;t always pan out to suggest accurate real world results, but I was just trying to present another Point of View and a picture idea to consider in the defense of the J-Pole antenna...if a model could show good results. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="Marconi, post: 513250, member: 903"] I agree Mr M. I'm glad you pointed that out. I really wasn't trying to show the bad or worst case effects for a bad design or bad construction. I was hoping that a keen observer might see, besides the remarkably similar pattern, gain, and angle results compared to my New Vector 4K model, how a good model of a J-Pole might look. IMO this was my way of suggesting both of these antennas might be very effective. We've heard all about the bad ideas in design and function that bad press, CB world, and the "non-apparent collinear" guys have always claimed in the S4/NV4K discussion that has gone on for years. I also understand that there have been plenty of guys, out there in the real world, that have tried to make these antennas and failed...only to get terrible results. I know the J-Pole is not a popular idea and models don't always pan out to suggest accurate real world results, [I][B]but I was just trying to present another Point of View and a picture idea to consider in the defense of the J-Pole antenna...if a model could show good results. [/B][/I] [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom