You didn't do anything bad intentionally. Discussions on that antenna spawns emotions like not other. I guess it is part of the nature of the beast...
I would agree. Even if few people use it this way, the fact the modeling software can be used to this effect says quite a bit about the capabilities of software itself.
11 meters to the radials.
Why don't I just post screen shots of the wire data...
I started with the s variable from the second screen shot above being the same as a single segment length. I also modified that variable, as well as 4NEC2's auto segmentation to get AGT close to 1.
All numbers are in meters.
My vertical element tip was also decided by taking 11 and multiplying it by .625. I didn't know the actual length of the antenna's in question. This model was intended to see if I could build that type of antenna from scratch in modeling software, and I could.
I have a second model, or more accurately a first attempt that I couldn't get to match properly until after I made this one. One of its trombone section wires at the same height and connected directly to the radials where the model I used above has the trombone section completely above the radials. That one shows noticeably more skewing than the model I presented here, and slightly less gain, as well as a slightly lower efficiency. The currents in the radials are even further off of the currents shown in the model I presented here.
The DB
