Yea, I understand NB, but it's hard to fully consider guys that probably use just one incident in their radio work to try and set their ideas in granite...like God did for Moses.
If I could find the test report that set this original idea for a .64 wavelength for a Broadcast monopole being better than a .625, you likely wouldn't believe that either. Could someone go thru the steps of doing such a thing and see the results you imagine? Yep! I suppose so, anything is possible.
I use the old "Take a minute, stand back, and think about this." formula to just try and get close, then I tune as best I can. I know on thing for sure, I've never gotten it totally perfect, as you might suggest.
I would also like to understand more about the HyGain idea for raising the radials in their ground plane mounts. I think they still produce some antennas with this design. That said however, I don't believe for one minute that this design will fully and completely decouple the antenna from the Earth affects like you claim, but it is an idea to consider and try to prove.
Regardless of what we hear, there are just too many variables to handle for this antenna business to be and easy process that always can give us perfect results, and for sure in CB.
I'll get off my soap box for now, I posted an image of the I-10K, section 6, on the Top Hat. I guess this section could have changed however. My antenna is pretty old.
I also post an image from Maxwell's 2001, Second edition of Reflections II, page 20-16, Chapter 20. Read this, it may be enlightening on the subject and supports what I been saying since back in the late 80's or early 90's when I originally read the Ballantine report to the newly forming US Broadcast Industry, and the counter report by Japanese engineers that the .64 produced the most gain. There is a distinction to be had here, that only understanding can provide. ^^ ab v c^^
[ATTACH]6403[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]6404[/ATTACH]
