I wasn't referring to the vector being a collinear antenna of any kind in that post, I was just using a collinear antenna as a known example that exists in reality of an antenna with similar capability and is used by both hams and the commercial industry in certain parts of the world. To me, the Vector being (or not being) a "non-apparent collinear" is mutually exclusive to weather the RF from a Vector is steerable, so please don't make the assumption that I am making this leap, I am not.
I have also talked to Bob about this in the past. All I am saying is that modeling is saying that what he describes seeing is feasable, that is all. What does it matter if the RF is being steered down the side of the mountain, or out to the horizon, it is still steering, so in both cases effectively the same thing is happening, just towards different targets.
When it comes to the models of what is happening in free space, and over an earth, this is as expected for me. I never expected the models with the earth to change the angle of radiation simply because of a change in the antenna, or hell, even swapping it out for another antenna mounted at the same current node height. That being said, models with an earth tell us very little, if anything at all, about what is happening between the antenna and the horizon. All they are really doing is showing us what is happening from a DX perspective. If looking for information on local contacts, a model with an earth is mostly, if not completely useless.
You should go back to Henry's report on the Vector, I recall him referring to RF Steering in said report (although I could be remembering that wrong). Weather or not it was in his report, however, it was discussed between him and myself in the public thread on this forum about said report. I, personally, thought it was an interesting aspect of this antenna that I have yet to duplicate with any other antenna design except to a very small degree (aka the Astroplane antenna), but apparently no one else cared.
The DB
