Donald, I don't disregard what I see in the pattern you posted. I just think the 1/4 wave pattern in the cone area is an anomaly. If you bothered to check the similar pattern for the 5/8 CST model that Siro publishes on their Website for their new Gain Master...you will see the same anomaly for that 1/8 wave element at the base. See at the bottom.
If you bother to check my Sigma 4 model below...you will see the same anomaly. I just exaggerated the image so we could see the radials are slanted and we see the bottom area of the red line looks to be curved a little. If you check the red line for the currents on the radiator you will see the more traditional look for a 1/4 wave element's current distribution that we might expect. Rather than curve a little, it goes straight down and does not look to curve any at the bottom.
You just rave about what you want to see, and make all kinds of wild-eyed assumptions, explaining to us how this is important and does this and does that. We see what you see, but you make claims without a thread of evidence to prove anything. To state that, somehow, a 1/4 radiating element can produce a pattern that looks like a 1/2 wave radiator is ridicules at best Donald. Something else is at play here Donald. You just have a vale over your face on this stuff.
This is BS too and it is obvious that this curve issue at the bottom of a 1/4 wave radiating element is not producing a 1/2 wave pattern. This is truly an anomaly.
Donald you say that all the time. Nobody has taken your challenge to test that idea and report back showing us what they find. You won't do it...so here we sit with just your word on the matter. Dale on eHam quite, DB quite...there is nobody out there to help prove your findings. All you can do is criticize or ingnore the evidence I post. You won't even argue the points in my evidence...you just claim I'm crazy or foolish.
None of us know what Cebik really meant. I recently asked Bob's if Cebik knew anything about the Vector design. I read his account, and Bob told us he described the idea to Cebik. Cebik did not know the antenna, but he does understand modeling...its aspects and limitations. Cebik's references were very likely talking about modeling...and you ignore that possibility too.
Don't be so hard on yourself. Your problem is the vale over your face.
You just have a good product that does what the customer wants Donald. What the customer sees, confirms that, and has little to do with how the S4 design works, and for sure like you are trying to describe.
My model that I just posted, may not be perfect, but it shows how much better the S4 design is over a 1/2 and 5/8 wave. But that just not enough for you.
Over the years I've seen terrible acting antennas, with terrible matches and TVI, all over hell's half acre, perform as good or better than some of my others...that I knew were setup better.
Check out my Eznec image for my S4 below. As noted you will see the currents have been enhanced, and we see a similar anomaly. Again go check out Sirio's 5/8 wave pattern in their GM page...we see the same.
Click here: http://www.gain-master.it/vsconventional.php
