This and a few other forums, although they were years ago. Feel free to dig them up. A lot of good information in them, and if you go back far enough you can see the growth that resulted from of my study of "Generally Accepted Antenna Theory" (as opposed to that guys antenna theory) over time.
None of my test results have ever disagreed with the ARRL Antenna Book series, and I have (and read cover to cover) all but three books in said series. If anything they confirmed said book series accuracy. I have not read Bill Orr's works so I have no comment on said books, although I have heard good things about them.
I did provide photos of the VNA test results with both tests, along with several that documented the processes I used. The VNA is an AIM 4170c, the best piece of test equipment I could afford at the time, and according to direct comparisons done by engineers, comparable to HP lab equipment of the day.
No argument here, some people want to believe certain things irregardless of reality.
For me, it depends on who did the test, what steps they took, what concerns they and others had about the process the equipment used and the results, namely the results are in line with what I can confirm through said books. When it comes to "experience" I have yet to produce a result that said books haven't been able to explain. If what I tested didn't match with what I expected, I want to know why. The why is everything to me, for it leads to understanding.
Just a note, my collection of antenna books includes engineering level textbooks. If you dig around enough on these forums you will find some quotes from them. I'm sure more will be posted, although, in general, the ARRL series of antenna books is written in a way that is a lot easier for most people to understand when explaining something or defending a position...
The DB
