1. Messages
  2. EMF Calculation - No Inverted V

Re: EMF Calculation - No Inverted V #EMF

Den (M0ACM)
 

At a suitable point, I will again email John and update him with Members'discoveries.

However since the Pre November deadline is 110 Megs and up, I think he would appreciate resolving any final final data table issues in those bands before moving to infill matters in "Phase 2" - (10-110megs).

Thanks for feedback. Glad the approach 'worked'.

73





-------- Original message --------
From: "James (M1DST)" <james@...>
Date: 22/10/2021 9:38 am (GMT+00:00)
To: sdarc@groups.io
Subject: Re: [sdarc] EMF Calculation - No Inverted V #EMF

As I said last night Den, I thoroughly enjoyed the topic.  Thanks again for doing all the leg work to make it understandable for the masses.

You indicate you have a list of issues...  Is that an internal list or are you feeding it back to the RSGB?

James

On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 09:33, Den (M0ACM) <denf.acm@...> wrote:
Noted the V2000 anomaly at 50megs.
I will add it the list of issues noted.

You are absolutely right, the V2000 should do 6 (and 10 ?).

I think the achilles heel of the whole calc situation is going to be the behind the scenes data used to set up the aerial gain data.

It might be well worth downloading the Thilo Kootz model and checking both 2m and 6m for the V2000 with his calc as I am pretty certain HIS tables will include that collinear on 6.

If the 2m figs tie up with rsgb/ofcom, I think you would be well safe accepting his 6m results too (with a suitable note to that effect in your explanation record.

73



-------- Original message --------
From: "Den (M0ACM) via groups.io" <denf.acm=gmail.com@groups.io>
Date: 22/10/2021 1:09 am (GMT+00:00)
Subject: Re: [sdarc] EMF Calculation - No Inverted V #EMF

Hi Dom.

Though I haven't done the calc run, I can confirm that there is AS YET no PAC for the 20m dipole/inv V. 

I will have a look when I wake up properly.... nodded off watching a film till my phone went bing !

Two initial thoughts come to mind...

1. I am pretty sure that a PAC will appear in due time for a whole variety of "typical" aerial set ups. JAV and Co really are working hard on their modelling activities and PACs seem to be a priority with them as I read between the lines. I think they went for the low bands initially as a proof of concept to Ofcom in an area where, as some would see it, Ofcom are struggling to articulate the Guidance. That accepted they are now free to replicate this concept to other bands and setups.

2. Assessing at 20 metres is not a current priority. We have until next spring to complete docs for frequencies from 10 to 110 MHz, so my humble suggestion at present would be to do 144MHz and up and leave HF for a while and see what emerges to assist.

Hope that helps.

...and thanks for your feedback on this evening. It was a challenge to pack something as 'involved' and critical to us all into a Talk evening without racing at such a pace as to leave everyone MORE confused than they were when they came in! 

73

Den
Join sdarc@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.