Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.57.9 with SMTP id e9csp73443igq; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 11:08:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.15.32.194 with SMTP id a42mr13624275eev.43.1373047687235; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 11:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a42si7273904eeb.41.2013.07.05.11.08.06 for ; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 11:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UvA6f-00012T-6R for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:47:41 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UvA6e-00012K-OA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:47:40 +0100 Received: from smtp-vbr2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.22]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UvA6d-0003sI-7K for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:47:39 +0100 Received: from pc-roelof (ndb.demon.nl [82.161.81.65]) by smtp-vbr2.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r65HlXJm018190 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 19:47:38 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from roelof@ndb.demon.nl) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <51D498BD.3050007@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <005b01ce798a$b0476600$6d01a8c0@DELL4> Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 19:47:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Roelof Bakker" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <005b01ce798a$b0476600$6d01a8c0@DELL4> User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.15 (Win32) X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello Jay, I don't think so. I have carried out a test with a vertical feed line and a horizontal feed line on a pole pushed out an upstairs windows. In both cases the antenna was in the same position and showed equal signal levels from the groundwave of ONO-399.5 at 59 km. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [194.109.24.22 listed in list.dnswl.org] X-Scan-Signature: 925300287489a1d7272e62b121c112aa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Subject: Re: LF: VK1OD's analysis of the MiniWhip antenna Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3141 Hello Jay, I don't think so. I have carried out a test with a vertical feed line and a horizontal feed line on a pole pushed out an upstairs windows. In both cases the antenna was in the same position and showed equal signal levels from the groundwave of ONO-399.5 at 59 km. 73, Roelof, pa0rdt