New aerial type?

[winston1]

Whatever. When counting aerial elements the standard practice is to consider the dipole as ONE of the elements.

 

[winston1]

Tell me winston1 if you were ordering a new car, for the sake of the discussion a Ford Fiesta 1.3, would you argue the manufacturer is not reputable?

Certainly not as reputable as for instance Volvo.

 

[bernardgreen]

When counting aerial elements the standard practice is to consider the dipole as ONE of the elements.

Is it ? Proof required please.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Is it ? Proof required please.

Whilst the centre of the fold is electrically joined or continuous, there will be a null in voltage at that point from an RF point of view - so it would be fair to consider it in two halves at that point - a dipole. Have you something different in mind?

 

[SUNRAY]

Certainly not as reputable as for instance Volvo.

While you're at the order stage for the Fiesta 1.3 would you request a 1.234L (or whatever the actual engine size is [I haven't looked this up])?
No of course you wouldn't as that would be silly, just as silly as asking for a 12 element aerial when the manufacturer calls it a 48 element.

 

[RandomGrinch]

Certainly not as reputable as for instance Volvo.

Volvo - bought from Ford in 2010, now owned by the Chinese Geely Group of companies - proud makers of Proton!

 

[winston1]

While you're at the order stage for the Fiesta 1.3 would you request a 1.234L (or whatever the actual engine size is [I haven't looked this up])?
No of course you wouldn't as that would be silly, just as silly as asking for a 12 element aerial when the manufacturer calls it a 48 element.

A Fiesta 1.3 is a model number not a description whereas 48 element aerial is a misdescription.

 

[SUNRAY]

A Fiesta 1.3 is a model number not a description whereas 48 element aerial is a misdescription.

Now you are making up new rules as you go along.

Fiesta 1.3 is a model description to differentiate it from the Fiesta 1.6 version despite both being factually incorrect.
48 elements is a model description to differentiate it from the 30 element version despite both being factually incorrect.

I don't see how even you can use different rules for those examples.

 

[winston1]

48 elements is a model description to differentiate it from the 30 element version despite both being factually incorrect.

No it is a lie because big numbers sound better to the punters.

 

[SUNRAY]

No it is a lie because big numbers sound better to the punters.

The same thing applies to the 1.3, 1.6 etc, such engines are usually smaller than the model number. The number is still incorrect, do you intend to challenge the manufacturers?

 

[SUNRAY]

Volvo - bought from Ford in 2010, now owned by the Chinese Geely Group of companies - proud makers of Proton!

The irony is in #35 my initial draft was going to be: "WTF? you think the Chinese are reputable?" but very annoyingly I managed to remove it while editing an insult.

 

[bernardgreen]

No it is a lie because big numbers sound better to the punters.

Do bigger numbers sound better when prefixed with £

 

[bernardgreen]

A Fiesta 1.3 is a model number not a description

Doesn't 1.3 indicate that the volume of the cylinders is 1.3 litres ?

 

[RandomGrinch]

Doesn't 1.3 indicate that the volume of the cylinders is 1.3 litres ?

Supposedly!
Unless you are BMW, who's naming convention is based on 'virtual displacement' and kW outputs
I.e. an M240i produces 250kW from its 3.0L engine so has a virtual displacement of 4.0L!
...but it does mean PHEV's can still fit into their line up i.e. BMW 745e again has a 3.0L engine.

 

[bernardgreen]

BMW, who's naming convention is based on 'virtual displacement'

Is "virtual displacement" the same as the swept volume (*) and virtually nothing to do with the actual volume of the cylinders.

(*) piston travel times cross section area of cylinder