View Single Post
  #8  
Old January 11th 05, 11:43 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ELIPPSE" wrote in message
oups.com...
Horsepuckey, unmitigated or otherwise, does not constitute a cogent
review of the technical information presented. It would be much more
enlightening to all if the respondent had replied with a discussion of
the technical merits as he sees them from his own perspective of
theoretical and practical experience, rather than to launch into the
vitriol of an ad hominem attack.


His attack was not ad hominem. I may not be an engineer, but I did take
Latin.

In fact, by usenet standards I would judge his comments as only border line
rude. He likely felt free to snipe because your reputation here is already
poor due to several missteps in ettiquette.

This type of attack is often a shield
for the attacker's own ignorance or incompetence!


I also took Psych, Communications, and Logic. You made an obvious
statement and that may or may not apply, and then qualified it with "often"
so that you really didn't say anything. Which is good, because as I said
before, I took Latin, and this IS an ad hominem attack.

I presented the
specs; he, for his part, should show how and in what way they are not
applicable, along with his own recommendations, especially with
practical examples of received and transmitted power levels and cable
lengths.


Maybe he should, or maybe he doesn't need to. Remember, "they decide".

It would also be interesting to see, from his vantage point,
what testing he has done on the effect of signal leakage in coax on the
their concomitant creation of sidelobes resulting in attenna pattern
distortion and signal dropout.


Interesting to whom? If you don't respect his opinion, why do you care about
his perspective?

Only in this way may all who are
interested in the proper selection of cabling for their aircraft be
able to intelligently make, what is for them, the proper choice of
cable and connector type based on performance and economics. We report,
they decide!


Actually, I, like many aviators, tend to go with what is tried and true
until I see a desirable benefit that would result from a change. While a
seriously detailed investigation and discussion may bring about new
knowledge, its not like our we are all failing as it is.

You are obviously a bright guy, but there are lots of those folks already
here. Perhaps you should try to avoid any heavy arguments for a bit.