Thanks for your comments Homer.
Here are my comparison models. I don't include Feed Lines, so that will be next. This shows how models can show to be overstated or understated and how it effect the reported gain.
This is where Free Space models come in handy by reporting what Eznec determines is an accurate model or not. I use them, but I see very little use otherwise. This is what I think folks like, Vortex and JoGunn, and some others might be reporting when their gain looks to be overstated or unbelievable.
1. My comments on this issue.
2. The Control Center for Eznec is showing Free Space where the Average Gain results for the model is showing to be overstated gain of +1.12 db in this case. When this happens we subtracted the error value noted from the gain that is reported for the model. 3.02 - 1.12 = 1.19 dbi gain. This doesn't look like a good model right off the bat...and all I did was add 4 x 109" x 0.625" radials 3" inches below the Feed Point at the bottom of the antenna.
3. is the Real Earth version of this model. I show several view of the antenna and this notes the dimensions for several important measurements for the radiator, radials, mast, and the gamma section area. It also reports 4.71 dbi gain at 8* degrees. This value is noted to be overstated by the Free Space model #2 above.
4. Again this model's results Is considered accurate by the Free Space model results being equal 1. Since this model with 4 horizontal radials added to the antenna is not showing me what others say will increase the gain...I decided not to try and tune this to a better match...plus the model should be workable at 1.419 SWR at 27.205 MHz.
