Bob, I can't argue the merits of this new idea for measuring signal strength, at least for Me. I don't see where Henry mentions Free Space in this area on page #41 of his report either.
However, I do see a fallacy with the idea that ground is a factor in Free Space modeling in your comments above. Height is also NOT factored in a Free Space models either. All losses have been removed and that is simply what a Free Space model is.
I would like to understand more about this new process for measuring signal strength. I see the chart that Henry reported to us, but I don't see how a Free Space model could be effected by changes in height. Plus, everything that Henry says about this topic on page #41 is referring to height above Earth at 10m and up to 30kM away.
I do remember Henry giving The DB a caution in his application of this feature in his modeling with 4NEC2 back around the time you posted Henry's report. However, I do not know if they discussed the idea further. Those 2 are the only folks I've ever heard discuss whatever this signal measurement feature is called.
I do seem to recall asking about the # values being reported as db's in the left side of the chart. I think I heard the higher the numbers that represent the db's, the lower the value, and thus the lower the signal and that was said because the values are (-) values.
If true, then these results in Henry chart shows the Sigma 4, without radials is stronger than the Sigma4, with radials added.
I think I right and I know, little to nothing, about this idea.
How say you?
