Browse Groups

• Hi, all. This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ. As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta County s EC/RO Anyway, I have recently put up a
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 10, 2008
View Source
Hi, all.

This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.

As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta County's
EC/RO

Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and am
not quite getting the results I had hoped.

My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground. The
short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
these lengths on the following formula:

468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for the
long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet of
the longer leg is hanging down vertically.

My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
you some readings to show you what I mean:

I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:

80 meters:
2.9 2.1 1.1

40 meters:
3.3 3.1 2.3

20 meters:
3.0 2.4 1.7

15 meters:
3.8 3.9 4.8

10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
5.1 4.7 3.4

17 meters:
1.7 1.8 2.0

30 meters:
around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.

It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied the
132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that my
long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3 feet
too short.

At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has been
put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions, and
I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help, unless
I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
having.

The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.

Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make it
work better, and what that modification should be?

Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
all this trouble?

I look forward to any responses someone can provide.

73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
• I am running a 133 ft windom. 41 6 / 96 6 with a 4-1 balun. 23 down from the balun is a 1-1 choke. Right now I can get the SWR below 2 and on some bands
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 10, 2008
View Source
I am running a 133 ft windom. 41' 6" / 96' 6" with a 4-1 balun. 23' down
from the balun is a 1-1 choke. Right now I can get the SWR below 2 and on
some bands 1 to 1 The only issue I have is that the best tuning is just
below the bottom of the bands. This tells me it is a little long. I am using
an MFJ 993 tuner which brings the match below 1.3 to 1 on all bands except
160M. The next time I bring it to the ground I am going to shorten each side
a little and hope to get it to tune to the center of the band. It seems that
there are many different lengths depending on which web site you look at.

For the last few years I have used a 66' version with very good results. I
put the 133' version up this summer. It has a little better gain (3-5
s-units) than the 66'. N9AUY Bob and I Have also put both a 66' and 133 "
Windom on the LST 393 downtown. And have done the same on the Muskegon
County EOC.

Here are a couple of links Hopes this helps

http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm

http://www.gd7jwr.com/page4.html

http://www.g4nsj.co.uk/windom.shtml

----- Original Message -----
From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:06 PM
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Hi, all.
>
> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>
> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta County's
> EC/RO
>
> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and am
> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>
> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
The
> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
> these lengths on the following formula:
>
> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
the
> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet of
> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>
> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>
> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>
> 80 meters:
> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>
> 40 meters:
> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>
> 20 meters:
> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>
> 15 meters:
> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>
> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>
> 17 meters:
> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>
> 30 meters:
> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>
> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
the
> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
my
> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
feet
> too short.
>
> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has been
> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
and
> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
unless
> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
> having.
>
> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>
> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make
it
> work better, and what that modification should be?
>
> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
> all this trouble?
>
> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>
> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>
> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
• Forgot to say, I am not an expert by any means. But I love to build my own antennas. ... From: Jim KC8PCJ To:
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 10, 2008
View Source
Forgot to say, I am not an expert by any means.
But I love to build my own antennas.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> I am running a 133 ft windom. 41' 6" / 96' 6" with a 4-1 balun. 23' down
> from the balun is a 1-1 choke. Right now I can get the SWR below 2 and on
> some bands 1 to 1 The only issue I have is that the best tuning is just
> below the bottom of the bands. This tells me it is a little long. I am
using
> an MFJ 993 tuner which brings the match below 1.3 to 1 on all bands except
> 160M. The next time I bring it to the ground I am going to shorten each
side
> a little and hope to get it to tune to the center of the band. It seems
that
> there are many different lengths depending on which web site you look at.
>
> For the last few years I have used a 66' version with very good results. I
> put the 133' version up this summer. It has a little better gain (3-5
> s-units) than the 66'. N9AUY Bob and I Have also put both a 66' and 133 "
> Windom on the LST 393 downtown. And have done the same on the Muskegon
> County EOC.
>
> Here are a couple of links Hopes this helps
>
>
> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>
> http://www.gd7jwr.com/page4.html
>
> http://www.g4nsj.co.uk/windom.shtml
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:06 PM
> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
> >
> > As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
County's
> > EC/RO
> >
> > Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
am
> > not quite getting the results I had hoped.
> >
> > My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> > Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
on
> > my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
> The
> > short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
> > these lengths on the following formula:
> >
> > 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
> the
> > long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
of
> > the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
> >
> > My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
give
> > you some readings to show you what I mean:
> >
> > I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
> > following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
> >
> > 80 meters:
> > 2.9 2.1 1.1
> >
> > 40 meters:
> > 3.3 3.1 2.3
> >
> > 20 meters:
> > 3.0 2.4 1.7
> >
> > 15 meters:
> > 3.8 3.9 4.8
> >
> > 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
> > 5.1 4.7 3.4
> >
> > 17 meters:
> > 1.7 1.8 2.0
> >
> > 30 meters:
> > around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
> >
> > It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
> the
> > 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
calculations.
> > Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
> my
> > long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
> feet
> > too short.
> >
> > At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
ham,
> > who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
been
> > put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
> and
> > I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
> unless
> > I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
> > having.
> >
> > The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
> > Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
> >
> > Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
make
> it
> > work better, and what that modification should be?
> >
> > Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
to
> > all this trouble?
> >
> > Thanks for reading this e-mail.
> >
> > I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
> >
> > 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
• Jim: I think I might have met you when I did the presentation on amateur radio for the blind at the MARC monthly meeting about a year ago. Anyway, what you re
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Jim:

I think I might have met you when I did the presentation on amateur radio
for the blind at the MARC monthly meeting about a year ago.

Anyway, what you're telling me here is that all of this is not an exact
science, and that it all depends on exactly where you feed the Windom, and
what the lenghts of the legs are on either side of the feed point.

I'll keep your e-mail here for future reference.

I guess my main concern is that if I get someone over here to help tweak
things, I certainly don't want to make them worse, and want to be sure I
make them better with whatever I do.

Do you know of any e-mail users groups devoted to Windoms, or anyone else I
might contact for input on this problem?

Thanks very much, and 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ, Big Rapids

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

>I am running a 133 ft windom. 41' 6" / 96' 6" with a 4-1 balun. 23' down
> from the balun is a 1-1 choke. Right now I can get the SWR below 2 and on
> some bands 1 to 1 The only issue I have is that the best tuning is just
> below the bottom of the bands. This tells me it is a little long. I am
> using
> an MFJ 993 tuner which brings the match below 1.3 to 1 on all bands except
> 160M. The next time I bring it to the ground I am going to shorten each
> side
> a little and hope to get it to tune to the center of the band. It seems
> that
> there are many different lengths depending on which web site you look at.
>
> For the last few years I have used a 66' version with very good results. I
> put the 133' version up this summer. It has a little better gain (3-5
> s-units) than the 66'. N9AUY Bob and I Have also put both a 66' and 133 "
> Windom on the LST 393 downtown. And have done the same on the Muskegon
> County EOC.
>
> Here are a couple of links Hopes this helps
>
>
> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>
> http://www.gd7jwr.com/page4.html
>
> http://www.g4nsj.co.uk/windom.shtml
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:06 PM
> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> Hi, all.
>>
>> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>>
>> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
>> County's
>> EC/RO
>>
>> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
>> am
>> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>>
>> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
>> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
> The
>> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
>> these lengths on the following formula:
>>
>> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
> the
>> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
>> of
>> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>>
>> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
>> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>>
>> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>>
>> 80 meters:
>> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>>
>> 40 meters:
>> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>>
>> 20 meters:
>> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>>
>> 15 meters:
>> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>>
>> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>>
>> 17 meters:
>> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>>
>> 30 meters:
>> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>>
>> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
> the
>> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
>> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
> my
>> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
> feet
>> too short.
>>
>> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
>> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
>> been
>> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
> and
>> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
> unless
>> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>> having.
>>
>> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
>> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>>
>> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make
> it
>> work better, and what that modification should be?
>>
>> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
>> all this trouble?
>>
>> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>>
>> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>>
>> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Hey, Jim. Neither am I, which might be why I m having the issues I m having. (grin) 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ ... From: Jim KC8PCJ
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Hey, Jim.

Neither am I, which might be why I'm having the issues I'm having. (grin)

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 12:37 AM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Forgot to say, I am not an expert by any means.
> But I love to build my own antennas.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> I am running a 133 ft windom. 41' 6" / 96' 6" with a 4-1 balun. 23' down
>> from the balun is a 1-1 choke. Right now I can get the SWR below 2 and
>> on
>> some bands 1 to 1 The only issue I have is that the best tuning is just
>> below the bottom of the bands. This tells me it is a little long. I am
> using
>> an MFJ 993 tuner which brings the match below 1.3 to 1 on all bands
>> except
>> 160M. The next time I bring it to the ground I am going to shorten each
> side
>> a little and hope to get it to tune to the center of the band. It seems
> that
>> there are many different lengths depending on which web site you look at.
>>
>> For the last few years I have used a 66' version with very good results.
>> I
>> put the 133' version up this summer. It has a little better gain (3-5
>> s-units) than the 66'. N9AUY Bob and I Have also put both a 66' and 133 "
>> Windom on the LST 393 downtown. And have done the same on the Muskegon
>> County EOC.
>>
>> Here are a couple of links Hopes this helps
>>
>>
>> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>>
>> http://www.gd7jwr.com/page4.html
>>
>> http://www.g4nsj.co.uk/windom.shtml
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
>> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:06 PM
>> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>>
>>
>> > Hi, all.
>> >
>> > This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>> >
>> > As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
> County's
>> > EC/RO
>> >
>> > Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
> am
>> > not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>> >
>> > My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>> > Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
> on
>> > my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
>> The
>> > short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
>> > these lengths on the following formula:
>> >
>> > 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
>> the
>> > long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
> of
>> > the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>> >
>> > My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
> give
>> > you some readings to show you what I mean:
>> >
>> > I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>> > following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>> >
>> > 80 meters:
>> > 2.9 2.1 1.1
>> >
>> > 40 meters:
>> > 3.3 3.1 2.3
>> >
>> > 20 meters:
>> > 3.0 2.4 1.7
>> >
>> > 15 meters:
>> > 3.8 3.9 4.8
>> >
>> > 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>> > 5.1 4.7 3.4
>> >
>> > 17 meters:
>> > 1.7 1.8 2.0
>> >
>> > 30 meters:
>> > around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>> >
>> > It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i
>> > multiplied
>> the
>> > 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
> calculations.
>> > Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean
>> > that
>> my
>> > long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
>> feet
>> > too short.
>> >
>> > At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
> ham,
>> > who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
> been
>> > put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
>> and
>> > I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
>> unless
>> > I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>> > having.
>> >
>> > The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in
>> > my
>> > Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>> >
>> > Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
> make
>> it
>> > work better, and what that modification should be?
>> >
>> > Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
> to
>> > all this trouble?
>> >
>> > Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>> >
>> > I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>> >
>> > 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Hi Tom, Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build: http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm In summary, the antenna is 41
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Hi Tom,

Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build:

http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm

In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a half
feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and matched
with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.

Good luck!

73

Mark K8MHZ

----- Original Message -----
From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Hi, all.
>
> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>
> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta County's
> EC/RO
>
> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and am
> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>
> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
> The
> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
> these lengths on the following formula:
>
> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
> the
> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet of
> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>
> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>
> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>
> 80 meters:
> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>
> 40 meters:
> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>
> 20 meters:
> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>
> 15 meters:
> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>
> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>
> 17 meters:
> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>
> 30 meters:
> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>
> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
> the
> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
> my
> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
> feet
> too short.
>
> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has been
> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
> and
> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
> unless
> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
> having.
>
> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>
> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make
> it
> work better, and what that modification should be?
>
> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
> all this trouble?
>
> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>
> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>
> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date: 10/10/2008
> 4:08 PM
>
>
• Mark: So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my previous e-mail is probably working as well as it will? Again, mine is 132 feet
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Mark:

So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my previous
e-mail is probably working as well as it will?

Again, mine is 132 feet long--88 on the long end, and 44 on the short end.
It is fed with RG8U coax with a 4-1 balun at the feed point.

This is a traditional Windom design that I was given by another fellow ham.

Will give the antenna a work-out today and tomorrow on the Pennsylvania QSO
Party contest.

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: <k8mhz@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Hi Tom,
>
> Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build:
>
> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>
> In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a
> half
> feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and matched
> with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.
>
> Good luck!
>
> 73
>
> Mark K8MHZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> Hi, all.
>>
>> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>>
>> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
>> County's
>> EC/RO
>>
>> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
>> am
>> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>>
>> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
>> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
>> The
>> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
>> these lengths on the following formula:
>>
>> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
>> the
>> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
>> of
>> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>>
>> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
>> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>>
>> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>>
>> 80 meters:
>> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>>
>> 40 meters:
>> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>>
>> 20 meters:
>> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>>
>> 15 meters:
>> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>>
>> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>>
>> 17 meters:
>> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>>
>> 30 meters:
>> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>>
>> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
>> the
>> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
>> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
>> my
>> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
>> feet
>> too short.
>>
>> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
>> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
>> been
>> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
>> and
>> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
>> unless
>> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>> having.
>>
>> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
>> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>>
>> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make
>> it
>> work better, and what that modification should be?
>>
>> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
>> all this trouble?
>>
>> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>>
>> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>>
>> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
>> 10/10/2008
>> 4:08 PM
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Tom- I am no expert, first off. I have also built and used a few different wire antennas on HF. I do not think your SWR readings are surpising, nor do I feel
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Tom-
I am no expert, first off. I have also built and used a few different
wire antennas on HF. I do not think your SWR readings are surpising,
nor do I feel they show that your antenna is not working optimally. As
to 30M being un-tunable, it is often the "black sheep" when it comes
to HF antennas, as it is not harmonically related to the other bands.
Again- I am not surprised the SWR on 10Mc is higher than all the
others. Why are you figuring it is not working well? Do you have
another antenna to compare it to? Just curious. Performance is
subjective without a comparison antenna of known performance, or field
strength measurements.
Another thing I've found is that MANY (read "most") Baluns you buy are
of inferior quality.

Not sure any of this is help, but hopefully is food for thought, any way.

Look forward to hearing you on the air!!

73-
Greg Schippers, KC8HXO

--- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, "T Behler" <tbehler@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, all.
>
> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>
> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
County's
> EC/RO
>
> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF,
and am
> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>
> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed
point on
> my tower.

SNIPPED____________________________________________________
• I think your feed point is at the wrong spot. My ARRL Antenna Handbook suggests placing the feed point 14 per cent off center, so that a 130 foot windom, has
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
I think your feed point is at the wrong spot. My ARRL Antenna Handbook
suggests placing the feed point 14 per cent off center, so that a 130 foot
windom, has a feed point 47 feet from one end. Sometimes the feed point
is moved slightly to accommodate balanced line feeder, and this design,
sometimes called the Carolina Windom, uses a portion of the feeder as
a vertical radiator, eliminating the problem with the feed line
it is intended to do just that.

Common dimensions for the Carolina Windom are 130 feet ling, with
the feed point 50 feet from one end, and 83 feet from the other end.

So... I am thinking that your feed point may be off - AND maybe that your
overall length may be less than optimal as well. It may be closer to 30
per cent from one end, rather than 33 or 35 percent...

Just my take. I would reconsider the length and feed line situation.

============= Richards K8JHR - Gran Rapids, MI ===========
• I think I stated the wrong dimensions on my antenna, the numbers don t add up. Here is another site. http://www.radioworks.com/ccwcover.html ... From: Tom
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
I think I stated the wrong dimensions on my antenna, the numbers don't add
up. Here is another site.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Behler" <tbehler@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Mark:
>
> So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my previous
> e-mail is probably working as well as it will?
>
> Again, mine is 132 feet long--88 on the long end, and 44 on the short end.
> It is fed with RG8U coax with a 4-1 balun at the feed point.
>
> This is a traditional Windom design that I was given by another fellow
ham.
>
> Will give the antenna a work-out today and tomorrow on the Pennsylvania
QSO
> Party contest.
>
> 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <k8mhz@...>
> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build:
> >
> > http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
> >
> > In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a
> > half
> > feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and matched
> > with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Mark K8MHZ
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
> > To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
> > Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
> >
> >
> >> Hi, all.
> >>
> >> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
> >>
> >> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
> >> County's
> >> EC/RO
> >>
> >> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
> >> am
> >> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
> >>
> >> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> >> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
on
> >> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
> >> The
> >> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
> >> these lengths on the following formula:
> >>
> >> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
> >> the
> >> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
> >> of
> >> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
> >>
> >> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
give
> >> you some readings to show you what I mean:
> >>
> >> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
> >> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
> >>
> >> 80 meters:
> >> 2.9 2.1 1.1
> >>
> >> 40 meters:
> >> 3.3 3.1 2.3
> >>
> >> 20 meters:
> >> 3.0 2.4 1.7
> >>
> >> 15 meters:
> >> 3.8 3.9 4.8
> >>
> >> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
> >> 5.1 4.7 3.4
> >>
> >> 17 meters:
> >> 1.7 1.8 2.0
> >>
> >> 30 meters:
> >> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
> >>
> >> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i
multiplied
> >> the
> >> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
calculations.
> >> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean
that
> >> my
> >> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
> >> feet
> >> too short.
> >>
> >> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
ham,
> >> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
> >> been
> >> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
> >> and
> >> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
> >> unless
> >> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
> >> having.
> >>
> >> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in
my
> >> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
> >>
> >> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
make
> >> it
> >> work better, and what that modification should be?
> >>
> >> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
to
> >> all this trouble?
> >>
> >> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
> >>
> >> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
> >>
> >> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> Checked by AVG.
> >> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
> >> 10/10/2008
> >> 4:08 PM
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
• Hello Tom, Well, I am certainly no expert on the off center fed antennas but I just happened to run across the site I posted and thought I would share it with
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Hello Tom,

Well, I am certainly no expert on the off center fed antennas but I just
happened to run across the site I posted and thought I would share it with
you.

Nonetheless, we often put too much faith in SWR readings. Many times they
have NOTHING to do with antenna efficiency. All SWR readings are really
good for is to make sure that today's solid state radios won't be harmed by
reflected energy. The topic of SWR, feedline loss and antenna efficiency is
way to complex to master via e-mail.

That being said, Greg's post is one to consider as well.

Personally, I prefer to feed a multi-band antenna with balanced line so that
no matter what the SWR readings are at efficiency there will be negligible
loss therein. If you want to make an attempt to understand all this I
strongly suggest reading 'Reflections' by Walt Maxwell W2DU.

If you are only interested in getting a wire in the air to connect with the
world my feelings are that a few of us should get together with an analyzer

As Greg mentioned, 30 is an odd duck. If you really want to be hot on 30 it
may be best to have a dedicated antenna for that band.

You may also want to investigate building a fan dipole. So many ways to
skin the same duck makes this craft most enjoyable, in my humble opinion.

Cheers and best of 73

Mark K8MHZ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Behler" <tbehler@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:48
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Mark:
>
> So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my previous
> e-mail is probably working as well as it will?
>
> Again, mine is 132 feet long--88 on the long end, and 44 on the short end.
> It is fed with RG8U coax with a 4-1 balun at the feed point.
>
> This is a traditional Windom design that I was given by another fellow
> ham.
>
> Will give the antenna a work-out today and tomorrow on the Pennsylvania
> QSO
> Party contest.
>
> 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <k8mhz@...>
> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build:
>>
>> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>>
>> In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a
>> half
>> feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and matched
>> with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.
>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Mark K8MHZ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
>> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
>> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>>
>>
>>> Hi, all.
>>>
>>> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>>>
>>> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
>>> County's
>>> EC/RO
>>>
>>> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
>>> am
>>> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>>>
>>> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>>> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
>>> on
>>> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
>>> The
>>> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
>>> these lengths on the following formula:
>>>
>>> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
>>> the
>>> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
>>> of
>>> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>>>
>>> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
>>> give
>>> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>>>
>>> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>>> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>>>
>>> 80 meters:
>>> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>>>
>>> 40 meters:
>>> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>>>
>>> 20 meters:
>>> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>>>
>>> 15 meters:
>>> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>>>
>>> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>>> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>>>
>>> 17 meters:
>>> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>>>
>>> 30 meters:
>>> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>>>
>>> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
>>> the
>>> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
>>> calculations.
>>> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
>>> my
>>> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
>>> feet
>>> too short.
>>>
>>> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
>>> ham,
>>> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
>>> been
>>> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
>>> and
>>> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
>>> unless
>>> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>>> having.
>>>
>>> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
>>> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>>>
>>> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
>>> make
>>> it
>>> work better, and what that modification should be?
>>>
>>> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
>>> to
>>> all this trouble?
>>>
>>> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>>>
>>> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>>>
>>> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
>>> 10/10/2008
>>> 4:08 PM
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date: 10/10/2008
> 4:08 PM
>
• I hope to lower mine tomorrow and tweak it a bit.. I will let you know what lengths I wind up with. My antenna is about 35 feet above the ground and runs NW to
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
I hope to lower mine tomorrow and tweak it a bit.. I will let you know what
lengths I wind up with. My antenna is about 35 feet above the ground and
runs NW to SE.

----- Original Message -----
From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:06 PM
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Hi, all.
>
> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>
> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta County's
> EC/RO
>
> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and am
> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>
> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point on
> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
The
> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
> these lengths on the following formula:
>
> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
the
> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet of
> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>
> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me give
> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>
> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>
> 80 meters:
> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>
> 40 meters:
> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>
> 20 meters:
> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>
> 15 meters:
> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>
> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>
> 17 meters:
> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>
> 30 meters:
> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>
> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i multiplied
the
> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial calculations.
> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean that
my
> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
feet
> too short.
>
> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind ham,
> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has been
> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
and
> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
unless
> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
> having.
>
> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in my
> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>
> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to make
it
> work better, and what that modification should be?
>
> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going to
> all this trouble?
>
> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>
> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>
> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
• Here are the deminsions and the plan that I used. Depending on how high the antenna is, they use a different balun. further down in the text they say when in
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 11, 2008
View Source
Here are the deminsions and the plan that I used. Depending on how high the
antenna is, they use a different balun. further down in the text they say
when in doubt use a 4-1 balun.

http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/dir/jump2.cgi?ID=15683
• Gee Jim -- I ran the numbers according to that formula, and came up with an 80-10 meter OCF Windom - which is not really a windom because I think that a
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Gee Jim -- I ran the numbers according to that formula, and
came up with an 80-10 meter OCF "Windom" - which is not
really a windom because I think that a "true' windom is a single
wire, like a random wire, that is off center fed "Marconi style"...
but anyway...

I came up with a total length of 123 feet, with 79 on the long
side and 44 feet on the short side (rounded off to whole
numbers.)

Using the formula for a 160 meter antenna, I came up with
166 feet on the long side, and 166 on the short side, for
a total length of 260 feet, with 166 on the long side, and
94 feet on the short side.

The article pictures one measuring 135 feet in length, and
it is 90 feet on the long side, and 45 feet on the short side.

NONE of these measurements seem to coincide with your
antenna measurements as stated in the first post.

Maybe you need to revisit the formula and double check the
lengths to be sure both sides are correct.

Not sure what happens when the lengths are not determed
according to the formula, but are just in direct proportion to
what the formala would call for... but I doubt it would work as
well as cutting the lengths to what the formula calls for, and
not being just in proper proportion.

Happy trails. Hope this is helpful in some way.

=============== Richards - K8JHR =============

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> Here are the deminsions and the plan that I used. Depending on
how high the antenna is, they use a different balun. further down in the
text they say when in doubt use a 4-1 balun.
>
> http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/dir/jump2.cgi?ID=15683
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Well I have looked at so many numbers and different plans, now I am getting a little confused. You are right the Original windom was a single wire fed aprox
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Well I have looked at so many numbers and different plans, now I am getting a little confused. You are right the Original "windom" was a single wire fed aprox 14% off center. The antenna I have built and found plans on the web is many time referred to as a "Carolina Windom". It is off center fed at 33% and uses a 9-1, 6-1, 4-1 balun (depending on what plans you look at) and a portion of the coax is used as a vertical radiator with a choke at 22' down from the balun. Maybe the correct term would be to call it a OFC Multi band dipole. I have found many plans for this antenna and there seems to be many variations. Baluns and lengths also seem to vary.

I guess in the end antennas may be a science but than again when you can find the resonant freq of any object, It could be an antenna. ie the window blind that was in a article in QST.

I am glad to see this discussion. It keeps the brain working. Today I am going to drop my antenna, do a little trimming and see what happens. Hopefully after all this I will have an even better antenna.

Will let you know what happens.

73s Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: Richards
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 3:18 AM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

Gee Jim -- I ran the numbers according to that formula, and
came up with an 80-10 meter OCF "Windom" - which is not
really a windom because I think that a "true' windom is a single
wire, like a random wire, that is off center fed "Marconi style"...
but anyway...

I came up with a total length of 123 feet, with 79 on the long
side and 44 feet on the short side (rounded off to whole
numbers.)

Using the formula for a 160 meter antenna, I came up with
166 feet on the long side, and 166 on the short side, for
a total length of 260 feet, with 166 on the long side, and
94 feet on the short side.

The article pictures one measuring 135 feet in length, and
it is 90 feet on the long side, and 45 feet on the short side.

NONE of these measurements seem to coincide with your
antenna measurements as stated in the first post.

Maybe you need to revisit the formula and double check the
lengths to be sure both sides are correct.

Not sure what happens when the lengths are not determed
according to the formula, but are just in direct proportion to
what the formala would call for... but I doubt it would work as
well as cutting the lengths to what the formula calls for, and
not being just in proper proportion.

Happy trails. Hope this is helpful in some way.

============ === Richards - K8JHR ============ =

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> Here are the deminsions and the plan that I used. Depending on
how high the antenna is, they use a different balun. further down in the
text they say when in doubt use a 4-1 balun.
>
> http://www.dxzone. com/cgi-bin/ dir/jump2. cgi?ID=15683
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

• When ya gonna try it? Maybe I can find you on the air... ================ K8JHR ================= ... ===================================================
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
When ya gonna try it? Maybe I can find you on the air...

================ K8JHR =================

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> Well I made some changes. Went to 80' on the long side and 45 on the
> short. 40M got much better 3.9 to 1.5 however 20 went the other way,
> from 1.6 to 3.6. Tuner still cleans things up. Wish I had many more
> hours to play but Will give it a try on the air and see what happens.

===================================================
• Well I made some changes. Went to 80 on the long side and 45 on the short. 40M got much better 3.9 to 1.5 however 20 went the other way, from 1.6 to 3.6.
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Well I made some changes. Went  to 80' on the long side and 45 on the short. 40M got much better 3.9 to 1.5 however 20 went the other way, from 1.6 to 3.6. Tuner still cleans things up. Wish I had many more hours to play but Will give it a try on the air and see what happens.

• How about 8 PM on 14.235? I reset my tuners memory and it does not do as much tuning within each band. So it appears that even though the swr has changed it is
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
How about 8 PM on 14.235?

I reset my tuners memory and it does not do as much tuning within each band. So it appears that even though the swr has changed it is flatter across each band.

Tom: Hope some of this information has helped you.
What kind of tuner are you running?

I will do some more SWR reading and record them so you can compare.

----- Original Message -----
From: Richards
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

When ya gonna try it? Maybe I can find you on the air...

============ ==== K8JHR ============ =====

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> Well I made some changes. Went to 80' on the long side and 45 on the
> short. 40M got much better 3.9 to 1.5 however 20 went the other way,
> from 1.6 to 3.6. Tuner still cleans things up. Wish I had many more
> hours to play but Will give it a try on the air and see what happens.

============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ===

• Greg: Sorry for the delay in my response. Just catching up on e-mail here, since I spent most of the week-end doing the Pennsylvania QSO Party contest.
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Greg:

Sorry for the delay in my response.

Just catching up on e-mail here, since I spent most of the week-end doing
the Pennsylvania QSO Party contest.

Actually, you may be right:

I was very surprised as to how well my Windom actually worked during the
contest, especially given the absolutely horendous conditions on 40 meters
yesterday.

Made 250 contacts, and got all but 4 of the 67 Pennsylvania counties.

Worked 40 and 80 CW and phone.

A real fun contest to be sure, since I grew up in PA and got my first ham

Will continue to work with the antenna, but I was very pleasantly surprised.

73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids

----- Original Message -----
From: "kc8hxo" <kc8hxo@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 12:15 PM
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: any Windom experts out there?

Tom-
I am no expert, first off. I have also built and used a few different
wire antennas on HF. I do not think your SWR readings are surpising,
nor do I feel they show that your antenna is not working optimally. As
to 30M being un-tunable, it is often the "black sheep" when it comes
to HF antennas, as it is not harmonically related to the other bands.
Again- I am not surprised the SWR on 10Mc is higher than all the
others. Why are you figuring it is not working well? Do you have
another antenna to compare it to? Just curious. Performance is
subjective without a comparison antenna of known performance, or field
strength measurements.
Another thing I've found is that MANY (read "most") Baluns you buy are
of inferior quality.

Not sure any of this is help, but hopefully is food for thought, any way.

Look forward to hearing you on the air!!

73-
Greg Schippers, KC8HXO

--- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, "T Behler" <tbehler@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, all.
>
> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>
> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
County's
> EC/RO
>
> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF,
and am
> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>
> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed
point on
> my tower.

SNIPPED____________________________________________________
• I am thinking of re-visiting the length issue for each leg at some point, but it s so hard to get the antenna up and down, given my property situation, that I
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
I am thinking of re-visiting the length issue for each leg at some
point, but it's so hard to get the antenna up and down, given my property
situation, that I may have to put that off for a while.

Will keep your thoughts in mind, though, for future reference.

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richards" <jruing@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Re: any Windom experts out there?

>I think your feed point is at the wrong spot. My ARRL Antenna Handbook
> suggests placing the feed point 14 per cent off center, so that a 130 foot
> windom, has a feed point 47 feet from one end. Sometimes the feed point
> is moved slightly to accommodate balanced line feeder, and this design,
> sometimes called the Carolina Windom, uses a portion of the feeder as
> a vertical radiator, eliminating the problem with the feed line
> it is intended to do just that.
>
> Common dimensions for the Carolina Windom are 130 feet ling, with
> the feed point 50 feet from one end, and 83 feet from the other end.
>
> So... I am thinking that your feed point may be off - AND maybe that your
> overall length may be less than optimal as well. It may be closer to 30
> per cent from one end, rather than 33 or 35 percent...
>
> Just my take. I would reconsider the length and feed line situation.
>
> ============= Richards K8JHR - Gran Rapids, MI ===========
>
>
>
• Ok, Jim. ... Thanks! 73 de KB8TYJ ... From: Jim KC8PCJ To: Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 2:30 PM
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Ok, Jim. ... Thanks!

73 de KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

>I think I stated the wrong dimensions on my antenna, the numbers don't add
> up. Here is another site.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Behler" <tbehler@...>
> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> Mark:
>>
>> So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my
>> previous
>> e-mail is probably working as well as it will?
>>
>> Again, mine is 132 feet long--88 on the long end, and 44 on the short
>> end.
>> It is fed with RG8U coax with a 4-1 balun at the feed point.
>>
>> This is a traditional Windom design that I was given by another fellow
> ham.
>>
>> Will give the antenna a work-out today and tomorrow on the Pennsylvania
> QSO
>> Party contest.
>>
>> 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <k8mhz@...>
>> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>>
>>
>> > Hi Tom,
>> >
>> > Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to
>> > build:
>> >
>> > http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>> >
>> > In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a
>> > half
>> > feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and
>> > matched
>> > with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.
>> >
>> > Good luck!
>> >
>> > 73
>> >
>> > Mark K8MHZ
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
>> > To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>> > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
>> > Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>> >
>> >
>> >> Hi, all.
>> >>
>> >> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>> >>
>> >> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
>> >> County's
>> >> EC/RO
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF,
>> >> and
>> >> am
>> >> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>> >>
>> >> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>> >> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
> on
>> >> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the
>> >> ground.
>> >> The
>> >> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I
>> >> based
>> >> these lengths on the following formula:
>> >>
>> >> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66
>> >> for
>> >> the
>> >> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
>> >> of
>> >> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>> >>
>> >> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
> give
>> >> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>> >>
>> >> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>> >> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>> >>
>> >> 80 meters:
>> >> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>> >>
>> >> 40 meters:
>> >> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>> >>
>> >> 20 meters:
>> >> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>> >>
>> >> 15 meters:
>> >> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>> >>
>> >> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>> >> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>> >>
>> >> 17 meters:
>> >> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>> >>
>> >> 30 meters:
>> >> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>> >>
>> >> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i
> multiplied
>> >> the
>> >> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
> calculations.
>> >> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean
> that
>> >> my
>> >> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
>> >> feet
>> >> too short.
>> >>
>> >> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
> ham,
>> >> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
>> >> been
>> >> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult
>> >> conditions,
>> >> and
>> >> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
>> >> unless
>> >> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>> >> having.
>> >>
>> >> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in
> my
>> >> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>> >>
>> >> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
> make
>> >> it
>> >> work better, and what that modification should be?
>> >>
>> >> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
> to
>> >> all this trouble?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>> >>
>> >> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>> >>
>> >> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> >> Checked by AVG.
>> >> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
>> >> 10/10/2008
>> >> 4:08 PM
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Mark: See some of my earlier e-mails for the pleasant surprise I got as I used the antenna for the PA QSO Party this week-end. I know the antenna isn t quite
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Mark:

See some of my earlier e-mails for the pleasant surprise I got as I used the
antenna for the PA QSO Party this week-end.

I know the antenna isn't quite optimal, but it sure did well, given the
conditions that existed, especially yesterday.

I would hate to have you come all the way over here from Muskegon just to do
some work with the analyzer, so, unless you find yourself in Big Rapids for
some reason, I probably wouldn't worry about it. However, I truly
appreciate the offer.

Sure wish they made an antenna analyzer that talked! (HI! HI!)

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: <k8mhz@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Hello Tom,
>
> Well, I am certainly no expert on the off center fed antennas but I just
> happened to run across the site I posted and thought I would share it with
> you.
>
> Nonetheless, we often put too much faith in SWR readings. Many times they
> have NOTHING to do with antenna efficiency. All SWR readings are really
> good for is to make sure that today's solid state radios won't be harmed
> by
> reflected energy. The topic of SWR, feedline loss and antenna efficiency
> is
> way to complex to master via e-mail.
>
> That being said, Greg's post is one to consider as well.
>
> Personally, I prefer to feed a multi-band antenna with balanced line so
> that
> no matter what the SWR readings are at efficiency there will be negligible
> loss therein. If you want to make an attempt to understand all this I
> strongly suggest reading 'Reflections' by Walt Maxwell W2DU.
>
> If you are only interested in getting a wire in the air to connect with
> the
> world my feelings are that a few of us should get together with an
> analyzer
>
> As Greg mentioned, 30 is an odd duck. If you really want to be hot on 30
> it
> may be best to have a dedicated antenna for that band.
>
> You may also want to investigate building a fan dipole. So many ways to
> skin the same duck makes this craft most enjoyable, in my humble opinion.
>
> Cheers and best of 73
>
> Mark K8MHZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Behler" <tbehler@...>
> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:48
> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>
>
>> Mark:
>>
>> So, are you saying that the current arrangement I described in my
>> previous
>> e-mail is probably working as well as it will?
>>
>> Again, mine is 132 feet long--88 on the long end, and 44 on the short
>> end.
>> It is fed with RG8U coax with a 4-1 balun at the feed point.
>>
>> This is a traditional Windom design that I was given by another fellow
>> ham.
>>
>> Will give the antenna a work-out today and tomorrow on the Pennsylvania
>> QSO
>> Party contest.
>>
>> 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <k8mhz@...>
>> To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 10:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>>
>>
>>> Hi Tom,
>>>
>>> Here is a link with some info about the antenna you are trying to build:
>>>
>>> http://users.erols.com/k3mt/windom/windom.htm
>>>
>>> In summary, the antenna is 41 and a half feet on one side and 96 and a
>>> half
>>> feet on the other made from 12AWG wire, fed with 50 ohm coax and matched
>>> with a 9:1 balun. It covers six bands but 30 is not listed.
>>>
>>> Good luck!
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Mark K8MHZ
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "T Behler" <tbehler@...>
>>> To: "west michigan hams" <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:06
>>> Subject: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi, all.
>>>>
>>>> This is Tom Behler: KB8TYJ.
>>>>
>>>> As some of you may know, I live in Big Rapids. I also am Mecosta
>>>> County's
>>>> EC/RO
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I have recently put up a traditional Windom antenna for HF, and
>>>> am
>>>> not quite getting the results I had hoped.
>>>>
>>>> My Windom is a coax-fed 80-meter
>>>> Windom. It is fed by RG8U coax, and has a 4-1 balun at the feed point
>>>> on
>>>> my tower. The feedpoint and legs are all about 35 feet off the ground.
>>>> The
>>>> short leg is 44 feet long, and the longer leg is 88 feet long. I based
>>>> these lengths on the following formula:
>>>>
>>>> 468 divided by 3.550 Megahertz. I then multiplied 132 feet by .66 for
>>>> the
>>>> long end, and .33 for the short end. Due to space limitations, 8 feet
>>>> of
>>>> the longer leg is hanging down vertically.
>>>>
>>>> My SWR's on the various HF bands are marginal in many cases. Let me
>>>> give
>>>> you some readings to show you what I mean:
>>>>
>>>> I took readings at the low end, the center, and the high end, of the
>>>> following bands, and came up with the following SWR readings:
>>>>
>>>> 80 meters:
>>>> 2.9 2.1 1.1
>>>>
>>>> 40 meters:
>>>> 3.3 3.1 2.3
>>>>
>>>> 20 meters:
>>>> 3.0 2.4 1.7
>>>>
>>>> 15 meters:
>>>> 3.8 3.9 4.8
>>>>
>>>> 10 meters from 28.05 to 28.5(very surprising):
>>>> 5.1 4.7 3.4
>>>>
>>>> 17 meters:
>>>> 1.7 1.8 2.0
>>>>
>>>> 30 meters:
>>>> around 8.1 to 1 throughout--basically untunable.
>>>>
>>>> It has been suggested that my problem lies in the fact that i
>>>> multiplied
>>>> the
>>>> 132 foot figure by the wrong factors, when doing my initial
>>>> calculations.
>>>> Perhaps I should have multiplied 132 by .64 and .36. This may mean
>>>> that
>>>> my
>>>> long leg is now roughly 3 feet too long, and my short leg is roughly 3
>>>> feet
>>>> too short.
>>>>
>>>> At this point in my e-mail, I need to add the fact that I am a blind
>>>> ham,
>>>> who needs help with antenna projects of this nature. The antenna has
>>>> been
>>>> put up and taken down twice already, under rather difficult conditions,
>>>> and
>>>> I really am hesitant to have all of that done again by sighted help,
>>>> unless
>>>> I'm absolutely sure that any fix will truly correct the problems I am
>>>> having.
>>>>
>>>> The antenna obviously is usable on most bands, with the auto-tuner in
>>>> my
>>>> Kenwood TS480, but I am sure the antenna is not performing optimally.
>>>>
>>>> Can someone tell me if I really need to modify this antenna again to
>>>> make
>>>> it
>>>> work better, and what that modification should be?
>>>>
>>>> Also, is there anything I can do or check from the ground before going
>>>> to
>>>> all this trouble?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for reading this e-mail.
>>>>
>>>> I look forward to any responses someone can provide.
>>>>
>>>> 73 from Tom Behler: Kb8TYJ, Big Rapids, MI
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG.
>>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
>>>> 10/10/2008
>>>> 4:08 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.8.0/1719 - Release Date:
>> 10/10/2008
>> 4:08 PM
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Thanks, Jim. Well, I m using a 4 - 1 balun, so at least that s right! (grin) 73 de KB8TYJ ... From: Jim KC8PCJ To:
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Thanks, Jim.

Well, I'm using a 4 - 1 balun, so at least that's right! (grin)

73 de KB8TYJ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

> Here are the deminsions and the plan that I used. Depending on how high
> the
> antenna is, they use a different balun. further down in the text they say
> when in doubt use a 4-1 balun.
>
>
> http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/dir/jump2.cgi?ID=15683
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
• Jim: I m reading the mail with interest here. I m using the auto-tuner in the TS480, although I have an old MFJ 901B versatuner that I can also use with my
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Jim:

I'm reading the mail with interest here.

I'm using the auto-tuner in the TS480, although I have an old MFJ 901B
versatuner that I can also use with my talking SWR meter if needed.

Will continue to play around as I get time.

73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ, Big Rapids

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim KC8PCJ" <kc8pcj@...>
To: <WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

How about 8 PM on 14.235?

I reset my tuners memory and it does not do as much tuning within each band.
So it appears that even though the swr has changed it is flatter across each
band.

Tom: Hope some of this information has helped you.
What kind of tuner are you running?

I will do some more SWR reading and record them so you can compare.

----- Original Message -----
From: Richards
To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] any Windom experts out there?

When ya gonna try it? Maybe I can find you on the air...

================ K8JHR =================

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> Well I made some changes. Went to 80' on the long side and 45 on the
> short. 40M got much better 3.9 to 1.5 however 20 went the other way,
> from 1.6 to 3.6. Tuner still cleans things up. Wish I had many more
> hours to play but Will give it a try on the air and see what happens.

===================================================
• Aw... shoot. I got busy on a project and did not see your reply. (project is copying all the old user manuals into PDF format for Ten-Tec as a favor to
Message 1 of 25 , Oct 12, 2008
View Source
Aw... shoot. I got busy on a project and did not see your reply.

(project is copying all the old user manuals into PDF format
for Ten-Tec as a favor to them... you cannot make too many
friends...

Sorry. =========== James - K8JHr =============

Jim KC8PCJ wrote:
> How about 8 PM on 14.235?
>
>
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
• Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
• Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.