- 1. [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Barry LaZar" <k3ndm@comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:35:07 +0000
- Fellas, There is nothing magic about an OCFD. It just a variant of the Windom that was invented, I believe, in the 1920's. It's nothing more than a dipole fed off center so that when you use it on ev
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00055.html (9,175 bytes)
- 2. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: Wade Staggs <tvman1954@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:49:14 -0500
- *Once again I walk forward with my Asbestos Suit on hi .. hi .. In the QST Article linked below, modeled on a 66 foot dipole. The SWR and Loss Figures comparing Ladder Line ( Windowed Line ) and Coax
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00064.html (11,641 bytes)
- 3. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 00:06:26 +0200
- Man, I hope I don't come across as evil after this response. This is to Wade and Barry. Guys there are a lot of myths and fallacies in the paragraphs below. First Wade, there is no reason on earth no
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00068.html (19,206 bytes)
- 4. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Barry LaZar" <k3ndm@comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 22:09:32 +0000
- Wade, The Windom was invented when tube transmitters were around. The output stage of most, not all, could handle a fair difference in impedance, but most could not handle the very high impedances re
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00069.html (16,310 bytes)
- 5. [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: Spencer <w1gak@arrl.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:41:48 -0600
- Transmission line loss means heat in the transmission line. _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tent
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00072.html (7,111 bytes)
- 6. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: Joe Papworth via TenTec <tentec@contesting.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 19:13:13 -0400
- I can't believe this discussion is still going on. But, since someone mentioned Mr. Windom I have to ask if anyone has ever used or seen what I call the "Classic" Windom, which I believe was the orig
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00074.html (18,809 bytes)
- 7. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Tony Lelieveld" <va3dwi@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 01:59:34 -0400
- Hi Joe, In 1989 I used that kind of antenna for about a year (before I put up a tower with a tribander) and it was quite useful on 20 mtr. I had a regular schedule with my brother in New Zealand, ZL1
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00078.html (31,819 bytes)
- 8. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:03:29 +0200
- Boy there are a lot of wrong statements in that one, Barry. There was good sound advice, mixed in with some totally wrong statements. -- "So Windom said I have the answer. I'll feed the antenna at a
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00081.html (13,457 bytes)
- 9. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: Joe Papworth via TenTec <tentec@contesting.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 05:55:08 -0400
- Neat story Tony. Herb's Windom worked well also. I think he mainly used it on 80 cw cuz he did a lot of traffic handling and I assume he covered all of FL with a good signal. It was his only low band
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00082.html (28,755 bytes)
- 10. Re: [TenTec] The OCFD Mystique (score: 1)
- Author: "Barry LaZar" <k3ndm@comcast.net>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 14:30:57 +0000
- Rick, You may be correct about the very early work on the Windom, but later on it was definitely accepted as a multiband antenna. However, in those days we only had 15 meters that was not an even mul
- /archives//html/TenTec/2015-09/msg00091.html (17,851 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu