On 3/22/2017 4:05 PM, RCM wrote:
I think the term “Carolina Windom” was given as a cute name in
> some magazine article,
Carolina Windom is a registered trademark of RadioWorks:
www.radioworks.com
The antenna has been often copied but in any case my antenna was a
RadioWorks original. The PVC housing for the matching unit (auto-
transformer) at the feedpoint was so brittle that the hang-up eye
and both eyes for the legs pulled through, nuts and all.
> To say a Carolina Windom is no good because yours fell down, is
> saying Ford cars are no good because I had a flat tire.
All I'm saying is that the PVC is not a good choice for a structural
element when exposed to UV.
I will say that a Carolina Windom (r) has a feed point 3/8 of the way
from one end. Modelling does not support a low SWR (or SWR suitable
for use with a tuner) on all bands even with the 22' vertical section
as claimed by the manufacturer.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 3/22/2017 4:05 PM, RCM wrote:
On Mar 22, 2017, at 13:49, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@subich.com> wrote:
I would not recommend the Carolina Windom as I had one literally fall
apart due to UV degradation of the PVC DMU (feedpoint) housing here in
Florida.
To say a Carolina Windom is no good because yours fell down, is saying Ford
cars are no good because I had a flat tire.
I think the term “Carolina Windom” was given as a cute name in some magazine
article, describing someones version of an off center fed dipole.
Made from junk, they fall down.
I have never tried one, so I can’t comment on performance.
You can make a bad antenna (performing) from good components.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|