On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 00:40:45 GMT, Irv Finkleman
wrote:

Drbob92031 wrote:

Has anyone had any working experience wih the Latton antenna. Made from a
singel piece of TV feed line and can work all HF bands. Sounds too easy and
good to be true.
Tnx in advance de WA2EAW..Bob

I've got one rolled up in my shack -- used to use it but went to other
things after a while. The performance was not bad, but making one that
is strong enough to span any distance is difficult. I had to run a piece
of nylone cord through the dielectric, threaded in and out.

Another chum, now a sient key, used one for years and seemed happy with
it.

The spelling is Lattin, and you can find it on the net through Google.

Irv -- VE6BP

Hi Bob, Irv,

Over the past couple days I've done some investigation with this
design and it has as many dead-ends as any "revolutionary" idea that
has been revealed here by breathless inventors.

For one, there are any number of hits in the search engines for the
Lattin (W4JRW) antenna. However, without exception they all reference
the same pdf file. Examination of this file does not do the inventor
justice through the omission of William J. Lattin's name (aside from
what would be due to the presumption of the antenna's name which along
the way has been corrupted). I only found his full name through Irv's
earlier (2002) posting here (W4JRW has been re-assigned as a vanity
call). Any attempt to confirm the presumed patent (1960) is
frustrated by the lack of its number (required for a patent search,
name searches are limited to post 1976).

However, when I attempted to analyze the design in EZNEC, it showed
nothing near the presumed bands without extensive trimming (albeit,
the suggest foam twin lead suggested by that single pdf reference is
not amenable to EZNEC analysis, and I simply used ladder line). Even
then, the various "traps" are neither intuitively designed nor
correctly driven. Hence with only one design extant, and the reports
of difficulty in tuning it up (not withstanding Irv's suggestions),
and confounding results from modeling; it then seems suspect on the
face of it. The "theory" offered is tantalizing, but I see so many
problems, that such "theory" appears to be more the result of a
fantasy with numbers than the actual proof of the design/test/data
cycle.

Let's face it, if the design were serviceable, it would be more
current given 44 years of exposure.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC