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

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
--
--------------------------------------
Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001
Beating it with diet and exercise!
297/215/210 (to be revised lower)
58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!)
--------------------------------------
Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/
Visit my very special website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/
Visit my CFSRS/CFIOG ONLINE OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/
--------------------
Irv Finkleman,
Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

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

Bob,

I found a bit of information from this site, though
it is in French:

http://www.connectinfo.fr/ham/radio1.html


It has about 1 Mbyte of PDF's concerning multiband
antennae made from twinlead. It is certainly a lot more
than I have found by searching for "lattin" antenna.

I ran the text from the PDF's through
the Google translation page and it came out mostly
gibberish, but some parts are understandable (I hate
being ignorant of languages.)

I am no antenna expert at all, but it looks interesting.
I have not yet attempted building one, though I am
thinking of playing with a 2 or 3 band version.

Hope this is of interest to you.

Phil - N4GWV

(remove x's from email address to reply directly)


(Drbob92031) wrote in
:

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

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
news
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 ...

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

The tuning was difficult but once tuned it wasn't half bad. I accomplished
the 'trimming' by addition of a hanging tail at the open end of the 'trap'
on a couple of the bands. You
have to take the velocity factor into consideration as well. Combine the
difficulty in tuning with the problem of support and you will soon put it
away! It was a fun experiment but not worth all the time and wasted
twin lead. By going to an open feeder you do away with the velocity
factor, but the trimming is still a pain. Support problems are further
compounded. If I wanted to carry a 10/15/20m antenna it might
be worth while for field day. The only reason I got involved was after
seeing Bob, VE6TE, now SK, running one and I was never one to
pass up a chance to play around with something intriguing!

Irv VE6BP

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).


I have been collecting data on the Lattin antenna for a long time.
I have quite a bit of interesting stuff, including a photocopy of the
patent.

It looks like William J. Lattin applied for a patent on this antenna
on Feb 13, 1948. The serial number of his application was 8,132. He
was granted patent #2,535,298 on Dec 26, 1950. There are 5 diagrams
used in this paperwork to help describe the Lattin antenna, including
1 vertical version.

I've made a couple of semi-serious efforts to build one, but no
success. I'm not too antenna tech. capable, nor do I have any
sophisticated test equipment, beyond an swr meter and a military grid
dipper, stuff like that. I've not attempted to model it.

I would love to see someone who understands the tech part of antennas,
and who has modelling knowledge and capabilities.........to give this
Lattin a serious effort.
Lee Carkenord KA0FPJ Denver CO

Richard Clark wrote in message

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.
? 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).




I have been collecting data on the Lattin antenna for a long time.
I have quite a bit of interesting stuff, including a photocopy of the
patent.

It looks like William J. Lattin applied for a patent on this antenna
on Feb 13, 1948. The serial number of his application was 8,132. He
was granted patent #2,535,298 on Dec 26, 1950. There are 5 diagrams
used in this paperwork to help describe the Lattin antenna, including
1 vertical version.

I've made a couple of semi-serious efforts to build one, but no
success. I'm not too antenna tech. capable, nor do I have any
sophisticated test equipment, beyond an swr meter and a military grid
dipper, stuff like that. I've not attempted to model it.

I would love to see someone who understands the tech part of antennas,
and who has modelling knowledge and capabilities.........to give this
Lattin a serious effort.
Lee Carkenord KA0FPJ Denver CO

On 3 Apr 2004 17:50:04 -0800, (Lee Carkenord)
wrote:

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).


I have been collecting data on the Lattin antenna for a long time.
I have quite a bit of interesting stuff, including a photocopy of the
patent.

It looks like William J. Lattin applied for a patent on this antenna
on Feb 13, 1948. The serial number of his application was 8,132. He
was granted patent #2,535,298 on Dec 26, 1950. There are 5 diagrams
used in this paperwork to help describe the Lattin antenna, including
1 vertical version.

I've made a couple of semi-serious efforts to build one, but no
success. I'm not too antenna tech. capable, nor do I have any
sophisticated test equipment, beyond an swr meter and a military grid
dipper, stuff like that. I've not attempted to model it.

I would love to see someone who understands the tech part of antennas,
and who has modelling knowledge and capabilities.........to give this
Lattin a serious effort.
Lee Carkenord KA0FPJ Denver CO

Hi Lee,

Thanks for the patent number, it makes a world of difference between
conjecture and what "is."

For one, it quite plainly illustrates that the pdf file that dominates
most links falls seriously short at the drive point as I had figured.
It also quite plainly illustrates EXACTLY the method that Irv reports
in tuning it to make it operational:
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 00:37:30 GMT, "Irv Finkleman"
wrote:
I accomplished the 'trimming' by addition of a hanging tail at the
open end of the 'trap' on a couple of the bands.
which is also missing from the pdf treatment. This more or less
confirms my suspicion that the pdf treatment was a pipe dream.

I will look into the patent's model further.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC