Technical Topics > Equipment
T2FD Antenna
W7LPN:
"W7LPN thanks for your Emails:
Trust me, I've read them all.... Even ole Marty Jue..(XXX) notes of distain:...
The problem now is, all the advertisers who pay big buck$ with XXX, & XX mags to advertise their Antenna tuners have now threatened the ARRL/QST, and CQ to redraw or reduce their advertising if they continue to publish articles about T2FD, and WINDOM (tunerless) antennas. ANY Antenna that does not use an antenna tuner that could be written about in these pubs are bad news for the leading Amateur Publications. Cebik is now SK, but back when he wrote that piece, he was writing books for QST/ARRL.
For eighteen years, I was the digital editor of XX magazine, never missed a month writing my column.. sometimes several... Then when I wrote an article about the T2FD, they refused to print it... then I wrote an article about the Windom.... suddenly I had some sort of writers disease... they would not print it either.
I was furious, as I had put a lot of time and effort into those articles (column).
I gave them my "notice" and immediately stopped writing for them. They got P/O'd and then one of the employees of XX (nameless), called and informed me WHY they would not print my articles about the antennas that did not need an Antenna Tuner....
Seems two of their biggest advertisers threatened to pull all their advertising dollars if they ever gave credence to any article(s) that took away antenna tuner sales.
It's a sad day when politics enters our hobby, and begin to dictate editorial policy… and the rank-n-file HAM suffers because of the all-mighty dollar.
Up until 1995, all the handbooks, HAM magazines, and league publications (Antenna Books) had articles about T2FD, Windoms and specific antennas that did not require an antenna tuner.
SUDDENLY, all the Antenna handbooks, Annual Amateur Radio Handbooks.. and publications sold by the XXXX, XXX, or XX, took a noticeable difference in their hobby antenna related content and antenna information:!
ALL, I mean ALL reference to the T2FD, the Windom, and tunerLESS antennas was noticeably missing from these rags!
Here be side me, in my BOOK CASE are the last 4 years of ARRL Annual Handbooks. Not a word about these antennas.
Add to that, I have the ARRL Classic Wire type Antenna Handbook; first Edition Copyright 1999 through 2009.
Here is a book that should be bulging with T2FD, Windom and other WIRE type antennas (that don’t need antenna tuners), alas… NOTHING!
I tried to make a big noise, but I was laughed at because I related this to some of the "powers-that-be" at the league, and XX.... they poo poo'd it and denied it no less.
I rest my case.
Now you understand why I don't advertise in any of these “Hobby Rags.”
Every chance they get, they'll have some of their cronies put something on an antanna review page in print, trying to discredit me. I'm still here, and most of them are out to pasture.
AND now’ you know "The rest of the story !"
Have a great weekend."
Anonymous, but not too hard to tell who it is.
cmradio:
Politics ::)
Peace!
Tube Shortwave:
I have 2 of the B&W folded dipoles (T2FD type). They both work much better than standard dipoles. Out of the dozen or so antennas here, the folded dipoles are the 'go to' antennas most of the time.
Gee whiz, the local FCC office has one on their roof for their HF intercept! They can't be THAT bad. I agree with the author, if every ham and SWL tried a commercially built T2FD style antenna, tuner sales would certainly drop drastically. I don't buy into the conspiracy theory, but it is possible I suppose.
One of my folded dipoles is about 9 years old, the other about 3. The first was installed N/S and was just such an awesome performer, I couldn't resist buying the second one when I was able to install E/W. Not a bit sorry about either purchase. Would certainly buy again.
W7LPN:
Thank you for an honest real-time evaluation. I don't really care about whether anyone believes these antennas(T2FD & Windom) have been conspired against. I'm sure if I was the manufacturer and couldn't get a fair deal I would feel very different about it. If you occasionally get on QRZ forum look up antennas, limited space W7LPN thread. The so called experts have been bashing the t2fd for a few days. I'm relatively sure these "Experts" don't, nor ever have, owned a commercially manufactured T2FD. The truth as you have stated it needs to be known.
Tube Shortwave:
That's exactly why I stay off of QRZ forums and other similar forums. You stand a better chance talking reason into a CB forum than you do the ham ones. Hams hear someone say something like "RG-8 is the best coax on the planet" and then they parrot that from that day forward. They don't know, they have never done their own experiments, and 99.9% of them don't have the right test gear to do it right anyway. Heck, 99.9% of them say "I put 1000 watts in, I get 999 watts out" and call it good. What about receive? What about induced noise? What about efficient transfer of those precious few microvolts from the antenna to the receiver? A 2-way conversation requires both stations to be able to copy each other!
The hams are all 'experts' because they have a license. Big whoop. If I have a driver's license, does that automatically make me an expert driver? No, of course not. Same thing.
I happen to be a 'real' RF engineer, and have been a radio and TV Chief Engineer for 30 years. I find it amusing that a ham with no engineering education or background will argue a basic point with me. I have actually had hams with Extra licenses tell me they know more than me simply because I have not upgraded from General. Seriously! In an effort to keep my blood pressure low, I avoid those ridiculous forums. All hambones can disappear forever as far as I'm concerned sometimes. 90% of hams really repulse me. I suggest you adopt the same policy, life is so much more peaceful when you avoid the hambones.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version