Thanks so much, Steve.

I bet you get a bit of pleasure out of giving a professor reading 
assignments, eh????

I promise, ... I'll get to it as soon as I can!!

IN all seriousness, I really do appreciate this info!

Tom Behler: KB8TYJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: SWR's continued


> First, I've heard that before, Tom, about the half-wave or eighth wave
> multiples and not to use a quarter-wave length.  But, I've also seen the
> opposite claim documented.  Secondly, though, even taking into account 
> your
> calculations, you forgot to account for the velocity factor of your 
> coaxial
> cable feedline.
>
> The link below, though, takes the opposite view.
> http://www.kc9aop.net/HAM/antenna_facts.htm
>
> This, by the way, is a nice site for antenna calculators, feedline loss
> stats, etc.
>
> Steve, K8SP
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Pat Byrne" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:57 PM
> Subject: Re: SWR's continued
>
>
>> Tom,
>> I've never heard any magic about 100 feet.  Perhaps it is an urban
>> folk legend!!
>> I don't have anything that will tune 160 at all properly but will try
>> to listen as the saga goes on!!
>> Having a little trouble finding antenna installer support but someday!!
>> Pat, K9JAUAt 07:42 PM 11/17/2011, you wrote:
>>>     Guys:
>>>
>>>I unexpectedly had some extra time here tonight, and just got off 160
>>>meters
>>>with some midwest hams, who gave me a real interesting theory about my 
>>>160
>>>meter sloper, the excess coax I'm using for a feed line, and why it might
>>>be
>>>throwing my SWR's off.
>>>
>>>Here's the theory:
>>>
>>>They said that using a 100 foot piece of coax as a feed line is never a
>>>good
>>>idea because there is something in that particular length that is known 
>>>to
>>>throw antenna resonance off.  They said there was an article in QST
>>>documenting this fact a number of years ago.
>>>
>>>They said that what I want is either a half wave-length piece of feed
>>>line,
>>>or an eighth-wave length piece of coax.  They say I should avoid a
>>>quarter-wave piece.
>>>
>>>If you do the math (i.e. 468 over the frequency in megahertz), a 
>>>half-wave
>>>piece of coax would be approximately 260 feet long.  This is obviously 
>>>not
>>>very practical.
>>>
>>>However, if one were to use an eighth-wave piece, that would amount to
>>>approximately 65 feet long.
>>>
>>>Since I seem to have about 40 extra feet of coax out in my yard at the
>>>base
>>>of the antenna, cutting that off would almost give me that eighth-wave
>>>length.
>>>
>>>I wonder if this is really what I should now shoot for.
>>>
>>>Of course, I do not have experience soldering pl259's, so I'll have to 
>>>get
>>>help there, but I'm really thinking this might be worth a try.
>>>
>>>You guys know far more about this stuff than I do, so if you think this
>>>theory is nuts, please don't hesitate to let me know.
>>>
>>>Thanks for the continuing help with this issue, and I look forward to
>>>working at least some of you on 160 meters around 1.845 MHZ tomorrow
>>>night.
>>>
>>>73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 7:31 AM
>>>Subject: Re: SWR's continued
>>>
>>>
>>> > All I can say is that did happen to me the one time I coiled up about
>>> > 50
>>> > feet of coax, it actually made it try to radiate the rest of the coax
>>> > and
>>> > the SWR went crazy. The coax was fine, I cut off the extra and used it
>>> > elsewhere later on, even uncoiled and thrown all over the place it was
>>> > fine
>>> > but coiled up, it wasn't happening at all. I'm just reminded of that
>>> > which
>>> > is why I say that.
>