Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I didn't know where to go to answer this question, so that is why I'm in
this newsgroup. Basically I'm a reservist for an Engineer Command. Recently, my boss asked me to do a comparison between an OE-254 (standard 30-88Mhz mast antenna) and an Atlantic Microwave COM-201B (30-88Mhz mast antenna). Both FM antennas reach to about 42 feet. The COM-201B touts all kinds of advantages, but in my limited knowledge of antennas the performance aspect seems to me to be the same or very close. My biggest concern is durability. The Army for years (over 20) relied on this antenna (OE-254) and opting for a different one, with limited numbers scares me. If I could do a blanket purchase for all of our units, even those that already have the older antenna, I would opt for that. But with different antennas co-existing, with different parts etc, I'm very reluctant to make the switch. Can someone do an educated comparison between these two antennas? A study at http://www.gordon.army.mil/ac/Winter...02/USMCnet.htm seems like an ad, instead of a fair comparison. Anthony Jocius LTC, CA, USAR Communications Officer |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anthony,
Dennis O'Connor here... Ham radio operator, used to be electrical engineering guy for General Motors, and a good judge of beer and beautiful women - so my opinion has to be right on, right? All joking aside, I see nothing in the article that rings my BS bell... Looks straight forward... the radiated pattern claims shown on the graphs look reasonable.. The L-match at the input (the inductor and capacitor) is a standard circuit that is done for matching a radio to an antenna... There is one point I would make the manufacturer clear up (and it is obviously a typographical errer).. The frequency shown across the bottom of the graph labled "Comparison of Tune COM-201 vs. Untuned Antenna", is clearly wrong... The axis is labled as representing MHZ (1 million cycles per second, i.e. 1,000,000) but the numbers are entered as 0.03 to 0.09... If you multiply 0.03 X 1,000,000 you get 35 KHZ (35,000 cycles per second) not 30 MHZ (30,000,000 cycles per second), and likewise as you move across the bottom of the graph from number to number... Again, an obvious typo but when they are trying to do Mil-Spec business, details count... The thing I cannot judge from the write up is the mechanical structure... It sounds good from the write up, but you might want to actually look at one and see if you feel it will hold up mechanically in the tender hands of a bored recruit... Certainly a smaller parts count means less chance of missing parts... All in all, it looks like a good product for your use... cheers ... denny / k8do Anthony Jocius wrote: I didn't know where to go to answer this question, so that is why I'm in this newsgroup. Basically I'm a reservist for an Engineer Command. Recently, my boss asked me to do a comparison between an OE-254 (standard 30-88Mhz mast antenna) and an Atlantic Microwave COM-201B (30-88Mhz mast antenna). |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ask the question he http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/frm/f/1386012861
These are the guys that use them and I remember someone commenting on this comparison in the past. Bob Anthony Jocius wrote: I didn't know where to go to answer this question, so that is why I'm in this newsgroup. Basically I'm a reservist for an Engineer Command. Recently, my boss asked me to do a comparison between an OE-254 (standard 30-88Mhz mast antenna) and an Atlantic Microwave COM-201B (30-88Mhz mast antenna). Both FM antennas reach to about 42 feet. The COM-201B touts all kinds of advantages, but in my limited knowledge of antennas the performance aspect seems to me to be the same or very close. My biggest concern is durability. The Army for years (over 20) relied on this antenna (OE-254) and opting for a different one, with limited numbers scares me. If I could do a blanket purchase for all of our units, even those that already have the older antenna, I would opt for that. But with different antennas co-existing, with different parts etc, I'm very reluctant to make the switch. Can someone do an educated comparison between these two antennas? A study at http://www.gordon.army.mil/ac/Winter...02/USMCnet.htm seems like an ad, instead of a fair comparison. Anthony Jocius LTC, CA, USAR Communications Officer |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 22:29:56 -0500, "Anthony Jocius"
wrote: Can someone do an educated comparison between these two antennas? A study at http://www.gordon.army.mil/ac/Winter...02/USMCnet.htm seems like an ad, instead of a fair comparison. Hi Tony, It is a fair comparison using a well known modeler. They cite EZNEC which is our "gold standard" here for modeling. True, this is an amateur group, but there are a lot of professionals here, many with military experience, obtained directly or through contracts. None would shy from recommending EZNEC for professional work. Performance-wise the two are a wash. One dB accuracy is exceedingly difficult to achieve in the field, and all the variables of installation, terrain, use, what-have-you could easily erase slim advantages. Of all things to be considered is height and visibility and even here, both seem to be equivalent. Matching is examined and taken care of suitably for each's design - again equivalent. The only difference appears to be that the OE-254 appears to suffer some loss. How and where, the authors don't seem to be either aware of it, or go into any explanation. Still, even with this the OE-254 seems to be a performer. Choose the one with the fewest parts (or simplest design). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC, ET1 |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have read the GIs like the smaller size of the COM-201B and often set
them up directly on the ground without a mast. The OE-254 has had some problems with the center hub breaking when stressed and there are more parts to it. The 254 cannot be used without a mast. Bob Anthony Jocius wrote: I didn't know where to go to answer this question, so that is why I'm in this newsgroup. Basically I'm a reservist for an Engineer Command. Recently, my boss asked me to do a comparison between an OE-254 (standard 30-88Mhz mast antenna) and an Atlantic Microwave COM-201B (30-88Mhz mast antenna). Both FM antennas reach to about 42 feet. The COM-201B touts all kinds of advantages, but in my limited knowledge of antennas the performance aspect seems to me to be the same or very close. My biggest concern is durability. The Army for years (over 20) relied on this antenna (OE-254) and opting for a different one, with limited numbers scares me. If I could do a blanket purchase for all of our units, even those that already have the older antenna, I would opt for that. But with different antennas co-existing, with different parts etc, I'm very reluctant to make the switch. Can someone do an educated comparison between these two antennas? A study at http://www.gordon.army.mil/ac/Winter...02/USMCnet.htm seems like an ad, instead of a fair comparison. Anthony Jocius LTC, CA, USAR Communications Officer |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why Antenna Tuners Aren't Necessarily Useful for Shortwave Listening - Question Shortwave Listening (SWL) Antenna Tuners - Do You Have An Opinion ? | Shortwave | |||
Passive Repeater | Antenna | |||
No CounterPoise - Portable Antenna System | Shortwave | |||
Questions -?- Considering a 'small' Shortwave Listener's (SWLs) Antenna | Shortwave | |||
LongWire Antenna | Shortwave |