Dale,
I have got my software working with the AA-200.
What did they supply in the box with your Analyser?
Once I know then I will be able to help.

73 Andy


"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message
news:P%M%j.14200$ED6.8352@trnddc02...

"Andy" wrote in message
...
My Rigexpert AA-200 has just arrived from
http://www.radioworld.co.uk/~radio/c...fec46917ed4fe4

So far I have only used the MFJ 259B. But this is a much better analyser.
It is in a class of its own. I input the frequencies for all 5 bands and
connected it to my Cobwebb antenna and got an instant SWR reading. It
continuously monitors the SWR on all five bands at once. This is only one
excellent feature of many. I have not had much experience with antenna
analysers, but this one I am very impressed with, so far.

73 Andy


Hi Andy,
Have you been able to use the software? I don't see any documentation for
it or an explaination of the "PC" switch on the analyzer.

Dale W4OP

"Andy" wrote in message
...
Dale,
I have got my software working with the AA-200.
What did they supply in the box with your Analyser?
Once I know then I will be able to help.

73 Andy

Hi Andy,
My mail to bounces- is there a better address?

I have the CD and the USB cable. The software is installed on the computer-
but don't know about which com port etc.

Dale W4OP

I now have my AA-200 up and running with the latest firmware and software.
Support from RigExpert Canada has been first rate too.
I have owned about every analyzer out there from Autek to Timewave- except
the AIM as it requires a PC and that is not convenient for me. The AA-200 is
a vector device that even allows one to change the connector simulation L/C.
It agrees extremely well with my HP 8711B and the software allows easy
archiving and documentation.

Dale W4OP

Dale,

Glad you are happy with the AA-200 but the ability to calibrate an
analyzer with standards at the end of a cable or through a filter is
IMHO the absolute most important feature an analyzer can have. The
difference in accuracy is huge. Additionally the ability to make
measurements with a tuned tracking receiver rather than a broadband
detector separates the toys from the real equipment in the presence of
other RF interference when making antenna measurements. Granted that
the absence of a PC is a plus but the larger screen of a notebook PC is
a big deal to me as is the ability to capture plots for others to see.
I would take the AIM4170 over the AA-200 any day. If you wish, take a
look at http://www.bnk.com/w0qe/AIM4170_page1.html for a detailed
examination of the AIM4170. I am in no way connected to Array Solutions
who sells the 4170.

73,
Larry, W0QE


Dale Parfitt wrote:
I now have my AA-200 up and running with the latest firmware and software.
Support from RigExpert Canada has been first rate too.
I have owned about every analyzer out there from Autek to Timewave- except
the AIM as it requires a PC and that is not convenient for me. The AA-200 is
a vector device that even allows one to change the connector simulation L/C.
It agrees extremely well with my HP 8711B and the software allows easy
archiving and documentation.

Dale W4OP

On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:16:45 -0600, Larry Benko
wrote:

Dale,

Glad you are happy with the AA-200 but the ability to calibrate an
analyzer with standards at the end of a cable or through a filter is
IMHO the absolute most important feature an analyzer can have. The
difference in accuracy is huge. Additionally the ability to make
measurements with a tuned tracking receiver rather than a broadband
detector separates the toys from the real equipment in the presence of
other RF interference when making antenna measurements. Granted that
the absence of a PC is a plus but the larger screen of a notebook PC is
a big deal to me as is the ability to capture plots for others to see.
I would take the AIM4170 over the AA-200 any day. If you wish, take a
look at http://www.bnk.com/w0qe/AIM4170_page1.html for a detailed
examination of the AIM4170. I am in no way connected to Array Solutions
who sells the 4170.

73,
Larry, W0QE


I'll second that Larry. If you really want to soar add a Bluetooth to
RS232 serial adapter and battery to the AIM. That makes it much more
convenient to use plus it will improve measurement accuracies by
easily having everything floating above ground potential.

73,
Danny, K6MHE

..

I've had my RigExpert AA-200 for a few weeks now and I'm impressed with it.
I have only had the MFJ-259 as a comparison.
This Analyser for what I use it for, is far superior to the MFJ-259 in all
ways. This is just what I have experienced myself.. Others may prefer the
MFJ. I can't think why though.
Using a small homebrew loop coupler to measure the frequency of my homebrew
traps on the AA-200 was very consistent and repeatable, with the same
reliable and accurate readings every time. I got a fantastic dip at
resonance. Unlike my TR Dip meter and the MFJ-259. Both would be close each
time but not spot on like the AA-200.
I found using the AA-200 for homebrew Antennas is very easy and nice to use.
I'm new to using Analysers , so I'm still learning. But I can't fault this
Analyser in any way for what I use it for. It does every thing I want it to
do and does it very well indeed, all the time and every time with out fail.
What amazes me is after using the MFJ-259 and the AA-200 is why people are
still buying the MFJ. I know its cheaper, but after having two fail on me,
well never again.

73 Andy



Danny Richardson wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:16:45 -0600, Larry Benko
wrote:

Dale,

Glad you are happy with the AA-200 but the ability to calibrate an
analyzer with standards at the end of a cable or through a filter is
IMHO the absolute most important feature an analyzer can have. The
difference in accuracy is huge. Additionally the ability to make
measurements with a tuned tracking receiver rather than a broadband
detector separates the toys from the real equipment in the presence of
other RF interference when making antenna measurements. Granted that
the absence of a PC is a plus but the larger screen of a notebook PC is
a big deal to me as is the ability to capture plots for others to see.
I would take the AIM4170 over the AA-200 any day. If you wish, take a
look at http://www.bnk.com/w0qe/AIM4170_page1.html for a detailed
examination of the AIM4170. I am in no way connected to Array Solutions
who sells the 4170.

73,
Larry, W0QE


I'll second that Larry. If you really want to soar add a Bluetooth to
RS232 serial adapter and battery to the AIM. That makes it much more
convenient to use plus it will improve measurement accuracies by
easily having everything floating above ground potential.

73,
Danny, K6MHE

.

For what it's worth...

I own an MFJ analyzer, not the RigExpert AA-200. Why? 'Cuz I can
afford it, can't afford the RigExpert. While extreme accuracy would
certainly be nice, I just don't have a need for that accuracy. If it
get's into the ball park, that's usually close enough. The MFJ thingy
is also a bit more convenient for me to use, no need for a computer,
doesn't weigh a ton, and I can afford it. Is it the best?
(Qualified) NO! But it works. Would I like to have that RigExpert
AA-200? Sure! But not enough to buy one. Ahem... if someone should
decide to give their's away.... (hold my breath, right?)
- 'Doc

Fair enough, Doc. That's why I went for the MFJ in the first place.
It's not heavy, comes with its own carrying case with shoulder strap and its
very portable.
I don't know where you get the need for a computer from.
You don't need a PC to use the AA-200. Its a added bonus if you want to
connect it to a computer but you don't need to.
In fact, apart from testing the software and updating the firmware I haven't
found the need to use the computer with it since. Not for what I need it for
at the moment. This will probably change over time.
I get all the readings on the display of the AA-200 itself. So I get the
best of both words.

73 Andy


wrote in message
...
For what it's worth...

I own an MFJ analyzer, not the RigExpert AA-200. Why? 'Cuz I can
afford it, can't afford the RigExpert. While extreme accuracy would
certainly be nice, I just don't have a need for that accuracy. If it
get's into the ball park, that's usually close enough. The MFJ thingy
is also a bit more convenient for me to use, no need for a computer,
doesn't weigh a ton, and I can afford it. Is it the best?
(Qualified) NO! But it works. Would I like to have that RigExpert
AA-200? Sure! But not enough to buy one. Ahem... if someone should
decide to give their's away.... (hold my breath, right?)
- 'Doc