In this video I take the MPAS Lite to a local park and set it and also set a inverted V linked dipole and compare them real time using a antenna switch.
Yea sorry, I was out there for about 4 hours and I try to keep the videos at around 15 minutes. Skip the part where I show that I could tune the MPAS on most bands with my internal tuner.
Take a look at the ultimax dx 100. I run it vertical up a jackite pole. I run 5watts SSB on it, many cant even tell I am QRP.
From the look on your face I can tell you are really confused about the two antenna components floating in blue space. I hope you were able to get to the bottom of this mystery. Perhaps they are not able to escape the green box. What a great story to tell friends.
Very well done! I wish more YouTubers would do things this way, instead of just making a couple contacts and telling us the antenna is great!!
Nice video. Yes some say it's long, but it is a lot of good information and the OTA tests were very good. The discussion after the OTA tests was good. I like hearing the how's and why's for the options given. I was unaware of your YouTube channel until now. I will visit and pick more video to watch .
IMO, people tend to over-think or over-engineer wire antennas. To me it's rather simple, put up a decent length of wire, use a manual or automatic tuner, ground as best as you can, and check the vSWR often; QSO and enjoy. But, hey, that's just me.
And over price! $340 - for a wire, unun and a whip. Oh, and a grounding rod. I mean, that's at least $300 more than it ought to cost, right? An EARCHI end-fed would be a fine alternative - and just $56 towards the club! http://www.earchi.org/proj_homebrew.html
Those lossy UNUNs (called 5:1) used in the Chameleon antennas, Alpha antennas, Ultimax, Comet antennas, and many other clones, are terrible, and I still can't understand the average Joe Ham reasoning. Why wouldn't you learn something about antennas and make the right decisions? I am sure most of you would not drive a car at 100 mph with a flat tire, and that is the right analogy when you have up to 6db loss (even more on some high bands) and expect to get the same or similar result in comparison with the matched and efficient center-fed dipole. I am not sure if we have to blame the manufacturers of those antennas, because it remains unclear whether they are really dumb or just do not care and go after profit. I have designed many commercial and amateur antennas available to the ham community, and still do, but can't lower myself to the point to make and sell the substandard products based on lies how "Flat SWR from 160-10M" is a product of my ingenuity and not simple attenuation of reflected power in the lossy UNUN transformer. The principle is the same as the use of long and lossy coax to get "nice" flat SWR at the radio end while real radiated energy is a fraction of what you have sent towards the antenna. There is no excuse for lack of interest to learn basics about antennas, efficiency, matching losses, height above ground, ground and object absorption, and the list goes on. Availability of information is out there and all you need is to tap into amazing resources available to all of us online or in the very same books you have been using in order to pass your license exam. Danny, E73M disclaimer, owner of MyAntennas.com
I am pretty new to all of this, only being a ham for a little under three years and doing portable stuff since summer 2020. I started my efforts with very simple dipoles and then linked dipoles with a 1:1 current balun at feed point. My results with those antennas were excellent (in terms of SWR, contacts made on SSB & CW and how I show up on RBN). They were also inexpensive and reasonable to deploy with a mast in most places. I also made a couple of EFHW, and they were a step down from the simple dipole in terms of efficiency, but a step up in terms of options for quicker deployment. Again, very inexpensive and still demonstrably effective. With that early success, why in the world did I buy a new MPAS Lite last summer? Based on some comments, it should be a poor performer and I should be wishing for my money back. My answer to why is that I was seeing interesting reports from other users with the MPAS Lite and I was itching for a rapid deploy system that required no portable mast or other object on site to hoist it on. I also wanted something that could deploy in a very small footprint. I decided to roll the dice and see what the Chameleon hype was about, and so far I have had very good results with the MPAS Lite with 5W CW. Does it perform as well as my orders of magnitude cheaper linked dipoles? I don't have any data to state one way or the other, but I know that it almost certainly can't based on the design. It is a big compromise, exchanging performance in favor of easy deployment with limited space. It is not my best performing antenna, but my best performers are of no use if I cant get them aloft in a challenging spot. Determining if it is worth $340 will be completely subjective. I can say that the build quality is top notch and every component is rugged and made to last. It has performed well for me in multiple location where nothing else I have could realistically be used. It has the added advantage of adding the accessory jaw mount, allowing me to clamp to my boats stern pulpit, and use the boats stainless lifelines as a counterpoise. I am sure not an ideal antenna system on paper, but the dB reports on RBN when I do that with saltwater on all sides tell me what I need to know. It works better than it needs to on only 5W and it takes me a few minutes to deploy. I am very happy to have it as an option for my purposes and interests.
Nice effort for a 28 min video....But it is known that a dipole is quieter than a vertical.....Using the MPAS is using a base loaded vertical (dummy load w/whip the coil being a 5:1 or 6:1 balun) as opposed to a full size dipole (length not specified), the dipole rules on signal strength and noise level....Verticals at any height are subject to noise. This game plan has been repeatedly done and played out by now.....But, a good effort anyway.....
