Ham Radio - The ABBREE VHF UHF "tactical" antenna.

No, it makes them’tactical’. Didn’t you read the thread?!

 

And here's more fodder for the fire...

The Feng itself is part of the antenna. So the actual SWR of the SYSTEM AT THE PORT may be better than 'under 2:1' because the Feng is a counterpoise . May be worse. You MUST isolate the antenna from the equipment to measure SWR /impedance properly.

Also...who CARES if the antenna is *resonant* at 2M?? Why should we care?? The resonant frequency of the antenna is irrelevant to the issue. The issue is mismatch loss in-band. Which is fairly marginal IMO.

 

It's a section of a metal measuring tape with heat shrink and a SMA connector for goodness sake. Tactical is one of those words used in advertising I wish could be removed from our vocabulary.

 

I believe the proper terminology is “Tacti-Cool”!

On a side note, I tried to solder a connector for an actual military radio speaker mic handset to an adapter that would work with my IC-7200 for Parks on the Air activations and couldn’t because the wires were intertwined with what I’m assuming to be Kevlar strands for added strength. Now it makes sense why stuff that is military grade can cost a whole lot more!

 

They cost a whole lot more because gov't manufacturing contracts are full of waste and junk. I work for a contract manufacturer. I'll stop....it's too early and I'm in a poor mood. Kevlar doesn't take solder well. : )

 

While this is exactly true I would suppose they are comparable i.e. the approach could be considered acceptable.

It doesn't seem possible if antenna design implies the presence of counterpoise of any kind i.e. the presence of a radio and operator's body.

SWR measurement is easy. Efficiency measurement is not. Moreover there are people that still believe the resonance is needed for an antenna to radiate.

 

You can tap off at the port and choke.

You dont need efficiency measurements. Gain is easily found instead, when compared directly to a known source, such as a dipole. People used to build vertical ranges to test. Don't need a chamber.

 

The small loop shown is a poor antenna for 2M communications. In a multipath environment, when moving around, it will be smaller than the enhancement cell volume and thus is very sensitive to positioning, in three dimensions, especially since it has a figure 8 pattern.

OK for direction finding in a fox hunt. If you stand still.

 

I agree we love more Chinese junk

 

If you need a better antenna than the OE duck, I recommend getting one similar to this thin and flexible dual band Diamond SRH77CA for less than $25 (also available with BNC). I would not want a fold over as pictured because it would catch on things as one moves around.

 

The Blade-Antenna (US) or Blattantenne (GER) from ABBREE got a gain of about 2.15 dBi. Its only an isotropic antenna. The gain which was given by the manufacturer is just the standard for that kind of antennas. So nothing special to talk about. In cause of the missing surface, the folded one cant have good results and the gain is nearly lost. So its got to be always unfolded. Everything is better than this. And antennas from Diamond are always a better catch. Nothing to think it over.

 

Tactical antennas... I run a an AS-1320 for HF or sometimes my At-271 Where does that leave me?

Full disclosure, I ran the radio section of a USAF Tactical Air Control Party for some years on an Army base. So, yeah, I know tactical. The Chicom antenna ain't.
What it is more likely to do is break the SMA connector on your rig.

Still, attached to the front BNC on your FT-817 'manpack' rig does lend it a certain air....

 

As we type on our Chinese made social media devices...

 

Don't forget..."SUPER SIZE"

 

Not an isotropic antenna.

Perhaps you mean 'omni'azimuthal at zero elevation.

Its not that either, in situ with the radio.