You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

@ Marconi - Yes, we had conversations, and over the course of several different threads on different antennas I have maintained that the AP became a very effective antenna when raised to the heights of the tips of longer antennas. In my Because I was asked thread I repeat that the AP needed height to work its advantages. In fact, I once raised it to 54' to the top in order to work it compared to a 5/8 wave that was mounted at 36' at the bottom. This resulted in some controversy over whether it is proper to compare antennas from the feed point or the top. I cited the AP was designed to be raised to maximum legal height and so it should be tested accordingly to give it a fair run.

@ Booty. I have not had the same experience with this Merlin style antenna that I have had with the AP. The Merlin is close to 18' over all length. As Marconi points out, it has it's feedpoint at 72" from the Cap Hat. The AP is 12' over all length, and has its feedpoint about 48" from the top. The Merlin is a 1/4 wave GP designed to maximise the potential of a 1/4 GP. The AP is a center fed 1/2 wave vertical. It is not a GP, but has more gain than the dipole it's feedpoint suggests, or at least it works significantly better. I am not arguing for what the AP is or isn't, I am just looking at the physical characteristics of it with respect to feedpoint location on each of the antennas.
I will get the Merlin up as high as I can currently run it and see how I feel it performs. At the moment the top is around 42'.
Up front, I do not expect it to do as well as the AP, but should it do so I will admit to it.

<blockquote data-quote="HomerBB" data-source="post: 402011" data-attributes="member: 8569">@ Marconi - Yes, we had conversations, and over the course of several different threads on different antennas I have maintained that the AP became a very effective antenna when raised to the heights of the tips of longer antennas. In my Because I was asked thread I repeat that the AP needed height to work its advantages. In fact, I once raised it to 54&#039; to the top in order to work it compared to a 5/8 wave that was mounted at 36&#039; at the bottom. This resulted in some controversy over whether it is proper to compare antennas from the feed point or the top. I cited the AP was designed to be raised to maximum legal height and so it should be tested accordingly to give it a fair run. &nbsp;@ Booty. I have not had the same experience with this Merlin style antenna that I have had with the AP. The Merlin is close to 18&#039; over all length. As Marconi points out, it has it&#039;s feedpoint at 72&quot; from the Cap Hat. The AP is 12&#039; over all length, and has its feedpoint about 48&quot; from the top. The Merlin is a 1/4 wave GP designed to maximise the potential of a 1/4 GP. The AP is a center fed 1/2 wave vertical. It is not a GP, but has more gain than the dipole it&#039;s feedpoint suggests, or at least it works significantly better. I am not arguing for what the AP is or isn&#039;t, I am just looking at the physical characteristics of it with respect to feedpoint location on each of the antennas.I will get the Merlin up as high as I can currently run it and see how I feel it performs. At the moment the top is around 42&#039;. Up front, I do not expect it to do as well as the AP, but should it do so I will admit to it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HomerBB, post: 402011, member: 8569"] @ Marconi - Yes, we had conversations, and over the course of several different threads on different antennas I have maintained that the AP became a very effective antenna when raised to the heights of the tips of longer antennas. In my [I]Because I was asked [/I]thread I repeat that the AP needed height to work its advantages. In fact, I once raised it to 54' to the top in order to work it compared to a 5/8 wave that was mounted at 36' at the bottom. This resulted in some controversy over whether it is proper to compare antennas from the feed point or the top. I cited the AP was designed to be raised to maximum legal height and so it should be tested accordingly to give it a fair run. @ Booty. I have not had the same experience with this Merlin style antenna that I have had with the AP. The Merlin is close to 18' over all length. As Marconi points out, it has it's feedpoint at 72" from the Cap Hat. The AP is 12' over all length, and has its feedpoint about 48" from the top. The Merlin is a 1/4 wave GP designed to maximise the potential of a 1/4 GP. The AP is a center fed 1/2 wave vertical. It is not a GP, but has more gain than the dipole it's feedpoint suggests, or at least it works significantly better. I am not arguing for what the AP is or isn't, I am just looking at the physical characteristics of it with respect to feedpoint location on each of the antennas. I will get the Merlin up as high as I can currently run it and see how I feel it performs. At the moment the top is around 42'. Up front, I do not expect it to do as well as the AP, but should it do so I will admit to it. [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom