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).