COMPACtenna SCANNER

[iMONITOR]

Has anyone tried one of these? It caught my eye but after watching the video on it from it's inventor Dr. Jack Nilsson, N8NDL his video talked me out of it. No disrespect but I felt like I was drowning in snake-oil! I can find very little on the internet regarding it either. I know pcrguy was talking about it recently and I respect his knowledge and opinions on antennas of all kinds. Mike if you bought one please chime in here!

COMPACtenna SCANNER
COMPACtenna Scanner Antenna

 

[prcguy]

Its on my list of things to get, partially based on a few good reviews by RR members. I'll do at least a mini review in the future.

Has anyone tried one of these? It caught my eye but after watching the video on it from it's inventor Dr. Jack Nilsson, N8NDL his video talked me out of it. No disrespect but I felt like I was drowning in snake-oil! I can find very little on the internet regarding it either. I know pcrguy was talking about it recently and I respect his knowledge and opinions on antennas of all kinds. Mike if you bought one please chime in here!

COMPACtenna SCANNER
COMPACtenna Scanner Antenna
View attachment 69722

 

[N8IAA]

Has anyone tried one of these? It caught my eye but after watching the video on it from it's inventor Dr. Jack Nilsson, N8NDL his video talked me out of it. No disrespect but I felt like I was drowning in snake-oil! I can find very little on the internet regarding it either. I know pcrguy was talking about it recently and I respect his knowledge and opinions on antennas of all kinds. Mike if you bought one please chime in here!

COMPACtenna SCANNER
COMPACtenna Scanner Antenna
View attachment 69722

I know Jack personally. Have one on the roof of the car, and works really well on VHF/UHF and 800 Mhz. One of the best scanner antennas I've ever used. Low profile, and it gets some strange looks when people pass me by.

Larry

 

[iMONITOR]

I know Jack personally. Have one on the roof of the car, and works really well on VHF/UHF and 800 Mhz. One of the best scanner antennas I've ever used. Low profile, and it gets some strange looks when people pass me by.

Larry

Thanks for responding Larry. As I said I meant no disrespect for your friend. I was just a little overwhelmed by his highly technical explanation of how it works and how it performs, still leaving me not knowing if its something I would want or not.

Could you describe in more layman terms why it's design is superior to others and in what way does it excel as a scanner radio antenna. As a scanner antenna what bands is it actually tuned for and what are it's sweet spots?

Universal Radio list the antenna as a COMPACtenna SCANNER with a VHF/UHF range covering 100 - 1500 MHz. Then they also list what appears to be the same antenna only it's called a COMPACtenna 2m/220/440 Coverage is an amazing: 144-148, 219-225 and 420-450 MHz. Then they mention the The COMPACtenna 2m/440 is identical, but does not include '220'. Are they actually three different designs? Or is it actually the same antenna targeting three different markets.

 

[cbehr91]

I had the original V/U/7/800. I wasn't overly impressed for rail band RX...sometimes the same sometimes worse than a 1/4 wave. On 800 it seemed to do really well, though.

 

[iMONITOR]

That's fairly typical of wide-band antennas. A coat hanger, floor lamp, aluminum baseball bat, roll of aluminum foil, Brillo Pad could be 'called' wide band antennas because to some degree they will all receive some level of signal at most all common frequencies. How well is another story.

Unless you have a serious definite requirement for a one does all wide-band antenna, you're better with anything but a wide band antenna. Dual-band or tri-band antennas used on the bands they're designed for will normally perform better than wide-band antennas. Individual antennas tuned for the band you're monitoring is the best. In some cases one, two even three tuned antennas fed through a diplexer/triplexer are a better approach then one wide-band antenna. It would only be my guess to say but I think most of the people using wide-bands antennas don't need wide-band antennas. A wide-band increase your chances of requiring a FM notch filter or pager/intermod filter by pulling in signals you don't need or want.

 

[W5lz]

I have to agree with post# 6. There is typically nothing "new", or "better", about most so called 'wonder' antennas. Just more advertising. The one antenna I would definitely recommend over others is one 60 feet taller than those others. Unfortunately, than miracle worker isn't too practical for most people... oh well.

 

[Danny37]

A lot of these shorter wide band "low profile" antennas in my experience tend to do very poorly on VHF but ok on UHF/800.

 

[W5lz]

Try thinking about the physical lengths of antennas (inches, feet) in terms of electrical lengths (1/4, 1/2, 5/8 wavelengths). That shorty antenna is a fraction of a wavelength at VHF while a larger/longer electrical length at UHF, right? At UHF that shorty antenna is much closer to being the size of a "real live" antenna at UHF. It -should- work better.

 

[iMONITOR]

Most of these have some type of helical coil inside, similar to the typical rubber ducky. We all know how well those work.

 

[cbehr91]

I found a link to Dr. Jack's patent. Maybe prcguy or one of the other antenna gurus can figure out what's going (or not going on). US20140022144A1 - Antenna assembly - Google Patents

 

[W5lz]

Okay, so instead of a "long" antenna it's a "fat/wide" antenna. Is it the equivalent got a "long" antenna of a 1/4 wave for instance? Nope, not even close.
The only good reason for using any sort of "stubby" antenna is convenience. That's it...

 

[prcguy]

You can shorten an antenna some and not loose any performance at all. I guess you don't hang around antenna people much.

Okay, so instead of a "long" antenna it's a "fat/wide" antenna. Is it the equivalent got a "long" antenna of a 1/4 wave for instance? Nope, not even close.
The only good reason for using any sort of "stubby" antenna is convenience. That's it...

 

[TailGator911]

I bought a pair of these for low profile antennas on my RV, one a triband to transmit 2m, the other for scanner reception and I tried them out on a recent roadtrip to Nashville and I was impressed. I hit every repeater I tried with full quieting, and I fed the scanner line into a Stridsberg 4-port and sorted out to 4 scanners - SDS100, BCD536HP, BCT15X and a TRX-1 and it performed very well. Didn't have the SDS200 yet so I didn't get to try that, but the 200 will be tested on the way to Alaska. For campfire lounging I have constructed a handheld Diamond discone that I can either walk around with or mount on a tripod. I am just about set for the Alaskan journey, and I am prepared to make the discone my main antenna if the Compactenna does not meet my expectations. But, have to say that my first tryout with these antennas was a good one. My first impression is that they are definitely worth the money. I wasn't disappointed.

JD
kf4anc

 

[mule1075]

[QUOTE="prcguy, post: 3113484, member:] I guess you don't hang around antenna people much.[/QUOTE]

You think ?

 

[W5lz]

Hey, PRCGUY! I AM one of those antenna guys....

 

[N9JIG]

I have met Jack and have one of these antennas. He can be a little intense but the antenna itself works pretty well, comparable to other multi-band antennas. I compared it to the Comtelco and a couple ham 2m/440 duallies and received similar results when used for a scanner. I think the Comet dual-band performed better for me on 700/800 but the Compactenna seemed pretty good on UHF and VHF-High.

I worry about whacking it on garages or trees however. I had to remove it to clear a couple city parking garages on my Expedition as it wouldn't clear, had I not remembered I am sure it would have been ripped off the NMO mount. I have a high-clearance garage at home so it cleared here. A whip antenna is more tolerant of contact issues.

I used it for almost a year on my truck but opted for a slightly lower profile Comet on my recent install.

 

[iMONITOR]

All this feedback is appreciate, however is anyone actually using or has tried the "Scanner" version of antenna or are you using the models intended for dual-band 144MHz/70cm amateur radio? My needs are VHF/UHF aircraft and 700-800MHz public service bands? My concern is that it might not perform well on VHF aircraft band.

 

[mule1075]

All this feedback is appreciate, however is anyone actually using or has tried the "Scanner" version of antenna

Yes post#17

 

[iMONITOR]

Yes post#17

Ok thanks. With there being three different versions of the antenna I wasn't certain which one N9JIG actually has.