[MRCA] AN/PRC-108 Antenna

[MilComm Guy]

I have a new spare PRC-74 mount if interested.  In my opinion I agree with
Al using the 74 antenna.

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018, Al Klase <ark at ar88.net> wrote:

> Hi Ray,
>
> I'd be leaning in the direction of the 10-ft whip and spring base used
> with a lot of pack sets, including PRC-25/77 and PRC-104.  Yes, you'd have
> to gin up a base, but the 3/8-24 threads are pretty common in civilian
> antenna parts.  You could "loose" a couple of sections of the fishpole if
> the length is too cumbersome.
>
> Then keep an eye out for a PRC-74 whip.  It's the same thing with a
> jumpered center-loading coil.
>
>
> The mount is the rare part, but probably wouldn't be usable on a different
> size radio.
>
> Al
>
> On 6/26/2018 8:56 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:
>
> So the question is this, I am in the process of building up some sort of
> small whip antenna for my PRC-108 transceiver. It has rocks for both 3.885
> and 5.357 installed being it operates on both USB and AM. Happy with the
> way it works when used with its 50 Ohm output driving a dipole or inverted
> V but the idea now is to have a vertical whip for backpack portable
> operation over short distances, things like Dayton or other field events.
>
> The radio has an internal loading coil and second output that can drive a
> short antenna but the problem is that I will have to fabricate the adapter
> plate, mount and antenna from scratch. I have two choices for the antenna
> that I am currently looking at. The first choice is a seven foot whip
> antenna but I do not have a base for that antenna yet, and it appears that
> it would be a rigid non flexible base if I build one. The second antenna is
> just a little over three feet long but has a spring base and good
> attachment point. I would prefer to work with the shorter whip being it’s
> mechanically better and also would avoid some of the issues that the long
> antenna with the rigid base may get into.
>
> At the frequencies this radio operates at both antennas would be way short
> and I think what the radio originally had was a ten foot whip but the
> possibility of finding that is right up there with Hens teeth. Assuming
> that any vertical would be a poor compromise would there be any real
> difference between using the super short three foot vertical as opposed to
> the seven foot vertical? Can anyone model what the difference would be?
>
>
>
> Ray F/KA3EKH
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> MRCA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/mrca
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:MRCA at mailman.qth.net <MRCA at mailman.qth.net>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> --
> Al Klase – N3FRQ
> Jersey City, NJhttp://www.skywaves.ar88.net/
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/mrca/attachments/20180626/e49e342d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PRC-74 antenna.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1121341 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/mrca/attachments/20180626/e49e342d/attachment-0001.png>