Batboard

They will work tolerably well assuming good system coverage. Keep in mind they are not capable of 142-160 - that's the maximum tuning range. They are capable of a 2MHz spread within that range, with VSWR <2.0:1. They also require a 4' x 4' ground plane (or the VSWR will suffer further) and they are only capable of 60 watts for 60 seconds (I wouldn't push that number).

Laird also sells the Phantom Elite which has all the same issues, but looks a little nicer.

mike38015 wrote:Anyone have any experience with the Laird Technologies - 142-160 Phantom Antenna good or bad?

BAD

It's hard to defy the laws of physics.

When you try to squeeze a 18" antenna (1/4 wave) into a 4" tall package, you're going to give up considerable performance.

I have one vendor just send me a spec sheet for a 5.5" tall tri-band antenna (700/800, 1.9GHz, 2.4GHz) and claim 13 dBi in the 700/800. Yeah right, and if you believe that, I have some Florida swamp land for sale.

My work tried to use those for one specific frequency in that band. This was for use on RHIB vessels operating on the water. We gave them a solid 6x8 foot ground plane, well connected and sealed NMO connector and did not skimp on cable or connectors. They worked for about a year. Then the SWR was so high we replaced every one of them with cheap $3 Laird "whisker" antennas from Tessco. The small "whisker" or coat hanger antenna work SO much better.
Part of it could have been the saltwater environment, but from other uses of this antenna, it could just be the antenna.