The central thesis of kaosfm's thread is the performance of his antenna.
He refers to his anecdotal experience with the A99 under three differing setups.
1. his original directly set near/on his metal mast with no other modifications. He noted the performance with a drive around and radio checks, and his buddies providing feed back..
2. He made the modifications to the antenna system with angled GP radials of a given length and did the drive around with radio checks again, and his buddies providing feed back.
3. He removed his GP radials, and, unlike Marconi's A99 sitting within an inch or two of the 20' long metal mast, isolated the A99 from the mast by 4 - 5 feet, once again did his performance test with feed back.
His thesis has been the A99 worked under number one conditions with noticeable CMC indicated as TVI, worked much better with GP radials and reduced CMC indicated by a lack of noticeable TVI, and was by far worse in performance compared to either of the number one or number two setups.
I would have to prepare rebuttal, or at least information of merit to argue contrary-wise to any depth to Marconi's result of presumed A99 integrity by way of the analyzer, but on the surface of things I see the proximity of that A99 to the metal mast as being such that although there is no feedline or GP radials present, there is certainly a mast present to provide the balance for the sake of the analyzer readings.
I think kaosfm may have demonstrated exactly what we referred to before, the EFHW needs to be presented with material sufficient to fulfill the laws of physics, which is an antenna needs yin/yang or the antenna efficiency fails.
I find it interesting in the video that the A99 has to be so long in order to render nearly identical readings as the little dummy load.
Maybe kaosfm will put radials on his dummy load and tell us how well it doesn't do with a great SWR. Mine don't do so well as an antenna, and I get 1.0 SWR, R=50, and X=0
My neighbor 125' behind me talks to me with his dummy load, but another fellow 1.5 miles away thinks I'm ghost talking when we converse.
I don't have an A99, but I do have a very well tuned EFHW. If I can get a break in weather and my work obligations at the same time I'll certainly put the EFHW on a long non-conducting pole at least 20' in the air with the MFJ-259 hooked directly beneath it and see whether my results are similar. That said, I will only show that my EFHW without another half reads as well as my dummy load without another half.
