Just wondering because I am having to redo the feedline from my shack to my tower (about 160 feet), and can avoid buying new coax by using several pieces with PL-259s in between. -- 73, Pete N4ZR ___
Author: Wes Stewart via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 13:55:12 +0000 (UTC)
Properly assembled, you would be hard pressed to measure the added loss. Wes N7WS -- 73, Pete N4ZR _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Tow
Not very. Jim W7RY -- Thanks and 73, Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://li
Agreed. Jim W7RY Wes N7WS On Monday, June 17, 2024 at 06:39:45 AM MST, Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com> wrote: Just wondering because I am having to redo the feedline from my shack to my tower
First time I've heard anybody be concerned about the potential loss of "UHF" connectors in a few dozen years 8-D More frequently, we worry about how many of our 1500+ watts they will dissipate if th
W6LG did a video on this topic on his channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AARmcE7QQM Mike - KI8R -- -- *Michael Murphy - KI8R* mike@ki8r.com www.ki8r.com *614-371-8265 * -- ____________________
I just watched his video... VERY POORLY done. A true return loss of .31 dB, is anSWR of almost infinite. With approxamatly -14dB of return loss is 1.5:1 SWR. Cable loss has to be done with a short.
This subject comes up from time to time. I believe this is possibly definitive proof. 73, Kimo KH7U Tom, 35 watts = pencil soldering iron. Your comments made me go out and dig through the College Ar
There is much junk science and pure BS written about UHF connectors and loss. The short answer is as others have advised you -- UHF connectors are just fine well into the UHF spectrum, many good engi
That's really interesting data. I'm currently thinking about an array of helical antennas for weather satellite reception at 1700 MHz that would need a phasing harness. Your results suggest that si
VERY POORLY done. A true return loss of .31 dB, is anSWR of almost infinite. With approxamatly -14dB of return loss is 1.5:1 SWR. Cable loss has to be done with a short. You mean Return loss, which
I would certainly trust this data from the two undergraduate college students LOOONNGG before I'd trust W6LG to tell me the correct time of day. You can calculate the power dissipated within their co
Great engineering is applying applicable and useful aspects of science to solve a particular problem, not chasing angels dancing on the head of a pin. :) Hardware, construction, and design techniques
There are a lot of old wives tails about UHF connectors. As many have stated the loss introduced by the splices on HF is negligible. If they were as lossy on HF as I have read on the interweb, than m
YES! Junk connectors and adapters CAN cause issues. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@conte
Field day, maybe a decade ago, I go onto my 80m antenna, and all sorts of issues. Turns out my UHF Barrel connector was failing, and it was labeled as an Amp brand unit. Of course, who knows if it ac
I'd say when it comes to loss with UHF connectors the most critical thing is the machining of the male pin and the female cup fingers. Amphenol females are made so that you feel some resistance when
Rob, Totally agreed, and what eventually failed on that barrel connector (disclaimer, it was probably 5-10 years old) Now here is a good technical question - WHAT is the spec for min/max diameter of
Amphenol Datasheet: <https://datasheet.octopart.com/SO-239-Amphenol-RF-datasheet-11898728.pdf> Unfortunately, I do not see dimension specifications for the contacts ... only the body, threads and *in
Yeah, I've seen that, I was hoping for an exact number with a tolerance. Sigh. But thank you! I'm sure, out there SOMEWHERE is the exact spec for "What is a SO/PL 259, as the military uses/used them"