Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Measured\s+Loss\s+in\s+Copper\s+Clad\s+Steel\s+RG\-6\s+on\s+160\s+meters\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Measured\s+Loss\s+in\s+Copper\s+Clad\s+Steel\s+RG\-6\s+on\s+160\s+meters\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters (score: 1): Author: donovanf@starpower.net; Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:58:27 -0500 (EST); I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper (SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 coaxial cable. The difference is insignificant on 160 mete; /archives//html/Topband/2018-01/msg00059.html (11,914 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters (score: 1): Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:10:33 -0800; AFAIK, the only reason they even make solid copper RG-6 at all is for applications that send DC over the coax to operate such things as preamps. DirecTV does that a lot. Rick N6RK I measured the diff; /archives//html/Topband/2018-01/msg00060.html (12,503 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters (score: 1): Author: "N2TK, Tony" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>; Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:10:59 -0500; Frank, Good info. I have been using RG6 (Commscope F660BEF) for years for all my receive lines and the feedlines for 80M 4-sq. The critters don't seem to ever bother this slippery PE covering whether; /archives//html/Topband/2018-01/msg00061.html (12,698 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]