Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] RG11 Cable

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] RG11 Cable
From: Dan Zimmerman N3OX <n3ox@n3ox.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:34:04 -0400
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
> OK, I understand your logic. But that's a worst case (lossless line,
> precise
> odd number of quarter wave lengths) mismatch to a 50 ohm transmitter,


Yeah, but 1/2 inch hardline might as well be lossless, and if the load is 40
ohms or 36 ohms instead (no problem on a 50 ohm system), then the
range of unacceptable matches from the transformation expands to a wide
variety of line lengths.


>  Any reasonable antenna tuner should have no
> problem making a transmitter happy with that load.


Absolutely.  And many people have them built into their barefoot rigs and
use them, and there's no real loss or technical issue with that.

Any tube amp can deal with it too.

But for barefoot rigs without tuners or less expensive, less fancy
auto-tuner-less solid state amps, being able to keep the SWR under
2:1 without a tuner can be useful, NOT because a tuner wouldn't completely
fix the problem, but because
an autotuner is  more expensive than a few lengths of coax and the
connectors you need.     WAY more
expensive in the case of a high power autotuner.    A manual tuner is
cheaper but vastly less convenient, in my opinion.  I hate having to tune up
when I switch bands, so I only keep mine around in case I need to do
something out of the ordinary for me (like talking on the top end of 75m).

Look, it's just another tool, but I feel like it's necessary to mention it,
because "use a tuner" is not necessarily
the best solution for some people's stations, budgets,  and operating
styles.


73
Dan
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>