[TowerTalk] In Shack Tuner Vs. Remote Tuner forMulti-BandAntennas
wa3gin at comcast.net
Sun May 4 16:21:01 EDT 2014
Not really... The term condenser is interchangeable with capacitor but not used much; the name didn't change because of the influence of more modern language... Good try though.
Antenna tuner was used by the military ( Navy) when describing ship board vertical antenna base matching units. The couples would match the 50ohm feed line to the antenna input for a particular freq in use. I have one of the older Halicrafter built units from 1933. It still work fine. I also have a couple of Harris built fast tune RF 2601 automatic HF Antenna Couplers, a real work of art. So, in this real world example the old term "antenna tuner" was replaced with "antenna coupler" ;-)... Sort of like wireless. Everything was called wireless until the Navy built the Three Sisters Towers, in Arlington, VA to communicate with the Ifle tower in Paris. When those transmissions started the term wireless was replaced with a new term "Radio". Those towers were taking down in 1941 just before National Airport opened...the FAA was concerned about low felting bi-planes hitting the towers which at the were the second tallest structures in the world. Those towers are over 100 yrs old and still stand at Annapolis, MD Naval Academy.
Sent from my iPad
Be Prepared Stay Prepared
> On May 4, 2014, at 10:33 AM, "Jim W7RY" <w7ry at centurytel.net> wrote:
> Same reason a condenser was changed to a capacitor. More modern language.
> Jim W7RY
> -----Original Message----- From: WA3GIN in King George, VA
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 4:47 AM
> To: jim at audiosystemsgroup.com ; towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] In Shack Tuner Vs. Remote Tuner forMulti-BandAntennas
> When did matchbox or coupler get replaced with tuner?
> I thought a tuner was what was used to TUNE-IN AM and FM broadcast stations
> or one TUNES a VFO --- aren't these devices coupling RF from the feed-line
> to the feed-point of the antenna? They aren't adjusting the resonance of
> the antenna, so what are they tuning? ;-))
> Have Fun,
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Brown" <jim at audiosystemsgroup.com>
> To: <towertalk at contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 3:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] In Shack Tuner Vs. Remote Tuner for
>>> On 5/2/2014 11:54 PM, Roger (K8RI) on TT wrote:
>>> Technically the tuner at the antenna is better, but with good coax and low bands it's hardly worth the effort, but look up the chart in the handbook for additional loss Vs SWR at a given cable loss. Basically, at 160, 75, and even 40, it makes little difference whether the tuner is in the shack or remote. Unless it's a long run, if you are using good, low loss coax, the difference is likely only a few tenths of a db. Look up transmission line basics (20.1) in the current 2014 book. This chart has been in there for years, so if you have a different version, just look gor transmission line basics.
>> YES, YES, YES.
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
More information about the TowerTalk