[TowerTalk] Coax Losses on 160 and 75?

[Jim Brown]

On Sun,8/7/2016 1:04 AM, Jeff AC0C wrote:
> I really really do appreciate all of the email attempting to rectify 
> my misunderstanding of proper coax line terminology.  However that is 
> a debate of miniature that I'm sure the original poster is not asking 
> about.   The fact is if you lined up 10 hams and showed them a roll 
> marked RG11 at a hamfest, I would guess at least 9 of them would 
> expect it to the be foil + lousy braid stuff of the CATV era.

Perhaps I lead a sheltered life. I've never seen CATV RG11 in the flesh, 
only in catalogs.  And I've been no stranger to flea markets for most of 
my adult life. I've seen lots of CATV stuff labeled RG6, I've used a lot 
of it feeding RX antennas. 40 years ago, I even got paid to install some 
of it in locations as diverse as Chicago town homes and Sears Tower. :)

> The fellow was asking about what he could use that was cheap. Commonly 
> referred to "RG11" - meaning the cheap stuff from the CATV type 
> (whatever the proper nomenclature is for that) - works fine in ham 
> applications.  That is the point of my comment.

Yep -- for a while, and as long as it doesn't get wet. And it has more 
loss than RG11 made from copper.

73, Jim K9YC