Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+RG\-393\s+source\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+RG\-393\s+source\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] RG-393 source (score: 1): Author: Donald Fox <taurusshoguy@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:01:45 -0700 (PDT); Guys: Thanks for replies and info so far. Please recall that RG-393 is the RG-8 sized PTFE cable, and not the smaller RG-58 equivalent which is RG-142. While it looks like the smaller cable wou; /archives//html/Amps/2010-09/msg00139.html (7,104 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] RG-393 source (score: 1): Author: "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kirkby@onetel.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:33:47 +0100; There's also some "air spaced" cables that have very high RF power handling. There not a lot of support of the inner conductor to the outer conductor. I forget what they call the stuff, but PTFE insu; /archives//html/Amps/2010-09/msg00143.html (7,489 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] RG-393 source (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@f2s.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:36:31 +0100; Apologies for the confusion - the data I glanced at is laid out oddly and appears to group RG393 with RG142 sizes unless you look closely. There's a lesson there.... Steve ___________________________; /archives//html/Amps/2010-09/msg00160.html (6,883 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]