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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+UHF\s+Connectors\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 11:02:35 -0800; The name dates from the '30s or early '40s. No question that there's a small discontinuity due to the Zo of the connector, but it certainly doesn't matter below 50 MHz, and at higher frequencies is o; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00245.html (11,047 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 20:45:27 +0100; N, BNC and TNC always look a bit minimal for power at UHF, but there are ratings for them. A rarer alternative with bigger centre pins is the Type C. However, measurements I have done on multiple ser; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00246.html (6,807 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Fuqua, Bill L" <wlfuqu00@uky.edu>; Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 20:02:44 +0000; Lots of knowledge has been lost over the past 60 or 70 years. It is important to take time to see where we have been before determine where we are going. I had a coworker that thought his grandfather; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00247.html (11,825 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:29:16 +0100; Bill, Is it not the case that "Age, experience, cynicism, and an evil outlook on the opposition will generally outperform youth, innocence, ignorance and optimism"? 73 Peter G3RZP ___________________; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00248.html (6,935 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 01:59:10 -0500; The name dates from the '30s or early '40s. No question that there's a small discontinuity due to the Zo of the connector, but it certainly doesn't matter below 50 MHz, and at higher frequencies is; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00253.html (12,819 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Glen Zook <gzook@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 08:37:52 -0800 (PST); It depends on the quality of the UHF series connectors as to how much loss. A number of years ago, I had a client who decided to set up his own two-way radio test bench. For some reason, he used PL; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00256.html (15,559 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "qrv@kd4e.com" <qrv@kd4e.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:50:38 -0500; Watch out for the UHF elbow adapters as well. Some are so poorly made they may arc internally to the shell. It depends on the quality of the UHF series connectors as to how much loss. A number of yea; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00257.html (12,882 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 12:41:28 -0800; Amphenol, Amphenol, Amphenol! The only safe alternative are vintage parts stamped with MIL numbers. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00258.html (11,100 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 21:48:39 +0100; I don't know if the ones in the Dayton flea market at something around $11 for ten are Amphenol. They are silver plate with Teflon insulation, though, and are good. Otherwise, Amphenol. Especially fo; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00259.html (8,062 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:19:31 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) REPLY: Good advice. I had a Radio Shack elbow blow once while running QRO and damaged the load cap, a $300 repair bill. Amphenol only from then on. 73, Bill W6WRT _; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00260.html (10,673 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 13:56:29 -0800; How do you know they are "good?" I'd bet that they are junk. Have you run 1.5kW through them in a RTTY contest? Your description precisely describes a typical junk connector -- inside the shiny silve; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00261.html (7,880 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:34:06 -0500; Some just use a steel spring for the bend! Carl KM1H Watch out for the UHF elbow adapters as well. Some are so poorly made they may arc internally to the shell. It depends on the quality of the UHF s; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00262.html (13,269 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Ian White" <gm3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:47:41 -0500; made Probably true for elbows, but the only value of the MIL-standard marking is as an indication of the manufacturing quality. It says nothing about the quality of the original design. There have b; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00263.html (11,378 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: David Cole <dave@nk7z.net>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:50:35 -0800; If a connector has Amphenol on it, can I assume it is a good one? I see several Amphenol connectors on eBay for a pretty good price now and then. -- Thanks and 73's, For equipment, and software setup; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00264.html (7,846 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <dj7ww@t-online.de>; Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:30:53 +0100; The brown insulated Amphenol PL259/SO239 have the worse smell when burned out... 73 Peter If a connector has Amphenol on it, can I assume it is a good one? I see several Amphenol connectors on eBay f; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00265.html (8,513 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:15:18 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) REPLY: I've given up on the traditional solder-type PL-259s. Now I use the crimp on type and have never had a failure. The crimper is expensive but well worth the t; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00266.html (10,734 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:39:34 -0500; That's Phenolic. Hasn't been used in decades AFAIK. BTW when you see a white insulator in connectors, it is often High Density Polyethylene and not Teflon. It has very poor thermal characteristics an; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00267.html (9,236 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:42:34 -0500; We know that the original PL259 is an excellent connector if it is assembled properly, but the original design allows so many different ways of doing it badly - so much so that badly assembled PL259; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00268.html (11,624 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>; Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 07:29:26 -0500; I've given up on the traditional solder-type PL-259s. Now I use the crimp on type and have never had a failure. The crimper is expensive but well worth the time and hassle saved. I got both crimper a; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00271.html (11,634 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] UHF Connectors (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 08:42:55 -0500; On 11/13/2013 7:29 AM, Paul Christensen wrote: I've given up on the traditional solder-type PL-259s. Now I use the crimp on type and have never had a failure. The crimper is expensive but well worth; /archives//html/Amps/2013-11/msg00275.html (14,815 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]