Hi Brian,
I know you are intense with the rigid and highly defined parameters of
contesting, and what you've said is absolutely true, but please re-read
my comments and note that I separated them from contesters in the
discussion and addressed the majority of the amateur community with the
following:
".................Most full power HF stations with runs under 100 feet to
> the antenna simply don't need a better coax than RG213, and "barefoot"
> stations could participate with little restriction with
> a simple RG58. I realize the all of you big guns or wannabe's wouldn't
> consider it, but y'all aren't the majority - it's still a big, broad
> wonderful hobby with room for all!....."
I've learned from many conversations with hams all over the world that
our wonderful TT reflector is inhabited by many "casual" operators who
seldom, if ever, contest, but love to read and learn all they can about
all facets of the hobby, the art, the science, and the engineering of
amateur radio. Also in TT there are the "best of the best" in the form of
teachers and counselors, who never fail to contribute and share their
skills with all who ask, either on TT or with members directly.
These characteristics set TT apart from most every other forum I've
witnessed on the web, and places it high on the too short list
of forces ensuring the future of the hobby.
73, Press
On Sun, 29 Aug 1999 10:39:59 +0000 alsopb <alsopb@gloryroad.net> writes:
>Press,
>
>I think you haven't considered the raft of
>contesters who have long runs to their towers.
>The "tenth's of db" sure add up especially on 10
>and 15 meters. Contrary to what you imply, many
>hams have done the math and
>found that the low loss stuff is actually
>necessary to keep their total loss (output of amp
>to anteena) under a design figure. In my case,
>that loss figure is 1db.
>
>Brian/K3KO
>
>n8ug@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> There seems to be a lot of opinion, much of it unfounded, working
>its way
>> into this thread - perhaps a few thoughts might help guide some of
>the
>> undecided.
>> First and foremost, it should be realized that coaxial cable design
>and
>> construction is based on satisfying specified needs. There is a
>place for
>> solid dielectric, semi-solid (aka "air") dielectric, and foam
>dielectric,
>> the three major types; just as there is a place for considerations
>of
>> aging, power handling capability, mechanical capabilities, loss,
>> environmentals, shielding, size, weight, etc.
>> Unfortunately, many coax decisions in the amateur radio community
>are
>> based on very different criteria - these include "if a little is
>good, a
>> lot must be better," cheapest, lowest loss, and "my Elmer said .....
>so
>> that's good enough for me," as well as some measure of the right
>reasons.
>> One commenter cited, in effect, that all foam is junk, and hard line
>is
>> the only answer, or at the least, Times' LMR. Since practically all
>> hardline is foam, as well as all LMR, this opinion has to be
>suspect.
>>
>> Foam technology is an evolving science, and there is a tremendous
>> difference in the old wartime resource stretching material and the
>wide
>> assortment of ever improving high tech material available today.
>> As a matter of fact, only the HF bands are not dominated today by
>> foam type coaxial cable, and the inroads there are impressive, if
>not
>> always justified. Most full power HF stations with runs under 100
>feet to
>> the antenna simply don't need a better coax than RG213, and
>"barefoot"
>> stations could participate with little restriction with
>> a simple RG58. I realize the all of you big guns or wannabe's
>wouldn't
>> consider it, but y'all aren't the majority - it's still a big,
>broad
>> wonderful hobby with room for all!
>> Belden has indeed run into trouble with their 9913F, and it is most
>> surprising, given their level of technology. I'm reminded of the
>> introduction of the original 9913 to the amateur market at Dayton
>many
>> years ago. We stopped on the way at the Richmond, IN plant at
>midnight on
>> Thursday to pick up the first production - we had asked for 5000
>feet - 5
>> reels. As it turned out, there was only 1-1000 footer, and the rest
>was
>> little reels of everything from 100 to 500 feet. It all sold on
>Friday,
>> and it was some of the worst stuff we ever carried. It only had
>60+%
>> braid shield over the foil so you could hardly find a wire to solder
>to
>> when installing a PL259, and within a few weeks the reports of
>water
>> running out of it at the transceiver appeared. But hey! it had 40%
>less
>> loss than RG213 or most any other RG8 type, so the stampede began.
>> Happily, Belden increased the braid % to 88 and we learned how to
>keep
>> the water out, and later make a flexible version. It won the race
>for
>> years, until Times and others developed the new foams which have
>left the
>> solids and "airs" in the dust.
>> Belden will solve the foam problems with 9913F as well, for those
>who
>> want it, but that multitude only encompasses a small crowd who
>actually
>> need it. The latter have a choice right now of several coaxes,
>readily
>> available, state-of-the-art, models that are within a tenth or so
>db's of
>> the 9913F's loss characteristics, and are tougher and longer lived,
>rated
>> as good or better in that respect than even old workhorse RG213.
>> Our advice is to avoid the hype, study the specs, talk to the
>> professionals in the business who are ready, willing and able to
>help. It
>> will cost you less, improve your station performance, and cure your
>> headache.
>> 73,
>> Press Jones, N8UG, The Wireman, Inc., Landrum, SC, 29356
>> Sales (800)727-WIRE(9473) or orders@thewireman.com
>> Tech help (864)895-4195 or n8ug@thewireman.com
>> http://www.thewireman.com and the WIRELINE news
>> and bargain page. Our 22nd year!
>>
>> --
>> FAQ on WWW:
>http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
>> Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
>> Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
>> Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|