X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [69.171.58.236] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 5.0.7) with HTTP id 966992 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 04 Feb 2006 00:28:26 -0500 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: [LML] Antenna Lead To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.0.7 Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 00:28:26 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001401c6288e$59b2e080$660610ac@tgourley> References: <001401c6288e$59b2e080$660610ac@tgourley> X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for "Tom Gourley" : RG58 and RG400 are both 50 ohm coax so, assuming both cables meet their specifications, mixing cable types, in and of itself, will not cause any reflections or loss due to the different cables. There will be some small loss due to the coupling, and here I would use a female BNC on the end of one cable and a male BNC on the other. That way there is only one connection instead of two that would result from putting male BNCs on both cables and joining them with a barrel connection. I've talked with techs at avionics shops who told me that putting an extra connection or two in a comm cable is not an issue. (GPS antenna cables are a different story.) RG58C/U from Pasternack, for example, has a rated loss of 4.9dB/100ft at 100MHz. RG400/U is rated at 3.9dB/100 ft. It takes 3dB of loss to reduce the signal by half so unless you're planning to run an awful lot of cable the extra loss of the RG58 is negligible. However, RG400 is a much higher quality cable with better shielding and rated for a much wider temperature range; -55 to 200 C vs -40 to 80 for RG58. RG400 uses flourinated ethylene propylene for a jacket where RG58 uses PVC. I've noticed the avionics shops around here use RG142B instead of RG400. They're the same physical size with the same electrical properties but RG142B is slightly less costly. By means of comparison the costs from one on-line vendor are: RG58C/U - $0.23/ft RG142B/U - $2.01/ft RG400/U - $2.61/ft So RG58 costs a lot less, but how much are you going to use? The extra cost of RG142B or RG400 is nothing compared to the cost of your radios. Tom Gourley Legacy kit #122