Hi Fred,
Thanks for input. Am not sure if you have read Jim Weir's article, but he
addressed
concerns on losses on "that flimsy little offshore comnnector". Quote "With as
sophisticated a piece of equipment as I have on my bench (a $25,000 spectrum
analyser), the loss was down in the noise of the instrument. That is I can't
measure
detectable loss." I am not sure how this compares to your .5 db loss for an RF
connector. Since I am not an electrical engineer and I am well out of my depth,
I will
have to back out of this thread now.
Cheers, John
Fred Fillinger wrote:
> John & Paddy Wigney wrote:
> >
> > Boy, is this forum great or what ? Thanks Troy for the instant reply and
> > advice
> > on the Jim Weir article; I have found it already. I probably overlooked it
> > since I didn't know what a diplexer is. I think I know now. "A panel mount
> > connector which automatically disconnects the inop radio and connects the
> > handheld directly to the antenna." Sounds like a good trick to me, Jim
> > even
> > explains how you can check out the device with a patch cable to ensure that
it
> > works OK before you feel the need to cut the main coax.
>
> Cool, except it's putting some insertion loss into your antenna. A
> proper RF connector, vs the kludge item from Radio Schlock, is .5 db
> loss. You can better utility from a second antenna. Copper tape, or
> just split RG-58 into 21 inches of center wire and 21" of braid.
> Affix to fuse side with RTV. Forget the ferrites or poorer
> bandwidth. It will still work much better than the rubber ducky,
> which is basically a dummy load with incidental antenna
> characteristics.
>
> Best,
> Fred F.
|