Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
1) IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)
2) 2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')
3) 70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')
4) A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies (>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Mark,
Belden 9913F7 with "clamp" (hand assembled) N connectors would work for your feedline. If you go this route, MAKE SURE THAT THE CONNECTOR HAS THE PROPER CENTER PIN FOR 'F7.
RG-142 and hand assembled BNC's would work for the gear interconnect jumpers.
Look on the bay for real Amp connectors. They are cheaper here than at an online vendor. Finding the right connectors at a hamfest can be iffy.
RG-142 can be had cheaply on the bay as well.
Higher freqs are best handled by hardline. Small pieces are available and new, OEM (surplus) connectors are available at reasonable cost.
Closely following the spec sheet for the connector that you're assembling is critical. I use a copy of the MIL348 standard (for free, available online) for the dimensions. There's only one that matters, really for us. How far is the pin recessed. Get that wrong and the pin will "tulip" the prongs of the female or not make proper contact, trashing the connectors, your work and introducing a point of failure. An el cheapo pair of digital calipers (use the depth gauge on the tongue end) will make short work of this.
Razor blade and sharp scissors make short work of cable prep. A cassette stripper can help, but I have found is not a one size fits all fix.
If the sickness bites, a crimper set is a good investment. Making custom cables for portable gear is a snap. I usually carry a few clamp connectors in case of failure in the field.
Norm n3ykf
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:03 PM, anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed. 73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
The question, really, is what feedline is best for 23cm?It also would matter if one is working fixed vs. portable, of course, due to the different feedline lengths,
LMR-400 is great for 2 and 70cm, of course.
Rob KA2CZU
On Tuesday, January 23, 2018, 2:48:00 AM EST, Bob- W7LRD w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed. 73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
1) IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)
2) 2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')
3) 70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')
4) A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies (>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:46:15PM -0800, Bob- W7LRD wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed.
It's probably impossible to keep water from inside due to condensation. That said, the more recent 9913 is supposed to be easier to keep dry. I once saw on the web an enterprising university club station that rigged up a dry air pump for their 9913 run. ;) LMR is far better IMO as well.
73 Bob W7LRD
73 Diane VA3DB
I've got hardline for my 60' runs on 70cm, and 1.2 ghz. Really works a LOT better than 9913, especially with the water problems. Besides at the connectors, the local squirrel population likes to gnaw at stuff, and all it takes is one small chew to ruin the entire run. With "regular" (solid innards) coax, the wound can be taped over with electrical tape, since they don't seem to like the braid. Even the smallest nick in 9913 will eventually be fatal.
Greg KO6TH
Bob- W7LRD wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed. 73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
9913 is not 9913F7
Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not.
Norm n3ykf
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Greg D ko6th.greg@gmail.com wrote:
I've got hardline for my 60' runs on 70cm, and 1.2 ghz. Really works a LOT better than 9913, especially with the water problems. Besides at the connectors, the local squirrel population likes to gnaw at stuff, and all it takes is one small chew to ruin the entire run. With "regular" (solid innards) coax, the wound can be taped over with electrical tape, since they don't seem to like the braid. Even the smallest nick in 9913 will eventually be fatal.
Greg KO6TH
Bob- W7LRD wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed. 73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz. 9913 has about 2.6 dB.
https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf
I know which I'd choose.
-----Original Message----- From: Norm n3ykf Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:09 PM To: Greg D Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org>, ; anderson58625 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax
9913 is not 9913F7
Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not.
Norm n3ykf
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Yes, but wet 9913 has a loss of ?
While searching for some hardline to replace my 9913 run some years ago, I resorted to drilling a hole in the bottom end of the cable, and sucking out the water periodically with a syringe. It was not an insignificant amount, and made a huge difference. Eventually found someone with some leftover LDF4-50A hardline, and made a swap with him for a UHF beam antenna I had extra. Best deal on the planet.
If you can truly keep your 9913 dry inside, by all means, go for it. But how do you know it's still dry? To me, it's not worth the trouble. If you like that size cable, I'd go with LMR-400 instead of either variety of 9913.
Greg KO6TH
Glenn Miller - AA5PK wrote:
9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz. 9913 has about 2.6 dB.
https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf
I know which I'd choose.
-----Original Message----- From: Norm n3ykf Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:09 PM To: Greg D Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org>, ; anderson58625 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax 9913 is not 9913F7
Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not.
Norm n3ykf
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Some years ago I had some 9913, well sealed (so I thought). Gradually the swr crept up. Without a thought, it got trashed and was replaced with LMR 400. Yes the idea of syringing water out of 9913 can work, also a constant blower blowing into the 9913 can work, we can also insert small sponges into the 9913 and replace them when necessary, or we can have the 9913 running down hill the whole way so the water can drip out (makes for a wet ham shack), or we can build a roof over the 9913 to keep it out of the moisture. I could go on and on and I am sure many of you have even more creative ideas! Am I being facetious? Of course I am! Hams can be "cheap" bunch but there is place where a few extra bucks is money well spent. Anything above 70cm I use LMR600. Just having fun today!
73 Bob W7LRD
On January 23, 2018 at 1:03 PM Greg D wrote:
Yes, but wet 9913 has a loss of ? While searching for some hardline to replace my 9913 run some years ago, I resorted to drilling a hole in the bottom end of the cable, and sucking out the water periodically with a syringe. It was not an insignificant amount, and made a huge difference. Eventually found someone with some leftover LDF4-50A hardline, and made a swap with him for a UHF beam antenna I had extra. Best deal on the planet. If you can truly keep your 9913 dry inside, by all means, go for it. But how do you know it's still dry? To me, it's not worth the trouble. If you like that size cable, I'd go with LMR-400 instead of either variety of 9913. Greg KO6TH Glenn Miller - AA5PK wrote: > > 9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz. 9913 hasabout 2.6 dB. https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf I know which I'd choose. -----Original Message----- From: Norm n3ykf Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:09 PM To: Greg D Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org mailto:amsat-bb@amsat.org >, ; anderson58625 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax 9913 is not 9913F7 Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not. Norm n3ykf Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org . AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > _______________________________________________Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org . AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
You know how the phone company used to keep paper-insulate thousand (or whatever) conductor, lead sheath cables dry inside? Dry nitrogen pumped in from the central office, and extra bottles soldered in when leaks were found :-)
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Bob- W7LRD w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
Some years ago I had some 9913, well sealed (so I thought). Gradually the swr crept up. Without a thought, it got trashed and was replaced with LMR 400. Yes the idea of syringing water out of 9913 can work, also a constant blower blowing into the 9913 can work, we can also insert small sponges into the 9913 and replace them when necessary, or we can have the 9913 running down hill the whole way so the water can drip out (makes for a wet ham shack), or we can build a roof over the 9913 to keep it out of the moisture. I could go on and on and I am sure many of you have even more creative ideas! Am I being facetious? Of course I am! Hams can be "cheap" bunch but there is place where a few extra bucks is money well spent. Anything above 70cm I use LMR600. Just having fun today!
73 Bob W7LRD
On January 23, 2018 at 1:03 PM Greg D wrote:
Yes, but wet 9913 has a loss of ? While searching for some hardline to replace my 9913 run some yearsago,
I resorted to drilling a hole in the bottom end of the cable, and sucking out the water periodically with a syringe. It was not an insignificant amount, and made a huge difference. Eventually found someone with some leftover LDF4-50A hardline, and made a swap withhim
for a UHF beam antenna I had extra. Best deal on the planet. If you can truly keep your 9913 dry inside, by all means, go for it. But how do you know it's still dry? To me, it's not worth thetrouble.
If you like that size cable, I'd go with LMR-400 instead of either variety of 9913. Greg KO6TH Glenn Miller - AA5PK wrote: > > 9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz.9913 has
about 2.6 dB. https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf
https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf I know which I'd choose. -----Original Message----- From: Norm n3ykf Sent: Tuesday,January 23,
2018 1:09 PM To: Greg D Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org mailto:amsat-bb@amsat.org >, ;
anderson58625 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax 9913 is not 9913F7 Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not. Norm n3ykf Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org .AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiringmembership.
Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect theofficial views
of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateursatellite
program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org . AMSAT-NAmakes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the officialviews of AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satelliteprogram!
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
No question, the original 9913 could be a water hose. It had an air gap between the center conductor and the foam dielectric with a spiral winding of Teflon (?) to keep the spacing constant. A friend and operator of a repeater went up to determine why the performance was deteriorating. He found water running out of the feedline into the utility building. My first satellite station, circa 1986, used 9913 to the preamps at the tower, and then RG-213 (later LMR-400UF) to the antennas. I put some additional sealing at the preamps, and never had a problem with water. Perhaps I was lucky; I certainly was not good. :)
However, 9913 has evolved over the last 30 years in all versions. After my tower and antennas were destroyed, I rebuilt the system using LMR to the preamps, and hardline for the 24 cm feed. I had never been satisfied with the actual flexibility of the 400UF. 9913F7 is the loss equivalent and far more flexible. It lacks the air gap of the original, so no water. With some trepidation, I ordered some for the "rotator loop." After 5 years, based on performance and loss measurements, they are as good as new.
FWIW,
Alan WA4SCA
Checking the datasheets for 9913, 9913F7 and LMR-400DB shows no real world difference at UHF. 2-3 dB (round number) at 500 MHz per 100'. Most ops don't have the gear to measure that small a difference reliably.
Personally would not use 9913 due to it's problems.
Never had a problem with F7. Used two 130' runs of LMR-400DB for 7 years in FL. Replaced the UHF run with LDF4-50A 3 years in. Difference was remarkable. UHF and up for any significant length is worth the time and effort to install hardline. Checked the VHF side on the hardline, doing an A/B comparison. Could not tell the difference.
Next time I've got the sitemaster out, I'll try measuring the loss of two different pieces of F7. One brand new, the other 20 years old, exposed to the elements most of that time. Stay tuned.
Bottom line is that good coax with correctly installed connectors, weatherproofed well will perform identically. Measuring the difference would be very hard.
OTOH, while less quality connectors and coax may measure the same at instillation, will degrade faster. (I.E. moving pieces like antenna whips)
Hardline is cheep these days. New OEM connectors can be had very reasonably and are almost idiot proof to install. (Older ones need special tools!)
I hate doing things twice. These things tend to fail at the worst time.
Personal opinion: this is where pennies and sweat count.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.....
Norm n3ykf
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 5:00 PM, Burns Fisher burns@fisher.cc wrote:
You know how the phone company used to keep paper-insulate thousand (or whatever) conductor, lead sheath cables dry inside? Dry nitrogen pumped in from the central office, and extra bottles soldered in when leaks were found :-)
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Bob- W7LRD w7lrd@comcast.net wrote:
Some years ago I had some 9913, well sealed (so I thought). Gradually the swr crept up. Without a thought, it got trashed and was replaced with LMR 400. Yes the idea of syringing water out of 9913 can work, also a constant blower blowing into the 9913 can work, we can also insert small sponges into the 9913 and replace them when necessary, or we can have the 9913 running down hill the whole way so the water can drip out (makes for a wet ham shack), or we can build a roof over the 9913 to keep it out of the moisture. I could go on and on and I am sure many of you have even more creative ideas! Am I being facetious? Of course I am! Hams can be "cheap" bunch but there is place where a few extra bucks is money well spent. Anything above 70cm I use LMR600. Just having fun today!
73 Bob W7LRD
On January 23, 2018 at 1:03 PM Greg D wrote:
Yes, but wet 9913 has a loss of ? While searching for some hardline to replace my 9913 run some yearsago,
I resorted to drilling a hole in the bottom end of the cable, and sucking out the water periodically with a syringe. It was not an insignificant amount, and made a huge difference. Eventually found someone with some leftover LDF4-50A hardline, and made a swap withhim
for a UHF beam antenna I had extra. Best deal on the planet. If you can truly keep your 9913 dry inside, by all means, go for it. But how do you know it's still dry? To me, it's not worth thetrouble.
If you like that size cable, I'd go with LMR-400 instead of either variety of 9913. Greg KO6TH Glenn Miller - AA5PK wrote: > > 9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz.9913 has
about 2.6 dB. https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf
https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf I know which I'd choose. -----Original Message----- From: Norm n3ykf Sent: Tuesday,January 23,
2018 1:09 PM To: Greg D Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org mailto:amsat-bb@amsat.org >, ;
anderson58625 Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax 9913 is not 9913F7 Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not. Norm n3ykf Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org .AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiringmembership.
Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect theofficial views
of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateursatellite
program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org mailto:AMSAT-BB@amsat.org . AMSAT-NAmakes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the officialviews of AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satelliteprogram!
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Greg D said (in part):
Yes, but wet 9913 has a loss of ?
I'm not sure any of us can count that high!
Many years ago I had some 9913 on my satellite antennas. After a while I found that the 430 yagi was getting very deaf listening to mode V/U birds. Found the cable full of water. Because my cables made a 180 degree sweeping bend just before entering the house, I ended up drilling a small in the outer jacket and braid right at the bottom of the bend. Drained over a pint of water out of the coax. This was on a run that was less than 25 feet long, and both ends were at weather protected locations. Left it that way for at least a year before replacing the cable with LMR400.
73 ----- Jim Walls - K6CCC jim@k6ccc.org
The first link is for dB per 100 meters. The second link is for dB per 100 feet, and gives 2.6 dB. nominal.
73,
Alan WA4SCA
<-----Original Message----- <From: AMSAT-BB [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Glenn <Miller - AA5PK <Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 14:36 PM <To: AMSAT BBS amsat-bb@amsat.org <Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax < <9913F7 has nearly 10 dB attenuation/100 feet at 400 MHz. 9913 has about 2.6 <dB. < <https://edesk.belden.com/products/techdata/metric/pdf/9913F7.pdf <https://catalog.belden.com/techdata/EN/9913_techdata.pdf < <I know which I'd choose. < <-----Original Message----- <From: Norm n3ykf <Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:09 PM <To: Greg D <Cc: <, amsat-bb@amsat.org>, ; anderson58625 <Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax < <9913 is not 9913F7 < <Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not. < <Norm n3ykf < <Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb <_______________________________________________ <Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available <to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions <expressed <are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT- <NA. <Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite <program! <Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Ok, fair enough. F7 is different than the original 9913, and that is an important distinction. Bob's comment (which I quoted) was about the original 9913. The F7 variety shouldn't be as susceptible to water, but then it also isn't quite as good as (dry) 9913 or LMR-400.
But to the original question, which included a point about covering microwave bands, none of the RG-8-ish type cables are appropriate for more than a few feet on those bands. Except for the short flexible portion around the rotor, LMR-600 or hardline is needed, or mount a weather proof transverter up on the tower to shorten the microwave portion of the feed. I still use a higher-grade cable for UHF, as my run is over 60' from rig to antenna. Below that, it's more a matter of availability and cost. Just don't go with the really skinny stuff (RG-58 or RG-8X), because of both higher loss and lower power handling capability.
A good comparison table I found is here: https://mapleleafcom.com/PDFs_Downloads/CoaxLossChart.pdf
Greg KO6TH
Norm n3ykf wrote:
9913 is not 9913F7
Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not.
Norm n3ykf
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Greg D ko6th.greg@gmail.com wrote:
I've got hardline for my 60' runs on 70cm, and 1.2 ghz. Really works a LOT better than 9913, especially with the water problems. Besides at the connectors, the local squirrel population likes to gnaw at stuff, and all it takes is one small chew to ruin the entire run. With "regular" (solid innards) coax, the wound can be taped over with electrical tape, since they don't seem to like the braid. Even the smallest nick in 9913 will eventually be fatal.
Greg KO6TH
Bob- W7LRD wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed. 73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Thanks Greg, Norm, Diane, WF1F, and Bob for the effort of your kind answers!
73
Mark W9AT
-----Original Message----- From: Greg D [mailto:ko6th.greg@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 2:52 PM To: Norm n3ykf Cc: Bob- W7LRD; anderson58625; Amsat BB Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Exciting Coax
Ok, fair enough. F7 is different than the original 9913, and that is an important distinction. Bob's comment (which I quoted) was about the original 9913. The F7 variety shouldn't be as susceptible to water, but then it also isn't quite as good as (dry) 9913 or LMR-400.
But to the original question, which included a point about covering microwave bands, none of the RG-8-ish type cables are appropriate for more than a few feet on those bands. Except for the short flexible portion around the rotor, LMR-600 or hardline is needed, or mount a weather proof transverter up on the tower to shorten the microwave portion of the feed. I still use a higher-grade cable for UHF, as my run is over 60' from rig to antenna. Below that, it's more a matter of availability and cost. Just don't go with the really skinny stuff (RG-58 or RG-8X), because of both higher loss and lower power handling capability.
A good comparison table I found is here: https://mapleleafcom.com/PDFs_Downloads/CoaxLossChart.pdf
Greg KO6TH
Norm n3ykf wrote:
9913 is not 9913F7
Google is your friend, or perhaps if one is lazy, not.
Norm n3ykf
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Greg D ko6th.greg@gmail.com wrote:
I've got hardline for my 60' runs on 70cm, and 1.2 ghz. Really works a LOT better than 9913, especially with the water problems. Besides at the connectors, the local squirrel population likes to gnaw at stuff, and all it takes is one small chew to ruin the entire run. With "regular" (solid innards) coax, the wound can be taped over with electrical tape, since they don't seem to like the braid. Even the smallest nick in 9913 will eventually be fatal.
Greg KO6TH
Bob- W7LRD wrote:
For 2 & 70cm I use LMR400. LMR is better (in my opinion), in that it's
more flexable, 9913 can get water inside. Unless coax connectors are super sealed.
73 Bob W7LRD
On January 22, 2018 at 6:03 PM anderson58625 anderson58625@gmail.com
wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's!
<grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables),
any
quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good
answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do
not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do
not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the
official views of AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
program!
Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
I just use "LMR" Super-flex cable for everything.
For short runs in a car 15-20 feet, I use LMR-240 Super-flex. Its 0.240 in diameter and has measurably less loss at 20 feet (400 mc and higher) than typical 0.195" coax.
In the Shack: For HF, I use LMR-500 flexible with runs up to 200 feet. It can handle full legal limit without melting.
For VHF and UHF runs of 100' or less, I use LMR-600 Super-flex. It is flexible enough to go around a rotor. Normal RG-8 coax is 0.405 inches in diameter. LMR 600 is 0.600 inches in diameter. The Greater the diameter, the lower the loss. Its not the Name stamped on the cable that's important, it is the diameter of the cable. All 405 cable will have similar losses. It does not matter if its a 1$ per foot or 20$ per foot, 405 cable will have similar losses. If you need less loss, go with thicker cable or hardline.
The loss with 600 is so much lower than 405 cable, i just do not count DB 's any more.
Also, avoid splices, etc.
WF1F
On 1/22/2018 9:03 PM, anderson58625 wrote:
Reading the subject line, I may have somehow mixed sarcasm with a potential pun (eye of the beholder!) <grin>. Sorry for that.
I seek to avoid investing in a set of cable producing hardware (or assembled cables) which I will regret later. I am hoping to get some guidance regarding coax for:
IF patch between equipment (male-male BNC's)2m feedline (N-connectors) (<50')70cm feedline (N-connectors) (<50')A later potential for feedline carrying microwave frequencies(>1GHz)
The frequency & loss-rate charts for coax are informative, but I'm not sure I'm seeing which connectors will fit what cable brand/types. With the variables of loss, dimensions, flexibility, and potential proprietary crimping systems, etc., I don't have enough experience or information to confidently make an online materials order. Things were much easier down here with just HF frequencies, RG-213, and good quality (weather protected) PL-259's! <grin>
For IF patch cables, I figure these are conveying HF so the cable type/loss at 1-3' isn't very important. But, there is also shielding: A consideration?
. Any thoughts on IF cables?
. Plus, I've never attached a BNC to a cable. Easy? Avoid it?
. Plan on a new crimper/die?
. Or, if premade would be cheaper (just a few IF patch cables), any quality sources to recommend?
For the 2m & 70cm feedlines, I know flexibility may be a consideration on rotating/elevating masts. Of course, I'm sure a rigid feedline may be superior elsewhere, but I am not at that point yet. Still, advice on that subject is gratefully appreciated. I need to provide good questions to hope for good answers, so what feedline you would recommend for:
. Reasonable flexibility/portability
. 2m-23cm
. Modest power
. <50'
. For use with n-connectors
The benefit of you knowledge and experience is much appreciated.
73
Mark W9AT
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (11)
-
Alan -
anderson58625 -
Bob- W7LRD -
Burns Fisher -
Diane Bruce -
Glenn Miller - AA5PK -
Greg D -
jim＠k6ccc.org -
Miles (WF1F) -
Norm n3ykf -
Robert Switzer