开云体育

I have a ratchet crimp connector and can install various types of terminations. But what tool(s) do the pros use to strip coax? Any suggestions?

I have ordered a limited batch of boards from JLCPCB for the QEX September/October 2021 “Miniature SMA Step Attenuator” pp 9-21 by Tom Alldred VA7TA. If you are interested in a board, at $3.00 ppd

On 21/09/2021 13:45, Karl Jan Skontorp wrote: > Hi all! > Is there anyone who can be so kind as to give me some help to make my device work again or at least tell me what has happened to my device? >

Good point. But, people should keep in mind that PL259 and N style connectors are two different animals. The outer shell of a PL259 is part of the Rf connection, but the outer shell of an N connector

Hi all! Is there anyone who can be so kind as to give me some help to make my device work again or at least tell me what has happened to my device? I have a NanoVNA V2_2 - SAA-2N with the DiSlord

One thing I have found is when tightening the pl259 you have to make sure the nubs are well seated in the so239 no air gaps. Unfortunately it is easy to just screw the connection together and not

Even more interesting is to do a wide/multt-band sweep with the nanoVNA: You can easily see the effects of frequency on feedline losses in the loss. I usually do a 1-30MHz sweep of my multiiband-HF

Better, the pdf didn't include the figures... -- Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can be killed but

Howdy Albert, You can get SMA connectors for RG-8X (and -59, any .242" coax), tho you do of course need the ratchet crimper with the appropriate dies.. I got both on amazon a while back. PL-259s are

Since the antenna is SMA, would it make sense to put BNC connectors on the RG-8x and use a BNC->SMA adapter? Then not only do you avoid the PL-259 entirely, but you can easily calibrate at the SMA. If

If you calibrate at the end of the cable, there should be no difference in either case. But I would choose option 1 because the attenuation of 18 feet of LMR-100 at 145MHz is only 1.62 dB and the

It's a bit late now for this reply, but here goes - Do it with both cables, and compare the results. Then you could share the results, too! I think it would be an interesting comparison. -- Doug,

The article by N3GO states "I ran a quick ELNEC [3] simulation of an end-fed vertical dipole to assess what feedpoint impedance it predicted. I varied the wire size and height above ground to observe

The ZIP file also contains the HTML article and the figures that go along with it. Open JPOLE.HTM with your browser and you will see the article with the referenced figures. 73 -Jim NU0C "Roger Need

That appears to be just a link to a zip file containing the calculation programs. No article there from what I can see. Roger

I found a link to the full content of the article: http://www.knightlites.org/n3go_workshop/index.htm N3GO renewed his license in 2019 so presumably he is still around. 73 -Jim NU0C "Roger Need via

That's pretty much what I am seeing, although my feedline loss is 1.4 dB, giving a total of 2.8 dB up and backj.

No kidding, it is the core of the famous terminated folded dipole, especially the ones made of stainless steel cables.? If you're an embassy, or state operator, and you've got that 10 mW in to 10kW

Again, thanks for sharing! 73, and thanks, Dave (NK7Z) https://www.nk7z.net ARRL Volunteer Examiner ARRL Technical Specialist, RFI ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resources

Jim reminds me that loss matching and loss broadbanding are both accepted approaches in RF design. Of course the antenna is the worst place to introduce losses in the system, but I've seen it used to