Al, Great information! Yes, I can agree that properly tightened UHF connectors do not inflict much loss. I think the main problem has been with inadequate tightening - as you pointed out the shield connection requires that that UHF connectors be tight. How many hams wiggle the PL-259 connector a bit to be certain it is seated in the notch of the SO-239 - this is not a casual connector for making quick connections and disconnections.
Where am I going with this - well, with the KPA100, we have long recommended "disconnect the antenna when not in use" to protect the wattmeter diodes from static damage. While this is a good concept, the literal interpretation of that statement may actually inflict damage because of the way the UHF connector "connects". With a PL-259, the center conductor is what makes contact first - if there is a static charge on that feedline, that charge will be transferred to your equipment without a chance to bleed it off - the only way to prevent that is to either short across the feedline (if there is a ground connection for the shield) or some other means should be used to bleed off the charge before attaching a feedline with a PL-259 connector to any equipment. Type N and BNC do not have this problem - the shell makes contact first. On 4/25/2012 7:09 PM, Alan Bloom wrote: > (Changing to a more descriptive Subject line) > > > 4. Regarding RF loss in UHF connectors, it isn't as bad as many people > think. I did an Internet search and found the Usenet posting I made on > the subject about 20 (!) years ago: > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
