Hi, That's not true. The L network's only solution is the lowest Q possible, meaning it will have the lowest tuner loss possible and the widest bandwidth. And if the capacitor and inductor steps are made small enough, a 1.0:1 solution is always possible. The fact that many tuners give up once the SWR is below 2.0 or 1.5 is merely a shortcoming in their tuning algorithms. I am having high hopes for the KAT500. Is anything known on how many bits of L and C resolution is there?
AB2TC - Knut Wes Stewart wrote > What Don says is true as far as it goes. The L-network tuner has only one > solution, but it isn't necessarily a good one. > > Way back in 1998 when correspondence was via typewriter and snail mail, I > went around with Dean Straw, N6BV, then Editor of the ARRL Antenna Book, > about tuner losses. This was in conjunction with the editing of my paper, > "Balanced Transmission Lines in Current Amateur Practice" that appeared in > the Sixth Edition of the ARRL Antenna Compendium. > > Remarkably (coincidence I'm sure ;) it wasn't long before favored authors > were contributing articles to QST about how to measure tuner losses and > TLW was written. > > Tuner and line losses really do matter. > > Wes N7WS > > > <snip> -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/KAT500-Remote-Version-tp7563017p7563044.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ______________________________________________________________ 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
