You know, if you have a large aircraft, and you are not using a RG-8 style cable, from the radio compartment to the antenna on the belly may be 50 feet after the snaking around you have to do. At 18db loss you would be losing 9 db to the antenna at 10 db the 20 watt transponder will emit (at a perfect match) 10% of the signal or 2 watts AND the receiver only receives 10% of the ground signal. Not me! RG-213, N or C connectors, if you can find the Cs, with coax adapters at each end, about a .1db insertion loss per adapter. I want to show up strong on the radar screen.

Don't get me started on remote antenna for GPSs. The reason why you need an amplified antenna is because of the cable losses. They should mount the GPS on the skin, or suction cup it to the windscreen and cable the results to the display in your lap or panel. Stronger signals from the Sats. Much less drop outs in storms, much cheaper antennas. Are you listening Garmin?

We should probably go off list if you would like more of my ramblings.

I have to go, I've got to be somewhere for a Sat pass. I'll check the list mid afternoon.

John


On Sep 5, 2006, at 10:13 AM, A DeMarzo wrote:


----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----



<x-tad-smaller>Thanks for the info.  IIRC, I read that RG400 is now specified for aircraft radio installations, and especially GPS antenna.  Expensive, yes!  And actually a specified BNC connector.  The connectors for the 58 won't fit making the job a bit more expensive, too!</x-tad-smaller>
 
<x-tad-smaller>Al</x-tad-smaller>
 
On 09/05/2006 9:04:49 AM, John Silberman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
> advice in this forum.]----
>
>
> Hi Al,
>
> I looked up RG-400 and found
> it's a very well designed cable, silver
> plated and all, easy to solder to, but very expensive $1.80 a foot.
> It's
> great for some uses but aircraft RF is ok but not it's forte'.
> It's loss at 100 mhz is 4.5 db and at 1000 Mhz 18.8 db. If it were
> given to me, I would use (nav/com only)  it since we only use 10 feet
> or so but I wouldn't
> spend the money.  RG-58 the mil spec stuff, not
> the junk, is 4.5 db at 100 Mhz and 17.0 db at 1000 Mhz. I would not use
> it. RG-8X is 3.1db at 100 and 11.2 db at 1000 Mhz at 1/5th the cost. I
> guess
> I'm just splitting hairs since we use short runs of it but a
> tenth of a db could make the difference in long range communication.
> Using any of this stuff for transponder or DME is a crime. Lose 3db and
> you've
> lost half your power and in bad WX it will mean the difference
> between being seen and not. I always try to squeeze every db I can out
> of a system. They do add up. The manufacturers used to specify RG-8
> style low loss cables (RG-213  7.6
==============================================================================
To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm



Reply via email to