| |
K0CQ > TECHNI 01.10.08 02:07l 33 Lines 1540 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 49217_W0AK
Read: GUEST OE7FMI
Subj: Re: PL259 losses
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0GV<DB0LJ<DB0RES<ON0AR<N9ZZK<WD9EKA<
N9NDS<KB0OFD<KQ0I<W0AK
Sent: 080929/2051Z @:W0AK.#CIA.IA.USA.NOAM #:49217 [Des Moines] $:49217_W0AK
From: K0CQ@W0AK.#CIA.IA.USA.NOAM
To : TECHNI@WW
Back when I was a kid, there were Amphenol parts marked SO-239
and PL-259. The PL-259 plug was made differently from the 83-1SP
two piece plug that is the common plug today. The PL-259 had
three four pieces. The shell was not threaded, and the ring was
shorter retained by a sleeve that fit over a taper outside the
part of the shell that grips the outer jacket. That sleeve was
also tapered so that it increased the grip on the jacket as it
was pushed towards the connector ring and was anchored by a screw
through the side the rested on another taper to pull the sleeve
onto the connector. It was a little easier to screw onto the
jacket, but it didn't accept the adapters for RG-58 and RG-59
coaxes.
The biggest problem with the UHF family of connectors is that the
ground connection is made only by the tightness of the ring,
there are no springs like the center conductor and that of
improved connectors families, like N, BNC, C, LC, HN, and the
like. And when that ring vibrates loose the RF arcing can do
damage. I had one turned black from 18 watts of RF at 2m in a
mobile installation.
I so much prefer BNC, N, and C, that each radio here either has
an immediate UHF to BNC adapter or a custom coax with a UHF male
and a BNC, N, or C at the other end depending on its purpose. I
use C at the antenna patch panel for rapid disconnect when
lightning is observed in the area.
73, Jerry, K0CQ @ W0AK.#CIA.IA.USA
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
