Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:45 AM - Re: Radium dial (was: Choice) (Ron Davis)
2. 05:46 AM - Re: coax (Ron Davis)
3. 06:47 AM - Re: coax (Wayne Sweet)
4. 06:48 AM - Re: coax (Wayne Sweet)
5. 09:45 PM - Coax (DEAN PSIROPOULOS)
6. 10:11 PM - Re: coax (Ron Davis)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radium dial (was: Choice) |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Mantles made by Coleman haven't been radioactive for many years. If you
have some that have been in the basement for 20 years they are thoriated.
New mantles manufactured overseas may still be radioactive, but they are
labled if they are.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Did you notify Garmin that their manual is wrong?
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
To what is this referring??
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: coax
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
>
> Did you notify Garmin that their manual is wrong?
>
>
>
>
>
>
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 651 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Thanks Garth for clearing up the confusion. I always believed that the
RG-400 was primarily for durability rather than functionality. My experience
has been that the RG-58 has performed well, except if one uses the old
screw-on BNC connectors. Those tended to weaken at the junction and also
were difficult to fabricate without some little hair of the shield shorting
out the center conductor. The crimp-on BNC connectors are really easy to
use, of course with the correct crimping tool.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Garth Shearing" <garth@islandnet.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: coax
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Garth Shearing"
> <garth@islandnet.com>
>
> I'm going to go against the flow on this one.
>
> The data I have shows the RF loss in RG-58 and RG-400 is about the same.
> RG-58 uses a solid polyethylene dielectric and the RG-400 uses a solid
> teflon which provides operating temperatures up to 200 degrees C. RG-58
> can
> only go to 80 degrees C. So RG-58 is just fine for comm, nav, GPS, and
> transponder. RG-58 is quite limited in terms of its ability to handle
> continuous high power at high frequencies because the dielectric can heat
> up
> to 80 degrees C easily. This is not a problem with up to 200 watt
> transponders because they are only transmitting a small part of the time.
>
> RG-58 can be used up to around 3 GHz, much higher than the 1.2 and 1.5 GHz
> frequencies of GPS. Same goes for the connectors. Unless the cable is in
> the engine compartment, go with the RG-58. Way cheaper, easier to work
> with
> and weighs half as much as RG-400. I have used some teflon wire in my
> engine compartment, so I do think it has its uses.
>
> I don't understand the moisture problem. There are millions of
> installations out there working just fine. The only moisture problems we
> had occurred in outdoor cables where the cable ends were installed without
> drip loops and no shrink boots or tape wraps on the installed connectors.
> We used to drill a small hole in the bottom of the drip loop to let any
> moisture drain out, but this would not be needed in a typical aircraft
> installation.
>
> If you want lower losses or higher power, you have to go to larger
> diameter,
> which means heavier cable and connectors. You can also choose a cable
> with
> a foam or air dielectric. I think these choices are overkill given the
> short lengths of cable normally required.
>
> Sorry guys!
>
> Garth Shearing
> VariEze and 90% RV6A
> Victoria BC Canada
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- >
>> Do not use RG-58A/U for GPS installations. The signal losses at the GPS
>> frequencies (1.7GHz) are astronomical. Use RG-400 instead. This is a
>> low-loss, 100% shielded coax that may be used anywhere one would use
>> RG-58U or RG-58A/U.
>>
>> Brian Lloyd
>
>
>
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 651 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
I just made a trip to Gulf Coast Avionics yesterday to get some Coax and a couple
of Comm antennas. Because of lectric Bob's and other comments on the aeroelectric
list, I chose NOT to spend 6 times the price of RG-58 to buy RG-400 ($25
for 100 foot roll of RG-58 vs. $1.50 per foot for RG-400 from Stein Air, and
Steiny claims to have much better prices than most but I didn't bother checking
anyone else). I asked them about some cable for a GPS antenna connection
and they brought out some RG-142 (looks and costs like RG-400 but I only needed
a few feet). I have UPS GX-65 GPS/Com and they told me I needed to use a TNC
connector for it (which fortunately they also had in stock). Just one builders
experience, save your money on the Coax and buy something else you need for
the airplane. And I was surprised that Gulf Coast (sister shop to Pacific Coast
Avionics in Oregon) actually had the RG-58 for a cheaper price than Van's
aircraft!!
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Tarpon Sprgs, Florida
>Time: 11:15:05 AM PST US
>From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
>Subject: Re: Avionics-List: coax
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" w_sweet@comcast.net
>I have used the RG-58A/U for my GPS without any signal problems. However, I have
also recently tried making cables using RG->400 and BNC connectors from ACS
with a very curious problem. Seems the coax has the center insulation,
>that around the center stranded wire, a bit larger in diameter than the BNC connectors
could be forced onto. Has anyone else >experienced this problem. At one
time apparently, either the BNC or the RG-400 was a match, since I do have
the transponder >coax made from the RG-400. Out of frustration, I went back to
the old RG-58A/U for my recent GNS430
>installation.
>Wayne
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
This is a response to the posting that said to use RG 400 for the GPS
antenna. Garmin's manual says to use RG 58A/U.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: coax
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
>
> To what is this referring??
> Wayne
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
> To: <avionics-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Avionics-List: coax
>
>
> > --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Did you notify Garmin that their manual is wrong?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 651 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|