[amsat-bb] Re: LMR400 or 400UF? (Thanks and further comments)
domenico.i8cvs at tin.it
Wed Aug 20 20:34:35 PDT 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Tondee" <mat_62 at netcommander.com>
To: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:23 AM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: LMR400 or 400UF? (Thanks and further comments)
> I think I sent this to Sebastian when I in fact meant to send it to the
> whole BBS. My aplogies if it's a duplicate post.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Tondee" <mat_62 at netcommander.com>
> To: "Sebastian" <w4as at bellsouth.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: LMR400 or 400UF? (Thanks and further comments)
> > So what I'm getting from everyone is to go with a section of 400UF
> > between
> > the antenna and the preamp and the just the regular 400 down into the
> > shack.
> > I think that should certainly be better than what I have now anyway. Any
> > further comments?
> > Tnx and 73,
> > Michael
No further comments and concerning transmission line losses It is the best
compromise both for RX and TX conditions. Have you looked at the following
"Receiver Noise Figure Sensitivity and Dinamic Range ,what the Numbar mean"
by James R. Fisk, W1DTY Ham Radio Magazine october 1975
More information about the AMSAT-BB