> Call or write to Celwave (now RFSystems) and ask them
> for the cutting chart for units using RG400. Last time
> I tried that, every technician I spoke with told me,
> in no certain terms, that they NEVER used RG400 or
> RG142, yet I have seen photos and one actual unit that
> was factory fresh and had that unmistakeable tan
> colored, RG58-size teflon coax that I know is not
> RG214. Maybe they finally realized that they DID make
> them that way.
I have two 526's that use RG142B/U for interconnects. One of them appears
to be a regular duplexer, the other appears to have been spec'ed for use on
a close-spaced combiner/multicoupler (passbands shown as being 250 kHz
wide).
I've recabled T-band 526's down to 440-470 as well. IIRC, the cable lengths
for RG-214/U were 12" to the antenna tee, and 11.5" everywhere else. The
loss on the T-band ones seems to be just a tad higher than the 440-470 ones.
Perhaps the loops are a little smaller on the T-band ones. Like you, I
haven't drilled them out to a comparison over 0.2 dB.
> By the way, my first unit had RG8 with clamp-on male N
> connectors. Every one had been twisted so much that
> pieces of braid were shorting out the center pin and
> there was no longer a good electrical ground circuit.
Yeah, the old ones with RG8 interconnects also tend to have self-noise from
the now-tarnished 15+ year old copper braid. Same thing with older PD696's.
--- Jeff
