In article ,
cavelamb wrote:



What Wayne said...

From what I've seen of "professional" work (unless you did it yourself and
know), it would be worth checking.

I think this whole discussion ,is just about as funny a thread ,as I
have read, in months. If you don't have the right tools, and know what
you are doing, you just "****ing into the Wind"...

Yes, there are a few "Professionals" around who don't have Clue One, and
there are some that can't afford to buy the "Correct Tools" to do the
job.

If you want a real Marine Radioman, you need to pay for his Knowledge,
Service, and his Test Equipment.... or you can stumble around and learn
it yourself, after much Trial and Error.....

SaltyDog isn't even close to being a REAL Marine Radioman..... and his
attempt to sidetrack the discussion, by introducing a Trivial, and for
all Practical Purposes, irrelevant factor into the thread, is so silly
as to show a lack of intelligence in the field.

Oh well, folks can believe what they will, but it doesn't change the
FACTS... and the issues at hand.... Wilbur, Well we all know about
Wilbur... Enough said on that front....

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:23:42 -0500, wrote:

Boy, somebody sure feels threatened.

I don't think you should take it personally. "Bruce in Alaska" has
more real world electronic experience, by far, than anyone else in
this group that I know of. I've been FCC licensed in one capacity or
another since 1957 and would defer to his judgement on just about
anything.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:39:49 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:23:42 -0500, wrote:

Boy, somebody sure feels threatened.

I don't think you should take it personally. "Bruce in Alaska" has
more real world electronic experience, by far, than anyone else in
this group that I know of. I've been FCC licensed in one capacity or
another since 1957 and would defer to his judgement on just about
anything.

Bruce should give his opinion on the 214 versus the other cable
recently discussed. And whether mil spec means anything.
That's been questioned too, and I'm a bit confused.
Which is ok. Lucky for me I don't have a radio.

--Vic

In article ,
Vic Smith wrote:

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:39:49 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:23:42 -0500, wrote:

Boy, somebody sure feels threatened.

I don't think you should take it personally. "Bruce in Alaska" has
more real world electronic experience, by far, than anyone else in
this group that I know of. I've been FCC licensed in one capacity or
another since 1957 and would defer to his judgement on just about
anything.

Bruce should give his opinion on the 214 versus the other cable
recently discussed. And whether mil spec means anything.
That's been questioned too, and I'm a bit confused.
Which is ok. Lucky for me I don't have a radio.

--Vic

Well, it would seem from all the previous posts that there is some
controversy about the recommended RF Coax for VHF Marine Installations
on various Vessel type.... Hmmmm... Well the answers are fairly
straight forward. It really depends on the installation. Small coax,
RG58 types, are alright for runs less than 10 Ft. For runs up 100Ft, RG8
Types Should be used. RG213 is better than RG8 or RG8 Foam Core Types,
due to Wx survivability, and Water Intrusion. The Price Difference
between RG213 and RG214, is usually NOT a cost effective for a NORMAL
Marine Installation, especially on a non-Commercial Vessels, where
budgets are tight. For Military Installations RG214 is the MINIMUM. On
commercial vessels up thru the 80's, RG213 was the standard, for runs
under 100 Ft. Then the newer coax types became available, like Belden
9913 & 9914. These were touted as the Poor Man's Heliax, and looking at
the Specs back then, they were. They are iffy for Marine Use, mostly
because of Bending Radius Specs, AND 9913 is a Hollow Core Type, so any
water intrusion issues ruins the cable. The LMR Stuff around NOW is
similar to the Beldon stuff, and has the same issues in that some is
Hollow Core and it has limitations in Bending Radiuses. For Runs longer
than 100 Ft. Heliax was the only thing used, in the Old Days. Modern
replacements have come along in the 80's and 90's that are better on
Price with similar Specs. In all this the Installation is the CRITICAL
Factor, NOT the coax type used. Water Tight Fittings and Connectors,
and getting the connectors INSTALLED CORRECTLY, is far more important
than 213 vs 214 issues. I kind of doubt that many of the folks that read
this Group even know how to install a PL-259 correctly. If you can do it
in less than three minutes, you don't have a clue. 99% of Vhf Antenna
System failures are do to installation issues, or CHEAP Antennas.

If your paying someone to look at you stuff, and he brings anything
aboard to check the VHF Antennas other than a Bird Wattmeter with the
appropriate Slugs, kick them off your boat as if they had Homeric Fever,
because they are Dufus's and will only cost you money. If you take your
radio to a Service Shop and the guy Doesn't have a Real Service Monitor,
Do NOT have them work on you rig. They are hacks and don't deserve your
business. Even IF these folks show up with ALL the Right Tools, that
doesn't mean they know what is what, it only means the have the Tools.
Watch them like a hawk. Ask Questions. Experience Shows, and any Good
Radioman will be more than happy to explain what he is doing and why,
AND will show you exactly what your problem IS and what it will take to
correct it.

I was always willing to show my customers everything they wanted to know
about their stuff, because they learned, and I didn't have to fix the
same stuff twice, for the same guy. I always had more business than I
could work, and I usually sent the Apprentice's down on the small stuff,
after they had worked with me, for six months, out in the field. I have
trained a lot of Marine Techs, over the years, and as we are a Dying
Breed, Many are doing other things in RF Communications than Marine work
these days. I used to be able to count the Quality Marine Radiomen on
the West Coast and North Pacific on two hands. NOW it is down to One
hand, and MF/HF Marine RadioMen... well I can think if just (4) that I
would take my rigs to, as this is now a Very Specialized Area of Marine
World, and mostly obsolete, due to TracPhones, Cellular, and GMDSS.
I am just happy to consult and be semi-reTired.

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:03:52 -0900, Bruce in alaska
wrote:


Well, it would seem from all the previous posts that there is some
controversy about the recommended RF Coax for VHF Marine Installations
on various Vessel type.... Hmmmm... Well the answers are fairly
straight forward. It really depends on the installation. Small coax,
RG58 types, are alright for runs less than 10 Ft. For runs up 100Ft, RG8
Types Should be used. RG213 is better than RG8 or RG8 Foam Core Types,
due to Wx survivability, and Water Intrusion. The Price Difference
between RG213 and RG214, is usually NOT a cost effective for a NORMAL
Marine Installation, especially on a non-Commercial Vessels, where
budgets are tight. For Military Installations RG214 is the MINIMUM. On
commercial vessels up thru the 80's, RG213 was the standard, for runs
under 100 Ft.

Thanks Bruce

Bruce in alaska wrote:

If your paying someone to look at you stuff, and he brings anything
aboard to check the VHF Antennas other than a Bird Wattmeter with the
appropriate Slugs, kick them off your boat as if they had Homeric Fever,
because they are Dufus's and will only cost you money. /snip/

If you Google "VHF", sure enough you find entries about Viral
Hemorrhagic Fevers (VHFs) like Ebola, Dengue and Marburg. :-)

Bird Wattmeters are a trusted article no doubt.
If you come up against a strangely absorptive coax, it might just stay
absorptive on the Bird, even with the load disconnected. That should
provide a clue.

Brian W

On 15/12/2009 12:06, brian whatcott wrote:
Bruce in alaska wrote:

If your paying someone to look at you stuff, and he brings anything
aboard to check the VHF Antennas other than a Bird Wattmeter with the
appropriate Slugs, kick them off your boat as if they had Homeric
Fever, because they are Dufus's and will only cost you money. /snip/


I can get by with a Hewlett Packard 8754A and Site Master S331D.

http://www.us.anritsu.com/products/S...QQSidZ595.aspx

If you Google "VHF", sure enough you find entries about Viral
Hemorrhagic Fevers (VHFs) like Ebola, Dengue and Marburg. :-)

Bird Wattmeters are a trusted article no doubt.
If you come up against a strangely absorptive coax, it might just stay
absorptive on the Bird, even with the load disconnected. That should
provide a clue.

Brian W

goofball_star_dot_etal wrote:

I can get by with a Hewlett Packard 8754A and Site Master S331D.

http://www.us.anritsu.com/products/S...QQSidZ595.aspx


I liked the FDR feature; that and TDR are features of avionics cable
troubleshooting of the FA18 f'rinstance...
Brian W

In article ,
brian whatcott wrote:

Bruce in alaska wrote:

If your paying someone to look at you stuff, and he brings anything
aboard to check the VHF Antennas other than a Bird Wattmeter with the
appropriate Slugs, kick them off your boat as if they had Homeric Fever,
because they are Dufus's and will only cost you money. /snip/

If you Google "VHF", sure enough you find entries about Viral
Hemorrhagic Fevers (VHFs) like Ebola, Dengue and Marburg. :-)

Bird Wattmeters are a trusted article no doubt.
If you come up against a strangely absorptive coax, it might just stay
absorptive on the Bird, even with the load disconnected. That should
provide a clue.

Brian W

When in doubt about a coaxial cables integrity, a Good Radioman will
ALWAYS run the test at BOTH ends of the cable, with his Bird, and see
just exactly how much power is being used heating up the cable. SWR is
meaningless if the cable is soaking up the RF Power and selfheating....

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

Bruce in alaska wrote:
/snip/
When in doubt about a coaxial cables integrity, a Good Radioman will
ALWAYS run the test at BOTH ends of the cable, with his Bird, and see
just exactly how much power is being used heating up the cable. SWR is
meaningless if the cable is soaking up the RF Power and selfheating....

There's a well-intended tip, Bruce!
And I probably shouldn't mention how you should perk up your self-image:
always being so slow in coming forward and saying a good word about
yourself, an' all? :-)

All the best

Brian W