We chose RG+142 cable from Eric Jones for run from our Becker 250 watt mode C transponder to AAE dipole antenna in tail. RG+142 aluminium wire has less loss compared to RG-142, RG-400 or RG-58. RG-142 and RG+142 have a solid center wire compared to RG-400 that has a braided center. For a 14 foot run @ 1090MHz, Total Run Attenuation(dB), and Efficency(%) for various cable:
**RG-213 1.1dB 78.1% recommended by Becker .405" diameter and ~21 oz heavier than RG+142. RG-213 has PVC Jacket and stranded center conductor.
***Did find an equivilent from ECS .229" diameter and Part 25 complient and only a little over 3 times the weight of RG+142 (7.84 oz heavier for 14 feet).
*RG-220 .4dB 90.7% 1.12" diameter, I didn't bother to get weight.
****SFT-142 1.5dB 71.0% This is very close to RG+142 (anyway RG+142 is **** @ .172" diameter and .015 lbs/ft)
***RG-142 1.9dB 64.8% ~.200" diameter
**RG-400 2.5dB 60.9% ~.195" diameter
*RG-58 2.2dB 59.6% .195" diameter
Please note above doesen't include connector loss or return loss from standing wave. Eric said he never saw copper oxidize on his wire that would hinder RF signal. For every 3dB loss, it will cut power output by 50% (logrithmic). Semflex got back to me using their calculator figuring dB loss of RG+142 compared to RG-142, it was a little less difference than calculator I used (think something like 2.2dB for RG+142) but was still better than RG-142. His calculator took into consideration at least one TNC and one BNC connector and perhaps standing wave?

Popular tags

Random image