07-01-2015, 09:34 AM
Yes, Lawrence, that's my understanding.
It might just be worth mentioning that that type of line - its construction and materials used - is usually O.K. for reception purposes, but for the transmission of serious amounts of R.F. power, it can get quite lossy. A lot of the loss is caused by dirt etc. forming on the one-piece dielectric that separates the two wires. The type of line with gaps in it - and made with substantial insulating material - is to be preferred. Having said all that though, much research still indicates that balanced feeder using spacing bars - from 3 to 6 inches - still remains the best method of moving power R.F. from source to aerial load.
Aside.
From my perspective, all of this is highly relevant, since my new location looks like it could provide for an excellent balanced aerial and at a good height too, capable of operation at 3.5 MHz - or perhaps even lower.
But there will be a lot of work to do elsewhere before I can get back into 'radio stuff'.
Al.
It might just be worth mentioning that that type of line - its construction and materials used - is usually O.K. for reception purposes, but for the transmission of serious amounts of R.F. power, it can get quite lossy. A lot of the loss is caused by dirt etc. forming on the one-piece dielectric that separates the two wires. The type of line with gaps in it - and made with substantial insulating material - is to be preferred. Having said all that though, much research still indicates that balanced feeder using spacing bars - from 3 to 6 inches - still remains the best method of moving power R.F. from source to aerial load.
Aside.
From my perspective, all of this is highly relevant, since my new location looks like it could provide for an excellent balanced aerial and at a good height too, capable of operation at 3.5 MHz - or perhaps even lower.
But there will be a lot of work to do elsewhere before I can get back into 'radio stuff'.
Al.
