About Us

April 18th 05, 12:50 AM

wrote:

dxAce wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong... but would it not be better to run some
pre-amplification ahead of the splitter rather than try to make up
something that has already disappeared? Much the same in say VHF work
where it is better to run a receive pre-amp right at the antenna versus
running it at the receiver end of the coax?

I'd never consider using a passive splitter here, and I rarely if ever
engage the
pre-amps on the receivers... no need.

dxAce
Michigan
USA
------------------------------
The results might surprise you.

The results of what? Using a passive splitter?

When I received my zfsc-2-1 I expected the addional ~3.5dB loss to be
an
issue. But after much testing I found that it didn't make that much
difference.
For the most part any signal I could receive without the addtional loss
was
still present with the loss. I used a HP step atenuator to check this
before going to the trouble of mounting the zfsc.

I really expected to need a good low noise, high intercept, preamp
before
the splitter. If you have a "good enough" antenna the additional loss
is of slight concern.

But it is still a loss, is it not?

Since I have all of my antennas, receivers, RF filters on a patch
panel,
it allows me to easily move the splitter out of line. I use BNC
connectors
because I was given a "boat load" of them and find them easier and
faster to move then PL/SO-259 connectors.

A friend wanted a similar setup and I gave him enough bulkhead mount
"F" femalefemale to allow him to bring all of his antenas and both
receivers to a panel. He found an "old" TV spliter that works very well
to below the MW/BCB band. I bought a bag of over 500 for $1 at the
local Goodwill store.

Another advantage of a RF patch panel is I can connect my Pro2004 IF
out to my R2000 so I can listen to SSB VHF/UFF comms.

I do have to be very carefull to insure that I don't connect my ham
gear to
my receiver inputs. At them moment I have them feeding different RF
patch
panels and simply don't ever connect my ham gear to a receive antenna.
I am considering switching all of my receive RF connectors to "F", at
least
at the patch panel. I have thought of using TNC but they are expensive
and are easier to crossthread then "F".

You've made no pertinent point.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Antenna splitter?	bolt thrower	Scanner	6	December 29th 04 12:41 AM
CATV splitter question	Jerry	Antenna	11	November 15th 04 01:44 AM
CATV splitter question	Jerry	Antenna	3	November 5th 04 01:31 PM
Scanner antenna splitter	Jason Wagner	Scanner	7	January 3rd 04 01:08 AM
2-way splitter	mfc	Antenna	10	November 21st 03 06:09 PM

Menu

About Us