In article , charles scribeth thus
Did they let you keep it as a retirement pressy;-?...
Least it was a known figure..
In article , charles scribeth thus
Did they let you keep it as a retirement pressy;-?...
Least it was a known figure..
They would have been even better if you had used germanium!
yes to all of that
There arent many stupid questions asked in ukdiy, but I'm pretty safe in saying that's one of them.
NT
Olde AF139 she used to be used in the first generation Labgear UHF amps.
Usually preceding the dynamic PC 88 and 86 duo!.
All soo much better when Ms Silicon rode into town she was much quieter...
nb: for BC read BF ; .. U know it makes sense..
In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus
Yep, balanced against the cost of being able to get at it when required..
Course larger cable if you have to TX as well or if its the prime purpose of it all..
In message , tony sayer writes
If you are thinking of the ones used for some of the TV infill sites Tony, I have one on my roof, kind gift from a Beeb gent'. Ruggedised isn't the word for it, I think it would still be in one piece after a nuclear strike!
And if your S/N ratio is now sufficient for what you need then the amplification if required has taken place -where- it mattered..
Then there must be some piss poor TV's out there then, how is it so difficult to c*ck up a very simple part. Theres grillions of tellies around there're not rocket science.
Or what you might mean is that some TV's if fed with more signal then they decode DTV better if it's at a marginal level..
Well forgive me asking but it seems that an amp can improve matters regardless;-!.
There is one at the other end, only 6 dB gain and that that bloody thing is costing 650 odd quid!...
In article , Bill scribeth thus
Bet that cost around a few hundred I'd reckon..
Some here !..
Same old story, if you save 20p per tv, over a million sets that's £200,0
I dont know why youre inventing silly ideas.
NT
No - and I'm glad - maintaining the Range Rover underneath would have been beyond my finances
they were £200 in 1985, what they cost later, I've no idea
In message , tony sayer writes
That looks a bit flimsy, I'll nip up onto the roof tomorrow and get a photo for you. A bit dark now and my wife would have a fit!!!
The one I'm thinking of, if I've got it right, has a solid plastic wedge between the 2 lines of elements and an N Skt at the back.
They're 50 ohm though.
Bill
Minor problem :-)
That's the one. The elements were machined out of solid metal, too.
In message , charles writes
I just went on the roof to get a photo for Tony and realised it was no longer connected to anything, so one less bit of hardware up there now.
Tony, this is what a proper heavy duty aerial should look like :-) Preferably a bit more in focus though. Note the N on the right hand end.
Isnt that what VHS recorders did?
NT
In article , Bill scribeth thus
I think you'll find their aerial in the flesh are a lot more solid than what the pix might depict. I've got one of their aerials that used to be used for 860 MHz audio links and bloody solid and heavy it is too nothing that you'd ever call flimsy|!...
In article , Bill scribeth thus
C&S antennas by the look of it...
In article , Bill scribeth thus
Unless it's lotsa wotts up it ;!..
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.