this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
47 points (96.1% liked)

Amateur Radio

1372 readers
3 users here now

General amateur radio (ham radio) chat, questions, and news

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pubquiz@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

BNC looms large and RULES!

[–] va3db@mastodon.radio 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

@einfach_orangensaft Furiously agree. PL259 is harder to put on than a decent type N

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

SMA is too fragile and PL-259 is a pain to weatherproof. I prefer BNC for portable use and N connectors for just about everything else.

[–] ghost_towels@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

That’s interesting as PL-259 is the standard for marine use. I wish we had something better

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

Where is BNC, and why is uFL here?

[–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Ufl sucks. No mechanical lock.

[–] Gustephan@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

SMA or bust. The other three connector types introduce a lot of noise compared to SMA in my experience. BNC is my goto if I want a noise profile similar to SMA but the device I'm working with isn't vibration damped.

[–] 33rpm_neutron_star@lemmy.radio 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What's the role of vibration damping? SMA comes on most HTs.

[–] Gustephan@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh dang, I totally missed the name of this community when I commented. My knowledge of and opinions on rf connectors come from working on large aircraft mounted systems, where turbulence can cause a nightmare of threaded connector sleeves vibrating loose and bent pins. In this situation you either need vibration damping or a more mechanically robust connector like BNC

Makes sense, thanks

[–] Cysioland@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 week ago

UC-1 are less fragile than the petite SMAs

[–] n1vux@mastodon.radio 1 points 1 week ago