"Wes Stewart"wrote:
After some fussing around, we learned that my paper Andrew catalog no.
35 has different loss figures for the LDF series than does the "new"
online catalog no. 38. As we would say in America, like trying to
shoot at a moving target.
________________

Yes, and Andrew sometimes changes their philosophy about specs to meet
certain marketing realities. I was involved in a competitive situation
where my proposal for an offshore broadcast RF system included some Andrew
HeliaxT. The tender spec called for a certain power rating for the coax,
which by its published catalog, Andrew did not meet for the line size they
proposed to us as compliant. A similar line size by an EU Andrew competitor
had been bid to the end user by another tenderer, which by their spec was
compliant to the tender. The customer asked for clarificatication from
us/Andrew. The difference was due to Andrew's inclusion in the spec of a
solar derating value for their cable, where the competitor's did not.
Andrew proved their point (through us), and my proposal won.

Not long after that, Andrew changed all the power ratings for their cable,
removing the solar derating factor, and advising users to apply their own
based on derating information they added to the catalog (similar to derating
for SWR).

Also note that cable attenuation and power ratings are dependent on, and
stated by most OEMs only for specific ambient temperatures and a specific
load SWR (1:1 in the case of Andrew).

RF