RE: RG6 vs CT100

["Roger Bilboul" <Bilboul@xxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the responses - I will give you the next episode when I talk to
NTL again on Monday.

Roger.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: steve [mailto:steve@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 04:14
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ukha_d] RG6 vs CT100
>
>
> Bollox!
>
> A piece of wet string will conduct in any direction
>
> Steve.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger Bilboul" <Bilboul@xxxxxxx>
> To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 2:41 PM
> Subject: RE: [ukha_d] RG6 vs CT100
>
>
> > NTL have now come back to me to say that CT100 is
> unidirectional and with
> > NTL's digital cable service they need to send data back up the
cable as
> > opposed to, say Sky (satellite) digital which uses the telephone
for any
> > feedback. As RG6 is bi-directional it is the recommended cable.
> If only I
> > knew when I installed CT100!!!
> >
> > Roger
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tracey.gardner [mailto:tracey.gardner@xxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 06:10
> > > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [ukha_d] RG6 vs CT100
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >> Agree with James.  Your CT100 is a higher quality
cable than RG6.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > According to my catalogues the relative losses for RG6 and
CT100 at
> > > 400MHz are 13.1db and 13.0db respectively so there's very
little to
> > > choose between them performance wise.
> > >
> > > Tracey
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/2065/_/975689375/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->