Twin WF100 satellite cable 15m

obezyana wrote: »

... twin cable is something id be reluctant to use myself.

I can't see there being inherently wrong with twin cable, any more than just running 2 single cables side by side, since that's all it is ...

It's just the 'mini shotgun' type like WF65 that has higher signal losses than thicker cable.

IrishPhoenix wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. I thought the twin cable - full wf100, not mini anything- was supposed to be the same quality as single cable just neater for sky+ boxes?

Course it's the same, & I can't see why even the thin WF65 wouldn't be fine for a 15-20 metre run, if it's the typical setup for the satellites at 28 degrees east we're dealing with. The extra attenuation will only hurt if you push cable length it to the point where your rain-fade margin becomes unacceptably low.

obezyana wrote: »

Indeed but again i say personally i wouldnt use it and in fact only last week i ended up pulling out mini shotgun from a house that was put in by a Sky engineer ... The cable was not of good quality and was run arseways.

Aren't Sky 'engineers' supposed to use Webro WF65? If that's indeed what you pulled out, what quality issues do you have with it?

Thurston? wrote: »

Course it's the same, & I can't see why even the thin WF65 wouldn't be fine for a 15-20 metre run, if it's the typical setup for the satellites at 28 degrees east we're dealing with. The extra attenuation will only hurt if you push cable length it to the point where your rain-fade margin becomes unacceptably low.



Aren't Sky 'engineers' supposed to use Webro WF65? If that's indeed what you pulled out, what quality issues do you have with it?

It was cheap mini shotgun and by the way not all Sky installers use the cable they are meant to. There is plenty so called professional installers using poor RG6 etc cabling and the likes on long runs. And by do I have to prove to you that the cable was poor? I pulled the cable out because it was of poor quality not because i was bored, it would of been easier on me just to leave it there but i wouldn't because any work i do i like to say it was done to a good standard.

Just a quick one here that shows how some installers haven't a clue,

I once was in a house troubleshooting an issue where the customer said their Satellite signal went intermittently maybe for a few seconds maybe longer. So after doing the usual checks I then followed the route of the cable from the receiver to where it went outside. The cable was routed around the fire place under the carpet. I discovered that the Sky installer had in fact laid the cable across the carpet tacks so when someone would stand at the edge of the fire place they would unknowingly stand on the cable which in turn would end up being shorted by the tack. It was such a stupid thing for the installer to do that sometimes the level of idiocy that some installers are capable of is mind numbing. Don't ever underestimate somebody elses stupidity and just because Sky recommend a certain cable doesn't always mean that recommendation is adhered to at all times.

Im not gonna spend my days going back and forth over this. But think of it this way..the thinner the cable the less signal goes through so low and behold there is automatically some signal loss. Now in my books id rather use thicker over thin. Its one less variable to be thinking about if there is a signal issue. Now by all means one can use whatever cable they see fit but again personally i would rather use the thicker better quality cable.

If you havent ever studied electronics or electrics you should it will give you a wonderfull insight into the micro world of electron/electric flows via cables. If you have studied electronics or electrics then of course you will know the benefits of having thicker good quality cables and you wouldnt be so keen to try and take me to task over such an issue

Thurston? wrote: »

I thought it was clear from my posts that I'm aware of the extra attenuation with the .65 mm inner conducter, as opposed to the 1 mm? I'm certainly not disputing that different cable dimensions/construction/materials give rise to different RF & DC handling characteristics.

The point I'm making is that an installation can be done down to a price, & still perform perfectly well, it needn't measure up to some ideal specification.

Haha okay i get it ill pretend you know all. Im guessing you install for friends and family and keep educated by means of google and now you spread your knowledge to impress us all Ok google the word 'personally' and you will see what i mean when i say personally i wouldnt use it. Then point out where i suggested twin cable should NEVER be used...... After that whenever you feel like it go out in the real world of cable installation and you will come across the ****e botch jobs and poor cable installations that are so prevelant across the boards ie: the tv industry, alarm/cctv industry, telephone etc un fact any industry that involves cable runs. Some are great installs by very good professionals some are very bad by equally bad cowboys.

Now from reading some of your posts on this forum and others you are well informed and helpful and it is always good to see the level of help one is prepared to give but your silly nitpicking on a trival issue is not worth engaging with no more.

When ever if you ever decide to step into the trade come back and let me know about some of the cowboy installs and cheap gear you encounter and how you are shocked at the level of crap professionals that are out there.

Thurston? wrote: »

Fair enough, it seems I took you up wrong, & I apologise.

I certainly don't see where I claimed to 'know all' though, did I not in fact state clearly that I'm just a hobbyist?

You most certainly do not need to apologise but thanks anyway

You sure did state its a hobby for you and you come across as a very well read well informed one at that so fair dues but sometimes all the reading and hobby time in the world wont compete with real world experience. I can most certainly say with confidence that i have come across some seriously bad installs as im sure others on here have.

The next time you are out and about have a look at the stupid installations of aerials and dishes, the terrible cable runs the overkill aerials (some even multiple) on single dwellings and that will give a good indication of how poor some installers are and how some are out to do sub standard work for high prices.

hatchman wrote: »

I'm glad you guys made up !

I didn't realise there was a need to Anyway im a lover not a fighter.