[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Switches

To: <>
Subject: [AMPS] Switches
From: (measures)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:27:16 -0700
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: []On
>> Behalf Of measures
>> Assuming that hams are not capable of adjusting  the load-C for a 
>> specified  screen-current, is a load of Bandini.  Is Mr. Rauch on some 
>> kind of superiority trip or what?
>Measures' "superior attitude" strikes again.  For generations amateurs 
>have been taught to tune g-g amplifiers for maximum output. Tune for 
>plate/screen dip, 

The screen is not dipped, Joe.  It is peaked with the tank. 

>load for specified screen current is foreign ... just 
>listen to the garbage from some of the mistuned tetrode amplifiers 
>that have been showing up over the last couple years.  
>> Multronics make a line of suitable insuuctors.  Jennings makes a line of 
>> suitable capacitors.  With  9-bands, general coverage makes more sense 
>> than a bandswitch.    
>Why do you insist on this kind of stuff?  

Because I know that bandswitching a 9-bander does not represent good 
engineering practice.  Furthermore,  28 - 29.7 MHz and 3.5 - 4.0 MHz need 
two additional tuned circuits per band.    How practical is an 
11-position bandswitch?.  

>The designer already said 
>that a vacuum capacitor was not acceptable as is a rotary inductor, 
>no doubt.  There is a significant cost impact (not including the 
>need for a bandswitch on the input anyway) that would make such a 
>product commercially unviable. 
So is an 11-position bandswitch.  

>Not everyone shares your design priorities (amplifiers with > $4.5K 
>in parts).  

$4500 is no big deal, Joe.  I know guys who have over $200k in their ham 

> If you don't have anything positive to contribute keep 
>your hands off the keyboard. 

-  Rich..., 805.386.3734,  

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>