Hi Brian,
In a message dated 96-04-04 07:59:46 EST, you write:
>An offer to purchase a beefy single 4-1000 amp has come my way.
>With suitable power supply and cooling (which it allegedly has)
>what is (roughly) the RTTY capability as well as SSB/CW?
It depends on how hard you want to push the tube. Thoriated tungsen filament
tubes can take a fair amount of abuse, and in amateur service you'll likely
never notice the shortening of life unless the temperature of a critical
areas (like seals) go beyond a certain limit. A 4-1000A could provide 2000
watts or more of CW or SSB PEP output without damage even during contest
operation.
I've know people to run a single tube at 3kW+ PEP out on SSB.
The biggest problem is drive power and stability. The 4-1000 is "hard to
drive". In grounded grid, the 4-1000 needs a lot of plate voltage (over 5000
volts) to get decent gain. At 5000 volts, expect to drive the tube with
120-140 watts to get 1500 watts out! Expect a "hard to drive" amp unless
there is a a lot of high voltage.
With anode voltages above 4000 volts, the tube gets pretty unstable. The grid
leads are very long, so the PA can develop parasitic oscillations below 90
MHz. The closer the oscillation to the operating frequency, the harder
parasitics are to cure. The 4-1000A is one of the most unstable tubes I can
think of, besides 811A's and 572B's. .
>What about replacement costs?
That's where a 4-1000 shines. Cost is cheap, even if finding a good tube is
more difficult.
Even though IMD products won't be as good as with tubes designed to be used
in grounded grid, but they'll be very livable if you tune the amp correctly.
>(I don't wish to violate Part 97, just run RTTY conservatively)
A GG 4-1000A won't violate part 97 unless the HV is *real* high or you have a
FT-1000 driver! It also won't run RTTY conservatively at 1500 watts because
the plate dissipation is only 1000 watts. At 60 percent anode efficiency (if
the PA can manage that) the tube will be right at it's limit on RTTY and
glowing a pretty orange color!
73 Tom
>From AA3JU George Cook <george@epix.net> Thu Apr 4 16:07:04 1996
From: AA3JU George Cook <george@epix.net> (AA3JU George Cook)
Subject: 3rd party stuff
Message-ID: <199604041601.LAA21927@coconut.epix.net>
I could have sworn that the law said that a third party is "anyone not
eligable to be the controll operator of an amatuer station" Hence a No Code
Tech could work Extra class CW if the station licensee was an Extra. Same
goes for if that same NC Tech (extra class CBer) uses a 440/10meter link and
contacts a country to which we have no 3rd party agreement. The defacto
controll op is the repeater owner.
At 10:02 AM 4/3/96 -0800, you wrote:
>
>No, I think that guest ops fall under the "permitted privileges" rules.
>Licensed amateurs are permitted to talk to any other licensed amateurs
>(excluding any "banned" countries), within the privileges of the control
>operator. During MS/MM operations, the control operator is assumed to be
>supervising the operation of *any* guest operator, not just the
>less-privileged licensees. A lower-class licensee using the
>control-operator's call is, of course, assumed to be under the direct
>supervision of the control-op. So that's a whole 'nuther set of rules
>suffering incidental violations ;-)
>
>73, Ward N0AX
>
>
AA3JU george@epix.net AA3JU@W3PYF
Proudly F R C...........
"FRC When second best just isn't good enough!"
>From Del Seay <seay@alaska.net> Thu Apr 4 15:38:17 1996
From: Del Seay <seay@alaska.net> (Del Seay)
Subject: 3rd party stuff
References: <199604041601.LAA21927@coconut.epix.net>
Message-ID: <3163ECE9.7C83@alaska.net>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------26E36D601F02
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
AA3JU George Cook wrote:
>
> I could have sworn that the law said that a third party is "anyone not
> eligable to be the controll operator of an amatuer station" Hence a No Code
> Tech could work Extra class CW if the station licensee was an Extra. Same
> goes for if that same NC Tech (extra class CBer) uses a 440/10meter link and
> contacts a country to which we have no 3rd party agreement. The defacto
> controll op is the repeater owner.
Well, someone has to do this. The attached file is from Part 97
pertaining to Third Part Traffic.
de KL7HF
--------------26E36D601F02
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="PART97.HTM"
<BASE HREF="file:///C|/INET-AK/NETSCAPE/PART97.HTM">
<p>(b) The privileges available to a control operator holding an FCC-issued
reciprocal permit for alien amateur licensee are:
<dl><dl>
<p><dd>(1) The terms of the agreement between the alien's government and the
United States;
<h3><a name=97.115>S 97.115 Third party communications. </a></h3>
(a) An amateur station may transmit messages for a third party to:
<dl><dl>
<p><dd>(1) Any station within the jurisdiction of the United States.
<p><dd>(2) Any station within the jurisdiction of any foreign government
whose administration has made arrangements with the United States to allow
amateur stations to be used for transmitting international communications
whose administration has not made such an arrangement. This prohibition
does not apply to a message for any third party who is eligible to be a
control operator of the station.
</dl></dl>
<p>(b) The third party may participate in stating the message where:
<dl><dl>
<p><dd>(1) The control operator is present at the control point and is
continuously monitoring and supervising the third party's participation;
and
<p><dd>(2) The third party is not a prior amateur service licensee whose
license was revoked; suspended for less than the balance of the license
term and the suspension is still in effect; suspended for the balance of
the license term and relicensing has not taken place; or surrendered for
cancellation following notice of revocation, suspension or monetary
forfeiture proceedings. The third party may not be the subject of a cease
and desist order which relates to amateur service operation and which is
still in effect.
</dl></dl>
<p>(c) At the end of an exchange of international third party
communications, the station must also transmit in the station
identification procedure the call sign of the station with which a third
party message was exchanged.
<h3><a name=97.117>S 97.117 International communications. </a></h3>
Transmissions to a different country, where permitted, shall be made in
plain language and shall be limited to messages of a technical nature
relating to tests, and, to remarks of a personal character for which, by
reason of their unimportance, recourse to the public telecommunications
service is not justified.
--------------26E36D601F02--
|