- 21. [Amps] (no subject) (score: 1)
- Author: "c.s." <carlseye@verizon.net>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 14:38:02 -0400
- Lou , and all: about the meter faces: What I have done many times is to remove the meter face from the meter, put face down on any good copy machine , run a few copies in case i mess one up. Then if
- /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00205.html (7,239 bytes)
- 22. [Amps] 6 mtrs: (score: 1)
- Author: "c.s." <carlseye@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:27:45 -0400
- I have been seeing several messages here lately relating to 6 mtr. conversions of SB200 type amps to 6 mtrs . using (purportedly) 572B type tubes.!!! This may very well be as advertised, BUT, I am Ve
- /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00227.html (7,644 bytes)
- 23. [Amps] stability of amps (score: 1)
- Author: "c.s." <carlseye@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:50:23 -0400
- In my previous "diatribe" I addressed a very annoying issue!! ( IE) advertising for amps, that are WAY above the known useful range of the tubes being used !!!! I have been on this list for a number
- /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00228.html (6,998 bytes)
- 24. [Amps] SB200?? (score: 1)
- Author: "c.s." <carlseye@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:21:17 -0400
- The useful answer is that the 572B works very well at 6M and a SB-200 works very well there also if you understand amplifiers. No rocket science required. Carl KM1H I am not disputing anyones claims,
- /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00230.html (7,084 bytes)
- 25. [Amps] SB200's ETC (score: 1)
- Author: "c.s." <carlseye@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 20:41:20 -0400
- I don't think there is anything in "ham radio" or otherwise quite as disgusting as some "holier than thou" person trying to down another person just because he(or she, orwhatever) may have never know
- /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00236.html (7,483 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu