Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+\[Fwd\:\s+Inrush\s+Current\s+\-\:\)\]\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+\[Fwd\:\s+Inrush\s+Current\s+\-\:\)\]\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] [Fwd: Inrush Current -:)] (score: 1): Author: RMcGraw@BLomand.Net (Bob & Linda McGraw K4TAX); Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 21:51:08 -0500; Message-ID: <3907A9DE.28A0@blomand.net> To: <amps@contesting.com> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 21:45:50 -0500 From: "Bob & Linda McGraw (K4TAX)" <RMcGraw@blomand.net> Reply-To: RMcGraw@blomand.net Organiza; /archives//html/Amps/2000-04/msg00164.html (8,990 bytes)
2. [AMPS] [Fwd: Inrush Current -:)] (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:22:42 -0700; To: <amps@contesting.com> Eimac makes no such point in the 8877 specs. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. end -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@co; /archives//html/Amps/2000-04/msg00166.html (8,040 bytes)
3. [AMPS] [Fwd: Inrush Current -:)] (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 09:06:51 -0500; Eimac does not recommend or even acknowledge the "advantages of nichrome" suppressors in any of their literature. It just seems to help in some applications. Manufacturer's literature should not disc; /archives//html/Amps/2000-04/msg00170.html (8,107 bytes)
4. [AMPS] [Fwd: Inrush Current -:)] (score: 1): Author: 2@vc.net (measures); Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 09:02:45 -0700; I have never seen an Eimac Engineering Bulletin that discusses parasitic suppressor design. According to Paul Pagel, Reid Brandon stated that Willis B. Foote was not authorized to discuss the proble; /archives//html/Amps/2000-04/msg00172.html (8,574 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]