Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+TH7\-DX\s+Balun\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+TH7\-DX\s+Balun\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: "Byron Tatum" <bjtatum@ev1.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:54:03 -0600; I have been away for a few days but noticed a few subject lines covering the TH7-DX balun, the BN-86. I have a TH7-DX that will be going up in near future, what is the best balun to use for it? I kno; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00541.html (6,796 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: "ChetMoore" <ChetMoore@cox.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 07:50:00 -0500; Byron The BN-86 has been around for 35+ years and was designed when we could only run 1 KW. Force 12 makes a 3 (b-12) and a 5 KW balun. Radio works I think makes a 3 and a 5 K Balun. If you are going; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00542.html (8,639 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: "KD8OK" <kd8ok@n-focus.com>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:07:49 -0500; Byron, Hygain did come out with a newer version of the BN-86 which did solve the problems that the old version had. I put up a TH5 for someone years ago with the old version. We replaced it about 9 m; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00543.html (8,737 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: "Brad Nowak" <bnowak@speakeasy.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:05:56 -0500; Byron, you might consider the BN-4000 Balun from HyGain/MFJ. This model is rated higher than the BN-86 and is physically the same. I am using one on a TH6DX and it's fine at 1500w CW key down. Brad -; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00544.html (7,316 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: Gary Schafer <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:36:00 -0500; Just a note about power handling ability: I don't know what the BN-86 was actually rated at but for 1kw input power on AM that equated to a power output of around 3000 watts by today's standards. We; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00546.html (10,994 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:53:44 EST; I have been away for a few days but noticed a few subject lines covering the TH7-DX balun, the BN-86. I have a TH7-DX that will be going up in near future, what is the best balun to use for it? I kno; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00547.html (9,217 bytes)
7. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: k2qmf@juno.com; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:04:38 -0500; That was plate power "input" in the old days. at 70 percent efficiency you had 700 Watts out not 3000!!! 73, Ted K2QMF On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:36:00 -0500 Gary Schafer <garyschafer@comcast.net> writes; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00548.html (12,358 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] TH7-DX Balun (score: 1): Author: Gary Schafer <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:39:22 -0500; An AM transmitter has a PEP of 4 times its carrier power at 100% modulation. Also the input power for SSB was 1kw average as seen by the plate current meter. PEP is some 5 times that. Look at your av; /archives//html/Towertalk/2005-02/msg00551.html (13,671 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]