That is the mark of a very poorly adjusted exciter, Rich. Just as the 3/2 power law is, in fact, a law that physics will enforce regardless of our desires, so, too is the relationship between the tim
You also have a technique that the US Navy and Air Force will classify as having military advantages in radar, and you should be able to sell the patent to ITT, Hughes, Westinghouse etc for a large e
It is a misstatement. My exciter is adjusted to deliver 100w, which is 100v-pk.. When the VOX trips, the 100v level is reached in a bit under 2mS. This is not enough time to charge the screen bypass
Or was that 2 milliseconds? If Mr Thornley were still alive, you'd very quickly regret making that cheap shot. 73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book' 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB
fair point, Ian. My guess is that 2mS would not be doable in a typical 8171 amplifier. So why try?. Holding the screen potential at the needed 1500v solves the distortion problem provided that grid-
"Eimac, Amperex, Philips, Svetlana and RCA recommend regulated screen potential for tetrodes in AB linear service Could they all be out of step except Mr. Thornley?" Boeing, Douglas, DeHaviland, Brit
Rich, why is the 8171 your favorite benchmark?? Seems to me that few of us have/need/use a 10KW dissipation tube. Other than the handles... is there some magic with this moose? -- Original Message --
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 12:46:32 -0800 "Colin Lamb" <k7fm@teleport.com> writes: recommend front step"? Northrup left the tail off altogether, though lacking adequate stabilization computers nor an ongoin
Putting the stabilizer on the front of the aircraft saved the Wright Bros lives. That made the machine practically impossible to stall. A good feature for someone with zero hours flying time. Puttin
Specifically, Rauch and Ehrhorn made the claim. The gold-sputtered tubes shown in ''Parasites Revisited'' (QST, 9-90, 10-90) came from an Alpha amplifier. To view some parasite arced bandswitches ou
The anode cooler is so large that it cools ok on ssb with a 1700 rpm blower instead of the usual 3400rpm blower. . This makes much less noise. // The anode cooler is a straight through design that m
Now that we are charging the capacitor, why do you think that it cannot? What is a reasonable value for the source impedance of the rectifier. What is the time constant with 2000pF of screen capacito
Perhaps he was generating his SSB at too high a frequency? Steve -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contestin
I looked this up and posted it a while back. The rectifier resistance is of the order of 8 to 15 ohms (it varies with current) so the total source resistnace isn't going to exceed about 350 to 400 oh
To: <amps@contesting.com> It seems you should be asking what is the total source Z? // I ask why are we charging and discharging the screen bypass cap. in the first place? It makes better engineerin
To: <amps@contesting.com> My guess is that CHR himself was too high, Steve. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. end -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: am
In the observed feculence area - DAFs seemingly perform roughly 10x better on two-tone tests than they do in on the air voice tests. During two-tone tests, screen potential is constant. During voice
Rich ! Please give us a reference to the tests where you got the results that 'DAFs seemingly perform roughly 10x better on two-tone tests than they do in on the air voice tests' We who have question
Excellent! Will it be possible to do the tests at a number of PEP output levels up to the maximum rating of the tube in AB1 or AB2? I ask because one can visualise a 3500 watt tube being good at 400
Yes the measurements will be made at different power output levels first of all on the 'DAF' circuit but if time permits also on an conventional amp (AB1 or AB2) Peter Chadwick skrev: -- Petter G&aum