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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+RE\:\s*$/: 155 ]

Total 155 documents matching your query.

101. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 12 May 98 21:25:05 -0800; My guess is that there will Never be enough evidence for some. . For example, on 28 Nov., 1996, Mr. Rauch proposed that we calculate the parameters of a parasitic-suppressor that used a resistance-w; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00195.html (13,437 bytes)
102. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 13 May 98 01:22:18 -0800; To: <amps@contesting.com> I am one whose pals would throw me to the wolves if I refuted AC Circuit Analysis. He asked a question. I gave him my answer. Can you look in the KN6DV archive? Post it on a; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00197.html (13,078 bytes)
103. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:44:44 +0100; I think we'd better leave your higher-order IMD exactly as it is... 73 from Ian G3SEK -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: am; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00199.html (7,844 bytes)
104. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:00:03 +0000; To: <amps@contesting.com> For those sick of name calling, skip to the end. There is a technical point Rich made that plainly indicates he believes the best suppressor is no suppressor at all. For tho; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00201.html (14,705 bytes)
105. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: Will KN6DV" <kn6dv@contesting.com (Will KN6DV); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:33:15 +0100; --Original Message-- From: Tom Rauch <10eesfams2mi@mass1-pop.pmm.mci.net> To: Rich Measures <measures@vc.net>; amps@contesting.com <amps@contesting.com> To: <amps@contesting.com> Date: Wednesday, May; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00202.html (10,294 bytes)
106. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 13 May 98 11:40:12 -0800; To: <amps@contesting.com> I could not find such a statement, Mr. Rauch. . . If this was my position, we would have seen eye-to-eye on your design decision to use no VHF-suppressor whatsoever in the A; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00204.html (18,619 bytes)
107. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:47:55 EDT; I have never said any suppressor is a cure all, yours, mine or whatever. So quit trying to twist words again Rich. How did we get to parasitics again? You have got a one track mind. I am talking abou; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00210.html (10,845 bytes)
108. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:47:55 EDT; Explain your idea of real Rich; please. I believe that Tom explained it fairly well. BTW welcome back Tom. I would also add that every amp is different and you cant sit down with a paper analysis tha; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00211.html (11,751 bytes)
109. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: jono@webspun.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Wed, 13 May 98 22:04:52 -0500; I think we got back on this subject when discussing our DOE of the amplifiers and how the output Pi-network looks to a VHF signal. So if we are concerned about VHF signals, we are concerned with par; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00213.html (9,145 bytes)
110. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: jono@webspun.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Wed, 13 May 98 22:16:58 -0500; Based on my knowledge of filter designs (I sell high power filters), the filter does not "abosrb" energy outside of it's passband. Rather it rejects it. If you do a network analyzer plot of a filter; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00215.html (10,513 bytes)
111. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@axtek.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 03:14:18 +0100; John, I am glad to see that you took my post as it was intended.... If my post only succeded in prying loose another of your "Three-man-Tetrode" stories, it was worth the effort! I love these. John,; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00250.html (15,550 bytes)
112. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: w4eto@rmii.com (Richard W. Ehrhorn); Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:13:27 -0600; Rich & interested others... Observations, opinions, caveats, and a question... 1) Ran into Tom at Dayton and after reading all the flak here was surprised to find that he's still a pretty decent guy; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00327.html (14,249 bytes)
113. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: jono@webspun.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Mon, 18 May 98 20:56:56 -0500; Dick, GREAT posting. Really good! He's very brilliant. And has the patience to teach some of us knuckleheads (like me) a thing or two! Agreed. Again, agreed. This was one of my original conclusions a; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00328.html (11,916 bytes)
114. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Mon, 18 May 98 22:32:12 -0800; However, adding a bit of X to make one's calculations come out more favourably, undoubtedly gives one a leg up. Most amplifier builders use Eimac's definition. In a Heath SB-220 the peak anode poten; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00332.html (12,289 bytes)
115. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:16:51 +0100; Hey, no fair, no fair!!! 73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book' 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.demon.co.uk/g3sek -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00343.html (8,946 bytes)
116. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: Will KN6DV" <kn6dv@contesting.com (Will KN6DV); Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:48:10 +0100; Arlen and others, sorry about that. All is fixed, all parts are vavailble and unsencorced, I just captured as the debate went along. Thanks 73 Will, K6NDV (ex KN6DV) -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contest; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00347.html (9,341 bytes)
117. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: Will KN6DV" <kn6dv@contesting.com (Will KN6DV); Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:52:57 +0100; Arlen and others, sorry about that. All is fixed, all parts are available and uncensored, I just captured as the debate went along. Thanks 73 Will, K6NDV (ex KN6DV) http://www.as.net/~kn6dv -- FAQ on; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00348.html (9,411 bytes)
118. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: jono@webspun.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Tue, 19 May 98 09:58:52 -0500; The 200 nH is inductance for the anode lines to the blocking cap were a guess by Ian. So the inductance is less. It still doesn't change the mathematical principles. Also, as we have discussed recen; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00349.html (9,250 bytes)
119. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:43:06 EDT; Dick, give me a mail address, I'll send you a complete SB-220 tank coil and switch....I'll pick one with only a minor arc! 73 Carl KM1H On Mon, 18 May 1998 18:13:27 -0600 "Richard W. Ehrhorn" <w4eto@; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00352.html (16,629 bytes)
120. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 19 May 98 16:05:10 -0800; him good I don't think it will hold up on a Z-analyzer. Rich... R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@cont; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00363.html (9,322 bytes)

Current List: 101 - 120
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]