Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+YC\-156\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+YC\-156\s*$/: 31 ]

Total 31 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: w7xu@dtgnet.com (W7XU Arliss); Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 07:43:10 +0000; Hi, Where or from whom may I obtain a YC-156 (pull)? Thanks & 73, Arliss W7XU -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@; /archives//html/Amps/2001-01/msg00549.html (6,362 bytes)
2. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: W6RU@bak.rr.com (Terry Gaiser); Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 06:45:33 -0800; Norm has had them .... try him at: norsan@bright.net Terry W6RU -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com; /archives//html/Amps/2001-01/msg00555.html (7,151 bytes)
3. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 19:21:46 -0500; Something a few others seem to not understand Peter. With 5 or 6kV on the plate and a good standing current, it would And cheap to obtain. Why ?? Whats the yearly $$ difference between a 45-50% effic; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00036.html (9,015 bytes)
4. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 20:09:15 -0500; On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:22:16 -0800 Bob Marston <k1ta@earthlink.net> writes: Been away so excuse the delay in replying Sufficient details for the moment. Bill Orr might have his own comments if you ar; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00040.html (11,225 bytes)
5. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 19:21:18 -0500; On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:28:23 -0800 Rich Measures <measures@vc.net> writes: And as you asked in another post....who has an exciter capable of -50dB IMD? Cheers...Carl _________________________________; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00042.html (11,157 bytes)
6. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 04:17:53 -0800; pep. ? Carl - - I did not say that I measured the IMD at -50db. In Class A, such IMD is typical. You seemed to be talking about hams who measured such an IMD level, which is why I asked the yet to b; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00059.html (7,272 bytes)
7. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 19:25:12 -0800; To: <amps@contesting.com> Bill to see if I have his permission to put these notes up. The property rights may not be exclusively his though. I've promised to get back to those who have made individua; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00075.html (8,285 bytes)
8. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: gjerning@flash.net (Arne Gjerning); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 15:37:38 -0800; Is this an EIMAC tube or RCA? Can not find this nubmber in EIMAC catalogs I have. Does it have descriptive number or EIA 4 digit number? Thanks de Arne N7KA -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/a; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00566.html (7,812 bytes)
9. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:00:08 -0800; It's an Eimac It's a cross between the 3CPX5000A7 and the 3CX15000A7. It's specs in most regards are the same as the 5000. But its current curves ressemble the 15000. As Terry(W6RU) has already state; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00569.html (8,910 bytes)
10. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: w6ru@lightspeed.net (Terry Gaiser); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:27:28 -0800; Look at the Eimac 3CPX5000A7...I am told the YC-156 are "hand picked" versions of these. Terry W6RU -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrativ; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00573.html (8,634 bytes)
11. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:16:52 -0500; It is an Eimac selected version of the 3CPX5000A7 for ultra linear medical use. It is selected for highest emission and linearity from the 3CPX production line. It is basically a 3CX15000B7 internals; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00578.html (8,695 bytes)
12. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: km1h@juno.com (km1h@juno.com); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:50:38 -0500; On Sun, 21 Feb 1999 09:00:08 -0800 Bob Marston <k1ta@earthlink.net> writes: The 15000B7 not the A7. And why not? Details please. OH ? 1. 1988 on my data sheet with no revision listed. 2. Not in a 197; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00579.html (9,942 bytes)
13. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 16:43:38 -0800; Apologies to all for this one I meant to say B7 You're right again Carl. This one was caused by a data sheet that was an N generation copy. September 1988 Is the correct date. 73s Bob K1TA -- FAQ on; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00589.html (9,845 bytes)
14. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 06:37:27 -0800; ? At QRP levels, this is undoubtedly true because RL would be abnormally high. Increase the anode current to normal, RL drops to a reasonable level, and a match is easy. One of the greater old-wives; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00628.html (9,778 bytes)
15. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: W8IK@ibm.net (Joe Subich, W8IK/4); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:23:24 -0500; This is the third (in addition to the larger filament power and cooling requirements) problem with using "tubes with handles" at amateur power levels. When underdriven the RL goes quite high - a 3CP; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00629.html (9,459 bytes)
16. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:38:40 -0000; Only if you are going for maximum plate swing when running 1500 watts out. If you ran with say a 2000 ohm load and 2700 volts pk swing (5400 v p-p), you'd get about 1800 watts at the tube. Efficiency; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00630.html (8,578 bytes)
17. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:28:21 -0800; ? good point. However, it goes without saying that one would be doing the tuneup at c. the 15k in, 9k out level -- into a dummy load, of course!. . . ? [chortle] ? [guffaw] - cheers, Peter Rich... R; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00632.html (8,900 bytes)
18. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:28:23 -0800; ? One of the advantages of using the 8171 at amateur power levels is that its 7" (178mm) anode-cooler needs only a 1700-rpm blower instead of a 3400-rpm blower, which makes Much More Noise. ? For an; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00633.html (10,498 bytes)
19. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: k1ta@earthlink.net (Bob Marston); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:51:50 -0800; http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk When you get to the homepage select the search icon (binoculars) anf type in YC-156 Have fun! 73s Bob K1TA -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submission; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00639.html (8,022 bytes)
20. [AMPS] YC-156 (score: 1): Author: norsan@bright.net (Norman Hockler); Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:03:27 -0500; Hi all, Followed this thread on the YC-156 with interest since, as many of you know, I sell these tubes. I have original Eimac specs on the YC-156. If any one would like a hard copy e-mail me your ad; /archives//html/Amps/1999-02/msg00640.html (7,786 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]