Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+parasitic\s+oscillation\s+techniques\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: John Lyles <jtml@losalamos.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 10:15:42 -0600
The discussion of they what, why and how of parasitic suppression has always been controversial on this forum, especially when AG6K was here with his own retrofit kits and QST articles. I think there
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00410.html (12,609 bytes)

2. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:08:06 -0400
Ive always enjoyed your comments about what happens when BIG tubes act up John. Especially the fun dumping the PS. Having spent the last 10 or so years of my career in the 300 mHz to 75 gHz range I c
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00412.html (16,135 bytes)

3. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:07:55 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: A great post and an excellent summation. Thanks, John! 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.conte
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00419.html (8,048 bytes)

4. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:12:35 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: That is quite a remarkable statement. Before you besmirch Rich's reputation any further, can you back up your statement with names, dates and facts? 73, Bill W6WRT __________
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00420.html (7,934 bytes)

5. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:20:02 -0400
Call Eimac yourself and stop blubbering. Carl ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: That is quite a remarkable statement. Before you besmirch Rich's reputation any further, can you back up your statement with nam
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00424.html (8,182 bytes)

6. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:47:46 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Just what I thought. 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00426.html (7,780 bytes)

7. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:04:20 -0400
Im glad you agree.......... My conversation was about 22 years ago. Thats how long the voodo science parasitic farce has been going on. Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00427.html (8,610 bytes)

8. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "David H Craig" <davidhcraig@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:53:38 -0400
Maybe the "moderator" won't block this one. I am tired of this old sawyou got rid of the parasitic, so to speak, and I personally agree the nicrome idea is a bad one. That said, I guess a hobbiest (n
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00428.html (11,684 bytes)

9. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Alex Eban" <alexeban@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:36:43 +0300
My guess is that the guy meant it as a figure of speech, not literally! Let's not start another flame war! The problem with oscillation is that there are so many variables that it's practically impos
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00430.html (9,806 bytes)

10. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 02:33:44 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: 22 years ago was years before Rich began his crusade about nichrome parasitic suppressors. Please explain how that Eimac engineer could have blamed Rich for such wholesale de
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00432.html (8,862 bytes)

11. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: donroden@hiwaay.net
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:05:36 -0500
Measures was laying groundwork for his 1988-89 articles in the mid 80's. That should be close to 22 years + or - a few blown 3-500s. Don WA4NPL _______________________________________________ Amps ma
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00433.html (9,564 bytes)

12. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:20:14 -0400
Alex, whoever he was, he was certainly rather forceful in his comments and also remarked that he had received a continuous series of annoying calls from him. My call did not last very long! Sorry I d
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00435.html (9,968 bytes)

13. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:43:41 -0400
It is very simple, I was off by a year. Make that 21 years. If you are such a fan Id expect you to know the year and month Its not an article I keep under my pillow for reference. As to why? I'll rep
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00437.html (10,375 bytes)

14. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:02:43 -0400
The discussion is about the 3-500 and the SB-220 in particular. Why add other tubes that are inherently stable or do you just want to water down the discussion? Just about anybody can build a stable
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00438.html (14,422 bytes)

15. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: david sutton <sootydave@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Don. Correcto mondo. if every thing in life was perfect. we would have no problem. nothing is a 100% manufacturing defects human error etc etc. We just have to live with it. my 2 cent's, not worth mu
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00440.html (8,167 bytes)

16. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:41:03 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: It was you who quoted the Eimac engineer about the damage Rich's mods caused to masses of 8877's. I'm still waiting for an explanation - or even a guess - as to how any of Ri
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00443.html (9,890 bytes)

17. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:50:24 -0400
Do you have anyone that can help you look up Eimacs # and dial it for you? I didnt realize that you are handicapped. And since you like to be selective in your reply references with creative editing
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00445.html (10,774 bytes)

18. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:47:59 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Carl, let me spell it out for you real clear: You slandered Rich's reputation by quoting some un-named Eimac engineer who supposedly said "Measures was responsible for more d
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00451.html (10,519 bytes)

19. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:43:56 -0400
Sure is clear that you are incapable of following thru as you are simply a shill for Rich and afraid what you might hear. You were a regular trouble maker on Rich's turf before you decided to turn ta
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00455.html (11,924 bytes)

20. Re: [Amps] parasitic oscillation techniques (score: 1)
Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:22:59 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Tail tucked firmly between his legs, Carl ambles into the sunset. 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://
/archives//html/Amps/2009-08/msg00460.html (10,075 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu