> From: km1h@juno.com (km1h @ juno.com)
> Subject: Re: [AMPS] SB-220 Rating
To: <amps@contesting.com>
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 97 23:31:53 +0000
> The SB-220 owes its owners nothing. A few bucks into upgrades just might
> make it last ANOTHER 25-30 years! Not bad for a "poorly designed, 600W
> amp"....according to one "expert" .
> 73...Carl KM1H
Hi Carl,
You'll NEVER find a post where I said the 220 was poorly designed,
just like you'll probably never have the technical ability to
understand you multiply efficiency times RATED input power to
find the rated power output.
If the 220 wasn't a fairly good design, it would never stand the abuse
it gets by people who can't or won't read manuals and who think 1000
watts input in the CW position really means to run 1200 watts output
in the SSB position on CW.
The FCC rules clearly dictated a maximum plate INPUT power
of 1000 watts on ALL modes (that power included exciter input power
in grounded grid amps) at the time of the 220 design. That rule
included SSB, with the power measurement based on plate current and
voltage meters with specific damping rates. The power input was
further reduced if both voltage and current could not be monitored at
the same time, or if the PA could be shown to have excessive drive
feedthrough.
Despite your personal fantasy the SB-220 was only designed for the
FCC rated power, and that was 1000 watts dc indicated power on all
modes.
Cheers,
Tom
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|