At 08:18 AM 10/10/98 -0800, Rich Measures wrote:
...
>perhaps. Increased R is more likely.
>
>>He's going to tell me wether or not they are. It's just another feather
in your cap
>
>? nice pun, Jon. congrats
>
>>on your theory!
>>
>F. E. Handy wrote about it in 1926
>. (Radio Amateur's Handbook).
>G. W. Fyler wrote about it in Sept. 1935
>. (IRE Proceedings)
>H. F Dittrich wrote about it in the 50s.
> . (*Tubes for R. F. Heating*)
>
>I am but a Richy come lately.
There's only one problem with all this mutual admiration -- there is
insufficient data to indicate any parasitic at all, since the writer didn't
tell us whether the arcing occurred on one band or all, and didn't specify
the loading condition. I can make my SB-220 arc on demand -- I don't do it
any more -- with drastically too-light loading on some antennas. There are
no/no indications of parasitics, and I first experienced this phenomenon
before I removed the AG6K suppressors and substituted KM1H's with the big
MU metal straps. Picked up 100-125 watts on 10 meters compared with the
AG6Ks, and it is still fully stable.
Before I get condemned as a Rich-basher, please note that I think his
input-circuit mods make a lot of sense, as do his QSK and
anti-hot-switching ideas, among others. I just don't think that everything
scuzzy that happens on the anode side is due to parasitics.
73, Pete Smith N4ZR
n4zr@contesting.com
"That's WEST Virginia. Thanks and 73"
--
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
|