Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] More parasitic choke questions

To: <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] More parasitic choke questions
From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:24:11 -0400
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] More parasitic choke questions


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:02:30 -0400, "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com> wrote:
>
>>Your understanding of parasitic suppressor design is 180 degrees opposed 
>>to
>>reality.  I suggest that you study up on the subject instead of inflicting
>>new amp builders and others who apparently also dont understand the 
>>subject
>>(but feel the pressing need to comment) with such pathetic misinformation.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Please, give us your version. I can hardly wait to hear how parasitic
> suppressors actually do their job.
>
> I have stated my opinion, let's hear yours.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT


My opinion has nothing to do with it; Im relating to facts.

It was published in QST so any ARRL member should be able to access it. It 
was written by Bill Orr and a follow up by one of the ARRL staff. I want to 
say early 60's. It may also be in the Orr book or an Eimac publication.
Id look it up myself but Im leaving for Canada in a few minutes.

If after you digest the articles you want to dispute it be my guest.

Carl
KM1H 

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>