----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 9:45 PM
Subject: [Amps] DIN vs N
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:57:44 +0200
> From: "DF3KV" <df3kv@t-online.de>
> Subject: Re: [Amps] DIN vs N
> To: <amps@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <5CA20D7C804D494E8304E51B8F4E563D@shack>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Those 10-15W are per channel, not per connector.
> Cell phone sites run multiple transmitters into the same antenna.
> That is also the reason why IMD by connectors and cables needs to be as
> low
> as possible.
>
> 73
> Peter
>
> ### The cell tech I talked to at work....back in 2005 told me it was 100
> mw PER channel.
> Only ONE TX, that fed 3-4 x ants. Now that was before the G3+ upgrade.
> The telco I worked for,
> used Type N on everything. 99% of the cell sites back then used either
> 7/8" heliax....or 1.25" heliax.
My 903 amp is a 100W SS cell module. As many as were needed were in a rack.
I dont know if they were all combined or just a few per array.
Mine runs cool and linear at 150W using an old heatsink I had kicking
around.
The old cell amps used tubes such as the 3CX400U7 in a series of frequency
stepped Eimac cavities at around 250-300W out. One works on 903 without mods
and Id used it for almost 20 years (Motorola name plate) but a couple of the
SS modules and combiners is so much easier to get some real power.
Carl
KM1H
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|