Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] 160M PI network Toroidal Coil

To: <g8on@fsmail.net>, "Manfred Mornhinweg" <manfred@ludens.cl>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] 160M PI network Toroidal Coil
From: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:18:12 -0400
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>


Manfred

I'm not even aware of those Radio Regulations. I suppose you mean the
British ones? In my country they aren't valid anyway - and I wish there
were any at all! <

Actually Manfred, your government has signed up to them! I'm referring to the International Radio Regulations, published by the ITU, and signed up to, by all the participants in a World Radio Conference. Is there not a ban on spark transmitters? That's in the RR.

Interesting point about iron cores and VFOs. As I recall, the old Command transmitters were very stable, and they had iron cores in both the VFO and the PA. But they were magnetically loosely coupled, unlike toroids.

73

Peter G3RZP


The Command transmitters were reasonably stable for CW after a warmup but the 5mc range one used with a lot of early SSB rigs still had some drift that wouldnt be a bother on CW back then.

Central Electronics ran them at a much lower B+ and Gonset used just the VFO assembly in the GSB-100 and that was pretty decent. The Command sets had a much different than usual circuit that was described in an ER Magazine article....I dont remember the details.

Carl
KM1H
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

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