TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited.,

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited.,
From: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Reply-to: geraldj@weather.net, Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:35:32 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Because Tentec uses transistors rated for more power than they rate the radio, but they match the load to them for the rated power. Then those transistors come from the maker rated for operation into a high SWR, e.g. able to handle peak currents and peak voltages caused by a shorted or open feed line. The low pass filter changes the SWR seen at the transistors from that at the connector. Then with a more than adequate heat sink the Tentec current limited power supply or fast acting circuit breaker turns off the supply for those loads that cause excess collector current that would overheat the transistors in a while.

With the transistor load impedance designed for 100 watts it does no good to try to drive them to their true power capability, the match circuit prevents getting more power out into a matched load.

On the other hand the SWR roll back of the Kenwood TS-120 and 130 has protected those transistors from bad loads with a brick on the key while manually tuning an antenna tuner quite adequately. So for quick tuning, I never bothered with minimizing reflected power, I just maximized forward power and the tuner was matched good enough. I liked the simplicity of the 130, but it can't hold a candle to the strong signal handling of the Corsair II that replaced it on 75 meters. Stations that splattered in the 130, didn't in the Corsair II with no changes in antenna. The splatter was inside the 130, not from big amplifiers being overdriven.

73, Jerry, K0CQ

On 4/25/2010 4:44 PM, kc9cdt@aol.com wrote:
Sinisa,
Why do think TT does not have that power roll back safety feature?
73,
Lee




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