[AMPS] Re:

[Tom Rauch]

> Date:          Tue, 12 May 1998 09:27:17 -0800
> From:          Rich Measures <measures@vc.net>
> Subject:       [AMPS] Re:
> To:            Arlen Mendelssohn <pcmeas@hotmail.com>, amps@contesting.com

 Hi Rich,

> A rauchschnauzer is a mythical breed of lap-dog. 

And what are you? Do you really think name calling furthers your 
technical position?

> .     During Phase-I of the grate parasitics debate (which began on the 
> rec.radio.amateur.homebrew Newsgroup) , when Mr. Rauch refuted standard 
> AC Circuit Analysis, his supporters did not question him.   When he 
> professed that gold has a second, lower melting point below 1063 deg. C, 
> ditto.

Can you copy, and post that comment? All we have is "your word".

>  When Mr. Rauch retroactively promoted an ex-Eimac employee from 
> Engineer-B to "R+D Engineering Manager", ditto.   .  

Not true Rich. We have been all through that, and I even faxed 
several interested people a copy of a letter from Varian that 
confirmed my statement. You refused my offer for a copy. 

Mr. Miklos is also listed in the front of a VHF handbook as an 
engineering manager for Varian.

It appears you see and attribute to others what you are. I believe 
that is a common psychological trait in people.

> His theory is that one can build a vhf suppressor out of copper-wire that 
> equals the performance of a similar vhf suppressor that is built from 
> resistance-wire.  This can indeed be done by increasing the L of the 
> suppressor-inductor (Ls in Wes' measurements), and by increasing the R of 
> the suppressor-resistor (Rs).  However, the trade-off is exponentially 
> increased 28MHz dissipation in the suppressor-resistor.  .  The short 
> answer is that the use of resistance-wire in Ls allows the designer to 
> reduce the 28MHz dissipative burden in Rs while improving the vhf 
> performance of the suppressor.   . 

 N7 WS concluded the suppressor you sent him, which was NOT the 
design you normally sell, was no different than the conventional 
suppressor at upper VHF but the conventional suppressor was much 
lower loss at HF.

That fits circuit theory just fine, but not your agenda.

> Information that does not wash will backfire on its originator.  

Amen. You would do well to remember that, and be more honest with 
yourself and others.

73, Tom W8JI
w8ji.tom@MCIONE.com

--
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