[Amps] Eimac vs Svetlana

Rich 2@vc.net
Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:08:21 -0800


Amen, Karl-Arne.  Eimac seemingly began a long slide downhill after it 
was acquired by Varian.  The sweetheart monopoly contract Eimac/Varian 
signed with Eddie Richardson was a good clue that something was going 
amiss in San Bruno, California.  [this contract almost resulted in 
slammer/jail time for the conspirators at Club-Fed]  
-  After its Salt Lake City plant opened, Eimac began selling 3-500Zs 
with defective anode-cooler spotwelds.  This manufacturing defect allowed 
the anode coolers to eventually break- oose, fall down and short against 
the grounded-grid -- usually just beyond the 12-month warranty-period.  

>I can second this.
>
>My organization (Stockholm Radio) runs several Collins 208U-10 10 kW 
>amplifiers for air/ground SSB services that used Eimac 4CX350A's in the 
>driver chain. 
>During the final time before the driver chains were replaced with 
>solid-state broad-band amplifiers (1997-98) the average filament hours 
>before replacement (usually due to gassy tubes or low emission) was down 
>to about 3000 h.
>
>When we obtained the amplifiers (1988), the average running time was about 
>a year (8500 - 9000 h).
>I have been told by Rockwell/Collins field engineering that the US Coast 
>Guard, another big 208U-10 user,
>went through a 4CX350A evaluation program in the mid-90's and after this 
>selected Svetlana for all future replacements.
>
>Today's short replacement cycle of 4CX350A's (and probably also the 
>replacement cost of the P-290A final tube) reportedly also resulted in the 
>consignment to the scrap heap of Greenland Telecom's quite large setup of 
>Granger 172-2 MF/HF transmitters. (A pity that they learned too late about 
>the solid-state driver replacement that extended the life of our Grangers 
>by 8 years...)
>
>73/
>
>Karl-Arne Markstrom
>SM0AOM
>
>=============================
>Senior Radio Engineer
>Maritime Networks
>Telia Mobile AB Nacka Strand Sweden
>
>Phone +46-8-6017171 
>Mobile +46-706-636575
>Fax +46-8-6017959 
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Alek Petkovic" <vk6apk@eon.net.au>
>To: <amps@contesting.com>
>Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:36 AM
>Subject: [Amps] Eimac vs Svetlana
>
>
>> G'day form sunny Perth,
>> 
>> I found out something interesting a few days ago which may be of interest 
>> to the assembled masses.
>> 
>> A few mates and myself were lucky enough to pick up some decommissioned 1kW 
>> transmitters from VIP, our local government run marine coastal radio 
>> service station.
>> 
>> These all mode AWA transmitters run 3 4CX350 tubes in the pa and one more 
>> as a driver.
>> 
>> We got a few dozen used pulls in the deal as well.
>> 
>> That was the gloating bit. Now to the point.
>> 
>> The guys who run the transmitters told us that the Svetlana tubes were far 
>> better than the Eimac version. Typically, they get 2800 hours from the 
>> Eimacs before trouble sets in. From the Svetlanas, the average is 8000 
hours!
>> 
>> We were quite astounded at the difference. They also said that sometimes, a 
>> batch of Eimac tubes, are so bad, they send the whole lot back mostly 
>> unopened. The few that they had opened and tested were so bad, that they 
>> didn't even bother testing the rest.
>> 
>> I don't know if all this is specific to this type of tube or if it is 
>> across the board. Is anybody else in this group involved in a similar line 
>> of work? Have you had similar or different experience?
>> 
>> 73, Alek
>> VK6APK
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>_______________________________________________
>Amps mailing list
>Amps@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>


-  Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.