[Amps] 3.5 kV 2A REGULATED Power Supply: Schematic ?

[R.Measures]

>R. Measures wrote:
>>**  The grid does not and can not draw current when a competent 
>>operator sets the grid potential just above the level where it can draw 
>>grid-current with the max PEP drive that's available.
>
>That is only true if the grid input circuit is guaranteed to be able to 
>soak up all possible levels of drive without allowing grid current... 

**  So you are essentially saying that if the grid terminating resistor 
is blown away by the exciter, the grid driving potential could rise to a 
higher level and grid-current could flow?  Although this seems possible 
with exciters that do not have an SWR-foldback, I have not seen such, 
Ian.  Have you?  Would not such a scenario require that the 
grid-terminator be grossly undersized?

>but that also has disadvantages: either the exciter runs flat-out and 
>generates unnecessary IMD of its own, or else the exciter runs at a 
>lower level and the amplifier is seriously under-driven.

**  Why would the exciter run flat-out if a competent person set the 
power limit control in or on the exciter to the level prescribed?
>
>I truly cannot see why anyone should design (or defend) a high-impedance 
>bias supply whose voltage regulation will collapse at the first trace of 
>either normal or negative grid current.?

**  Because when the manufacturer of the tube specifies a maximum AB1 
bias supply impedance, there is quite probably a sound engineering reason 
behind it.  //  Ian:  Hello!   There is No "normal" grid current in a 
Class AB1 amplifier.  

> What's the point, when a 
>better-regulated supply is just as easy
>
**  Regulated is never as easy as unregulated.  As I see it, using a 
regulated supply where one is not indicated is hardly good engineering 
practice.  Why guild a lilly?
-  In a Class AB1 linear amplifier, the potentials that need to be held 
closely are the screen-V and the filament-V.