[Amps] "10 Meter Ban" to be lifted ...

[dcoffman at iquest.net]

Hello Paul and all others,

You all bring up several questions to mind, or rather comments.

1.  If an Alpha w/ an 8877 will produce 2500 watts PEP, why would one need a 
second 8877 in the same amplifier?  If hams are doing it and using them on the 
air, this is just as illegal as the CBers using an amplifier.

2.  How many CB operators can or are willing to pay for a high end amplifier 
just to operate 11 meters?  Most of them won't even pay for a new Ameritron.  
They will purchase used Ameritrons, or Heathkits and use that.

3.  No matter what the FCC does, or what the amplifier manufacturers do, there 
will always be a plentiful supply of legal or ilegal amplifiers for CBers to 
use.  Look at the Dave Made CRAP!  They are making 3-500Z amplifiers that they 
claim will produce 8KW AM PEP.

4.  If the FCC were serious, or had the resources to stop the illegal use of 
CB radios and amplifiers they would start by looking up CB shops in the phone 
books and making visits.  They would look at Ranger (Ranger that makes the 6M 
and 10M ham rigs), these are the same folks that make the Galaxy rigs and 
other 'Export' radios that noone wants to talk about.  And everyone knows that 
the Ranger 2950 / 2970 will convert in about 5 minutes to TX/RX on 12M thru 
10M.

5.  Most CBers are looking for simplicity.  That's why the pay for a poor 
quality Galaxy rig that cost almost as much as an IC706MKIIG.  Most don't want 
to tune or don't understand how to tune an amplifier with a bandswitch and 
Load and Tune caps.

6.  I bought some coax from a local CB shop to finish up an installation, and 
there was a guy claiming that he was driving an L-4B with a 400watt sweep tube 
amp to derive some unobtainable PEP.  Look at the shops, look at the 
operators, and you will see how to stop it.  The papers that the FCC writes 
will have absolutely no effect on CB operations.

73 All,

Doug - N9XTF

Quoting Harold  Mandel <ka1xo at juno.com>:

> Paul,
> 
> Years ago the Alpha 77Dx was manufactured with one 8877 tube and a square
> plate
> that could be removed to add a second 8877, making a 77Sx. 
> 
> People over America offered the "second tube kit" comprising a tube,
> a socket and some components.
> 
> Ray Heaton, the Alpha tech specialist at one time was vehemently
> opposed to the after-market program. I suppose he knew about the
> inability of the small doorknobs to support the circulating currents,
> and the inherent mistuning of the output (and input) networks, but
> he was vocal about the ability of the amp to develop more than the
> allowable output power. At this time, Alpha had two blocking
> mechanisms to prevent 10 meter operation, one on the bandswitch and
> one on the vacuum cap stop screw.
> 
> Again, my question to the group is if amp manufacturers didn't need
> to limit or constrain, and if required to sell to documented (licensed)
> buyers, could not the cost of providing constraints been better
> targeted to providing a better amplifier?  Imagine the great instrument
> a factory-issued 77Sx might have been if the mistuning and poor KVaR
> quality issues were addressed up front.
> 
> Hal
> W4HBM
> 
> 
> 
> [snip]
> Interestingly, the Commission omitted the prior rule pertaining to amp kits 
> (§97.315(b)(2)(i)).  What it does not specifically address is a limitation 
> on partial kits.  Could a manufacturer offer a 99% completed "kit," leaving 
> some trivial components to complete for the end-user?  Arguably, §97.315(a) 
> could still be interpreted to mean that a partial kit is also one of 
> "partial manufacture," thus enabling this section to partial kits.
> [snip]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>