Hey Geoff:
Since there's already a screen at hand, why not use it to your advantage
in this case by making it variable to allow clean adjustment of output
power? It just seems like what the doctor ordered for driving a linear,
that's all.
As for your second question, I should have clarified t
Does anyone have the values of the different 'Butterfly'
capacitors? I now have 3... one in the final, and 2 extras (with
HDVL jackbars) that I'm going to build something with (someday).
CX49A is one.
CX-82B is the other.
I think the CX-46 is what's in the rig.
Thanks for any info. Google ca
Geoff wrote:
I'm not sure you can get more than around 1kW PEP output of a pair of
813's... and probably more like 800w. (3) in parallel would be a
different story, though.
73 = Best Regards,
-Geoff/W5OMR
I would say you are pretty much on the mark there. I have a pair of
813's in GG
I have worked a friend on AM who has a Jupiter. It sounded just fine to me,
but I am not real picky on audio shaping and filtering.
As I understand, the Jupiter is a software defined radio so you might want
to have a qso with someone who can direct you as you make the settings for
AM. With a
I'm not sure you can get more than around 1kW PEP output of a pair of
813's... and probably more like 800w. (3) in parallel would be a
different story, though.
73 = Best Regards,
-Geoff/W5OMR
I would say you are pretty much on the mark there. I have a pair of
813's in GG also. I only run
Geoff wrote:
Gary Schafer wrote:
I know full well that there is no such thing as a 375 watt carrier
limit to AM power in the FCC rules. I never said there was.
Ok, good. I was just making sure ;) Too many people believe that
there's some 'magical mystification' about 375w of carrier out
Geoff wrote:
Gary Schafer wrote:
First you would need to tune it up at the 1500 watt out level. Then
apply enough drive from the ranger so you have about 375 watts carrier
out. That will be good for 100% modulation peaks.
Perhaps, if you were feeding nothing more than a sine wave to it.
Gary Schafer wrote:
First you would need to tune it up at the 1500 watt out level. Then
apply enough drive from the ranger so you have about 375 watts carrier
out. That will be good for 100% modulation peaks.
Perhaps, if you were feeding nothing more than a sine wave to it.
First you would need to tune it up at the 1500 watt out level. Then
apply enough drive from the ranger so you have about 375 watts carrier
out. That will be good for 100% modulation peaks. If you want to run
more than 100% modulation then you would need to lower the carrier level
with less driv
Byron Lichtenwalner wrote:
If you had an amp rated at 1500 pep rated for Continuous Commercial
Service and were going to drive it with a Ranger, (with W3AM's
modification as an example) where would you set the carrier level with
no modulation?
Byron, W3WKR
Where the 'scope showed that I had
If you had an amp rated at 1500 pep rated for Continuous Commercial Service
and were going to drive it with a Ranger, (with W3AM's modification as an
example) where would you set the carrier level with no modulation?
Byron, W3WKR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am thinking about giving my ten-tec jupiter a try on am.(only base rig i
have)
and body using one,and can give me an idea as to how this rig will work
also have 811 amp 73 Ron af4ob
I was in the Ten-Tec labs Ham Shack, back in September of this
year. There was a
I am thinking about giving my ten-tec jupiter a try on am.(only base rig i
have)
and body using one,and can give me an idea as to how this rig will work
also have 811 amp 73 Ron af4ob
In my National NCL-2000, I can run 200W carrier and 800W PEP, but
I do not, as 8122's are costly and the NCL's blower is really too
small. I usually do my testing at 100W carrier and 400W PEP. In
that amp, tuned up properly for each of two carrier level cases
(approximately):
loaded for 800W
Gary Schafer wrote:
I know full well that there is no such thing as a 375 watt carrier limit
to AM power in the FCC rules. I never said there was.
Ok, good. I was just making sure ;) Too many people believe
that there's some 'magical mystification' about 375w of carrier
output being the 'l
Joe Crawford wrote:
I just found a pair of 450TL's. Trying to find sockets for them and some
HK-254's.
Joe W4AAB
Rangers typically deliver around 40w out of the SO-239.
20w out of the Ranger would be enough, if there were around 1000w of
dissapation i
I know full well that there is no such thing as a 375 watt carrier limit
to AM power in the FCC rules. I never said there was.
I was trying to "clarify" Ronnie's statement about how much power he
runs his 813's at when he says he runs them at legal power out.
And since we don't know if Ronnie h
I just found a pair of 450TL's. Trying to find sockets for them and some
HK-254's.
Joe W4AAB
Geoff writes:
Bob Maser wrote:
Why not just use a coax Tee and dump half of the output power of the
Ranger into a 50 ohm dummy load and the other half into the
I wonder if I could drive my 3CX3000 Lineeaar with my Valiant. H.
Bob
Geoff wrote:
Gary Schafer wrote:
By "legal power out of the 813's" I assume you mean 375 watts carrier?
Why assume something that is false??
That statement is -designed- to put you on edge, Gary. Perhaps it's
just my perception, but it simply appears as if you're not paying
attention.
I'm with Dennis and Gary. To run a linear amplifier at 375 watts of
carrier and 100% modulation, you will need around 800 watts of plate
dissipation. For a short time a number of years ago, I tried running an
AF-68 and a 4-1000A linear amplifier. I could never get more than around
450 watts o
Gary Schafer wrote:
By "legal power out of the 813's" I assume you mean 375 watts carrier?
Why assume something that is false??
That statement is -designed- to put you on edge, Gary. Perhaps
it's just my perception, but it simply appears as if you're not
paying attention.
NO WHERE does it
At 04:21 PM 1/11/2005 -0500, you wrote:
In a message dated 1/11/05 12:14:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> well all I can say is it works.. works well as a matter of fact, and has
> been for 6 years :)
> I typically run between 350 and 400 watts of carrier every day. It looks
> great on the s
In a message dated 1/11/05 12:14:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> well all I can say is it works.. works well as a matter of fact, and has
> been for 6 years :)
> I typically run between 350 and 400 watts of carrier every day. It looks
> great on the scope. Modulation envelope is perfect. 100%
When I run the pair of 813 rig, its doing 600 watts carrier out,
and I limit my negative modulation to about 90%
I used to run it to over 2000 watts pep, 2500 judging by how
hard the watt meter pinned.
That was when I used negative cycle loading, which did not work
fast enough to prevent splatter
well all I can say is it works.. works well as a matter of fact, and has
been for 6 years :)
I typically run between 350 and 400 watts of carrier every day. It looks
great on the scope. Modulation envelope is perfect. 100% modulation. In 6
years Ive only lost one tube, and I accidently broke th
By "legal power out of the 813's" I assume you mean 375 watts carrier?
If so there is no way the peaks are going to 1500 watts. A pair of 813's
will not put out that much power in GG linear configuration. At least
not very long.
A pair of 813's in GG are good for about the same power out as 4
it's 500 Watts over here this limit.
Chris SV1DAF.
- Original Message -
From: "Robert M. Bratcher Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio"
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] AM Amps
> At 04:31 AM 1/11/2005, you wrote:
> >73s to all,
> >regarding D
Robert M. Bratcher Jr. wrote:
If I wanted more than 100w of AM (out of my Collins 23V-3) then I'd use
it for carrier only then plate modulate an amplifier with a modulation
transformer (if I could find one) plus a speech amp. Then I'd run the
maximum legal AM power of 375 watts.
But then I r
At 04:31 AM 1/11/2005, you wrote:
73s to all,
regarding Dick's problem i'd try to match 1st the Ranger's output pwr with
the needed input pwr of one of the amps.The choice of the amp depends on the
output pwr someone wants to "push on the air".Saw a Ranger there in Ebay and
think it's using somet
Gary Blau wrote:
Not sure where the article is exactly pertinent to this.
If the exciter B+ is reduced, so is the max available exciter PEP.
If the B+ stays the same and the screen V is reduced the max available
exciter PEP is (roughly) the same, but the carrier power out (no mod)
goes down.
I
RICHARD W GILLESPIE wrote:
Thanks to all for your suggestions and guidance. Great thread for
getting help. Hope to talk on the air at some point with all. I gotta
believe that AM is making a comeback. SSB has gotten a bit boring. Too
bad AM cannot get the respect it deserves and the frequencie
Thanks to all for your suggestions and guidance. Great thread for getting
help. Hope to talk on the air at some point with all. I gotta believe that
AM is making a comeback. SSB has gotten a bit boring. Too bad AM cannot get
the respect it deserves and the frequencies to go with it. Thanks again
This aint rocket science at my shack.
I have a pair of trusty old 813's in grounded grid with 3200 Volts on the
plates. I drive them with my Ranger all the time with no problems at all.
I always tune the ranger up to full power into a either a dummy, or my
dipole. THEN switch the 813's into th
73s to all,
regarding Dick's problem i'd try to match 1st the Ranger's output pwr with
the needed input pwr of one of the amps.The choice of the amp depends on the
output pwr someone wants to "push on the air".Saw a Ranger there in Ebay and
think it's using something like 6L6s or anyway not high po
Tnx for the help on finding a Filter choke for my SX-71.I found a replacement
choke at Tubesandmore.com that will work just fine..Keep those filiments
glowing!!!..73's Ron W6MAU
In a message dated 1/10/05 9:12:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Kinda Sorta. Depends on the quality of the transmitter. If he
> reduces the carrier output power of the Ranger, then the audio
> output power will rise, because there won't be as much final
> current flowing through the seconda
Not sure where the article is exactly pertinent to this.
If the exciter B+ is reduced, so is the max available exciter PEP.
If the B+ stays the same and the screen V is reduced the max available
exciter PEP is (roughly) the same, but the carrier power out (no mod)
goes down.
If your concern is run
Gary Blau wrote:
Although both of these will serve to reduce the drive power and get you
on the air, they are less than optimal.
The problem with reducing the B+ is the max PEP goes with it. You'll
want to preserve that for positive modulation peaks. As Gary Schafer
sez you want to keep the d
Bob Maser wrote:
Why not just use a coax Tee and dump half of the output power of the
Ranger into a 50 ohm dummy load and the other half into the amp?
Rangers typically deliver around 40w out of the SO-239.
20w out of the Ranger would be enough, if there were around 1000w
of dissapation in th
Although both of these will serve to reduce the drive power and get you
on the air, they are less than optimal.
The problem with reducing the B+ is the max PEP goes with it. You'll
want to preserve that for positive modulation peaks. As Gary Schafer
sez you want to keep the driver PEP up to wher
Why not just use a coax Tee and dump half of the output power of the Ranger
into a 50 ohm dummy load and the other half into the amp?
Bob
I build a couple switchable pads that allow me to run the Ranger into
the Thunderbolt or any other amp. It's also variable. Just a few
resistors and a switch from an antenna switchbox. I think the T-Bolt
manual has the directions.
73 Chris VE3NGW Fort Lauderdale Florida
http://www.ckradio
Gary Schafer wrote:
Here is a ruff rule of thumb for amps on AM:
If the amp takes 100 watts to drive it on ssb then it will take 100
watts pep of AM to drive it. 100 watts pep of AM means 25 watts of
carrier with 100% modulation.
Kinda Sorta. Depends on the quality of the transmitter. If h
44 matches
Mail list logo
