RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Low Power GE Phoenix...

2006-03-05 Thread Steve Bosshard
Seems like in the old days, when the Phoenix was new, that the synthesizer and microprocessor consumed a bunch of current and that from a low power / solar power, etc stand point, a crystal controlled radio was more conservative of power - maybe a crystal talkie or the like would be more practical.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Low Power GE Phoenix...

2006-03-06 Thread Rob
hl31943 wrote: > > I don't know if this helps, but the UHF manual says to replace Q203 > with L217, which couples the output of Q202 to the antenna switch. I > haven't found a value for L217 yet. This should give you a 2 to 5 W > output. > Howard > WB4GUD Thanks for the additional tidbit, How

Re: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Low Power GE Phoenix...

2006-03-06 Thread n1nte
watts so pumping 25-40W out isn't necessary. - Rob > > From: "Steve Bosshard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/03/05 Sun PM 03:21:13 EST > To: > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Low Power GE Phoenix... > > Seems like in the old days, when

Daniels IMD performance (was Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Low Power GE Phoenix...)

2006-03-06 Thread Bob Dengler
At 3/6/2006 09:47 AM, you wrote: >It sure makes a difference when things are designed for low power. >My whole daniels rig, receivers and transmitters for 2M and 440, draws >about 80mA at idle. I have a mobile radio that I use for a control >link, which draws about 300mA at idle. > >In the daniel