Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:W7MJM@arrl.net: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Current draw at 110 volts for SB-200 and SB-1000 (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:20:15 -0800
I'm thinking of acquiring an SB-200 or SB-1000. While I realize that it's preferable to power the SB-200 and SB-1000 amps from a 220 Volt AC line, I don't currently have 220 service in my shack. What
/archives//html/Amps/2004-12/msg00036.html (7,357 bytes)

2. Re: [Amps] Current draw at 110 volts for SB-200 and SB-1000 (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:34:15 -0800
Thank you Rich and to all who responded to my query. Your comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated. 73 de W7MJM _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesti
/archives//html/Amps/2004-12/msg00044.html (8,192 bytes)

3. Re: [Amps] Current draw at 110 volts for SB-200 and SB-1000 (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <W7MJM@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:40:54 -0800
Wow. The wealth of information one can gather from this list astounds me. Thanks again to everyone for their comments... and comments on comments! Based on what I've read on this thread, it seems to
/archives//html/Amps/2004-12/msg00057.html (9,308 bytes)

4. [Amps] Efficiency of AL-811/Al-811H compared to older amps (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 08:32:11 -0800
Following up on the previous thread about SB-200 and SB-1000 current draw at 110 to 120 volts, I've been wondering: What is it about the AL-811/AL-811H design that makes that amplifier series so effi
/archives//html/Amps/2004-12/msg00178.html (7,304 bytes)

5. [Amps] Dentron DTR 1200L (score: 1)
Author: Martin <W7MJM@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:24:28 -0800
Has anyone on the list used the Dentron DTR 1200L? What was your experience with it? _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/
/archives//html/Amps/2005-01/msg00360.html (6,322 bytes)

6. [Amps] AL-811: Tuning, Setting ALC, Operating (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <W7MJM@arrl.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 08:37:58 -0800
I just acquired a used AL-811. Any tips you guys can provide on tuning it, setting the ALC, and generally operating the amp would be greatly appreciated. I plan to drive it with my Icom IC-718. Accor
/archives//html/Amps/2005-01/msg00573.html (6,927 bytes)

7. Re: [Amps] AL-811: Tuning, Setting ALC, Operating (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:29:22 -0800
Dear Charlie and all others who have responded, Thank you for your answers, comments and suggestions. You guys are great. Regarding the question of whether to use a keying interface between my IC-718
/archives//html/Amps/2005-01/msg00631.html (8,373 bytes)

8. Re: [Amps] AL-811: Tuning, Setting ALC, Operating (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <W7MJM@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 10:47:42 -0800
Regarding my previous post in which I concluded that, according to the specs in the Icom manual, the IC-718 doesn't need an amplifier keying interface for the AL-811: If one reads the specifications
/archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00096.html (8,020 bytes)

9. [Amps] IC-718 and AL-811: Icom manual misleading,interface necessary according to Icom technician (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <W7MJM@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 10:52:04 -0800
Regarding my previous post in which I concluded that, according to the specs in the Icom manual, the IC-718 doesn't need an amplifier keying interface for the AL-811: If one reads the specifications
/archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00097.html (8,328 bytes)

10. RE: [BULK] - [Amps] IC-718 and AL-811: Icom manual misleading,interface nec... (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:49:29 -0800
Thanks for your responses, guys. The SOA explanation makes sense to me, if it were a solid state device doing the switching. But as Steve points out, the IC-718's "send relay" is in fact a physical r
/archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00112.html (11,138 bytes)

11. RE: [BULK] - [Amps] IC-718 and AL-811: Icom manual misleading (score: 1)
Author: "Martin J. Morgenbesser" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:04:10 -0800
Maybe Icom's figured a way to make current flow without any potential, that would be really cool. I could convert my car to run on a zero volt battery,as long as it can deliver 1000 amps, I'd be all
/archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00115.html (7,538 bytes)

12. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:57:18 -0800
"Thanks for the input guys. I'm aware of the limitations of the power supply on the AL-811. I was looking for performance information about the 572B tube itself." Isn't the power supply in the 3-tube
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00053.html (6,745 bytes)

13. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:27:18 -0800
Is there anyone on the list who can answer my question as to why three 572B's in the three-hole AL-811 should only put out 600 watts whereas W8JI has suggested (if memory serves), that when retubing
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00063.html (11,334 bytes)

14. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 15:37:55 -0800
Thanks Bill. That makes sense to me. But given those numbers, why would Tom (W8JI) suggest, when retubing a 4-hole AL-811H to only go with 3 572B's, leaving the fourth hole empty? Unless I misunderst
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00073.html (15,397 bytes)

15. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 15:40:18 -0800
"W8JI probably recommended using only 3 tubes in the 811H because it will reduce filament power, which will reduce the load on the transformer. The power is limited by the voltage and current of the
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00074.html (9,670 bytes)

16. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:01:33 -0800
Carl, I didn't see anything on the Ameritron site that would answer my particular question, but perhaps I didn't dig deeply enough or think it through thoroughly. In any case, Colin, W7FM, and Bill,
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00076.html (16,532 bytes)

17. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 20:38:24 -0800
Thanks Bob and all those who responded to my queries. I now have a better understanding of the AL-811 vs. AL811H amplifier capabilities when retubed with three 572B tubes. To be sure, I'm not looking
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00079.html (11,232 bytes)

18. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 21:20:23 -0800
Joe, Just looked at the parts list for the AL-811 and AL-811H. The power supply transformer, T1, is listed for both versions of the amp as part #406-1532. So it's the same transformer. Which brings m
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00080.html (16,556 bytes)

19. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 19:22:24 -0800
Brian, Yes indeed; it appears to be the same power supply transformer in both the AL-811 and the AL-811H. The conclusion I'm coming to is, IF you can run 800 watts PEP output from an AL-811H using 3
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00096.html (13,395 bytes)

20. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1)
Author: "W7MJM" <w7mjm@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 10:49:11 -0800
"Martin I own an AL-811 with three 572B's and get 800 watts out PEP easily on SSB but run it at 400 watts PEP. I own an AL-811H with four 572B's and get 900 watts out PEP easily on SSB but run it at
/archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00102.html (10,859 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu