Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+AL\-811\s+\&\s+572\'s\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+AL\-811\s+\&\s+572\'s\s*$/: 31 ]

Total 31 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Thomas F. Giella NZ4O" <nz4o@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:50:06 -0500; I have an AL-811 running 572B's instead of 811's. The manual says for RTTY mode to use a maximum of 150 ma on the grid and 400 ma on the plate for the 811's. What would be the maximum grid and plate; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00216.html (6,835 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: Vic K2VCO <vic@rakefet.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:47:20 -0800; 150 ma. on the grid and 400 ma on the plate (due to power supply limitations). The 572B's absolute maximum rating is 275 ma per tube, but at the low plate voltage in that amp it probably isn't possib; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00217.html (8,839 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: mitch cox <ww4cox@embarqmail.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:48:17 -0500 (EST); With the air flow through an AL-811 I don't think I would push it any farther than the factory specs. You have only improved the tubes at this point, the puff of air that the factory fan is giving yo; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00218.html (8,686 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: Charles Mills <w3yni1@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:50:46 -0500; If you have Greenlee punches, put an 80cfm fan off the side of it to force air across the tubes and out the top. Keeps the 811a's nice and cool. A friend of mine modded my amp like that for me. CM --; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00219.html (9,483 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: Alek Petkovic <vk6apk@bigpond.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 04:41:10 +0800; The transformer is the limiting factor just as much as the tubes. You can't run the 572Bs any harder because you'll just cook the transformer. 73, Alek VK6APK From sunny Binningup, Western Australia; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00220.html (8,922 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Thomas F. Giella NZ4O" <nz4o@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 07:53:16 -0500; 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. 73 & GUD DX, Thomas F. Giella, NZ4O La; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00227.html (8,996 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Mitch Cox" <ww4cox@embarqmail.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 07:57:31 -0500; Here you go; http://www.mgs4u.com/RF-Microwave/TriodeTubeDataCharacteristicChartbyW6LEG.pdf -- Original Message -- From: Thomas F. Giella NZ4O To: amps @ COL Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 7:53 AM; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00228.html (9,918 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 11:51:11 -0500; The 572B is a plug in replacement that offers a higher Pd and reliability in an 811A amp including the venerable Collins 30L1. Ameritron has recommended the swap in their amps along with the transfor; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00232.html (10,500 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 12:13:40 -0500; Im sure many of us would disagree with many of those IMD specs. The 572B is off by at least 4-5dB. Also realize that the Svetlana versions are using smaller anodes and non hardened glass. They melt d; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00233.html (11,875 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Mitch Cox" <ww4cox@embarqmail.com>; Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 13:01:15 -0500; Im sure many of us would disagree with many of those IMD specs. The 572B is off by at least 4-5dB. Also realize that the Svetlana versions are using smaller anodes and non hardened glass. They melt d; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00234.html (12,355 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: Benton <allen3500@bellsouth.net>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:32:12 -0600; I'd run the 572b's at about the same numbers as the 811's. Benton wb5twc _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/list; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00248.html (9,053 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: mitch cox <ww4cox@embarqmail.com>; Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:56:40 -0500 (EST); Something like this works great with a fan from an AL80B. -- Original Message -- From: "Charles Mills" <w3yni1@gmail.com> To: "mitch cox" <ww4cox@embarqmail.com> Cc: "Thomas F. Giella NZ4O" <nz4o@tam; /archives//html/Amps/2011-01/msg00251.html (10,558 bytes)
13. 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)
14. 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)
15. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: Bill Fuqua <wlfuqu00@uky.edu>; Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 16:59:54 -0500; With only 1500 or so volts on the plates the 572Bs have low gain. You may not have enough drive to go beyond 600 watts. Unless you operate a higher plate voltage you may not go beyond 600 watts anywa; /archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00068.html (13,807 bytes)
16. 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)
17. 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)
18. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 20:53:26 -0500; I was suggesting to look at the parts list and see if the transformers are different or the same. As far as the H model you should be able to drive and load 3 572B's harder and obtain the same power; /archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00075.html (18,216 bytes)
19. 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)
20. Re: [Amps] AL-811 & 572's (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 22:47:17 -0500; I suggest you download the AL-811 and AL-811H from the Ameritron web site then compare schematics/parts lists. That is what any other person would need to do to answer your question. If the schematic; /archives//html/Amps/2011-02/msg00077.html (14,394 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]