Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+AL1200\/RTTY\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+AL1200\/RTTY\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "k6xx@juno.com" <k6xx@juno.com>; Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:15:16 GMT; Kevin, Couple of comments. Most importantly, the "wattmeter" in the AL-1200/1500/82 amps is NOT accurate. It is merely a voltmeter. SWR of any type (resistive or reactive) destroys any semblance of p; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00040.html (13,815 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: Kevin Normoyle <knormoyle@surfnetusa.com>; Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:28:40 -0700; Bob K6XX commented on watt reading accuracy on the AL1200. Yeah, I knew someone was going to say "get a Bird!" :) I did run the coax thru my Palstar AT1500 tuner in bypass mode before it went to the; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00041.html (6,904 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:46:17 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: That was enough years ago that I can't honestly remember, but I was probably using a Kenwood SWR/Power meter at the time. In any event, since I know power meters are notoriou; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00044.html (8,359 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:07:49 -0400; The AL-1200's Ive had thru here wont do much over 1700-1800W at 100W drive. They wake up at 125-150W and can equal the AL-1500 at 80-100W. Carl _______________________________________________ Amps ma; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00046.html (10,071 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: RICHARD SOLOMON <w1ksz@q.com>; Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:17:57 +0000; I bought my AL-1200 years ago from Radio-Kit, when they had a store-front in some Mall or Industrial Park in NH. I also invested in tube futures by buying a spare final (only $225 then). I still run; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00050.html (10,540 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:51:01 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: If you're happy with the AL-1200, stay with it. When run conservatively as you do, it is a great amp. I especially miss the fast warm up. My current homebrew amp takes 90 sec; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00055.html (8,218 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "Tony Brock-Fisher" <barockteer@aol.com>; Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 16:37:44 -0400; Carl Which is it? What you said today: http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00046.html Or what you said 05/20/08: http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/Amps/2008-05/msg0013; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00063.html (8,059 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] AL1200/RTTY (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 17:22:00 -0400; Which is what??? Carl _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2009-07/msg00068.html (9,216 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]