Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Amps\s+Digest\,\s+Vol\s+151\,\s+Issue\s+6\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Amps\s+Digest\,\s+Vol\s+151\,\s+Issue\s+6\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 151, Issue 6 (score: 1): Author: Steve via Amps <amps@contesting.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 13:55:56 -0400; Hi Steve, I converted an SB-220 to 6 meters for my friend Mike, UN8GC, and wrote up the results in a QST article in April 2008. The input circuit I used was a T-match. Each inductor consisted of 10 t; /archives//html/Amps/2015-07/msg00018.html (7,545 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 151, Issue 6 (score: 1): Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 19:44:56 -0600; Thanks everyone for the responses, both on the reflector and direct. Is there any particular reason the L-C-L T-match is better or worse than the more standard C-L-C pi network in this application ?; /archives//html/Amps/2015-07/msg00020.html (8,671 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 151, Issue 6 (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 20:13:20 -0700; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: In order to achieve a wide range of impedance matching, you need to have two of the three elements variable. Variable capacitors are preferred by most de; /archives//html/Amps/2015-07/msg00021.html (7,553 bytes)
4. [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 151, Issue 6 (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 18:46:29 -0700; Thanks everyone for the responses, both on the reflector and direct. Is there any particular reason the L-C-L T-match is better or worse than the more standard C-L-C pi network in this application ?; /archives//html/Amps/2015-07/msg00022.html (8,651 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]