To: | amps@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [Amps] Why are we building amps rather then transmitters? (Tubes vs. Solid State) |
From: | Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com> |
Date: | Fri, 04 May 2012 15:26:25 -0400 |
List-post: | <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com> |
On 5/4/2012 1:51 PM, W2XJ wrote: > Dan > > I agree generally and in principle. There may be a few different ways to > do this which is well worth discussing. > > I am not sure how I got misquoted below. When I read some one wants to "integrate" the transmitter and the amp it means combine them. But be that as it may, if the amp is in a separate box the FCC will likely apply the current rules. If not in separate boxes you have combined them whether they are SDRs or not. 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [Amps] Tubes vs. Solid State, Roger |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [Amps] The power of an oversized electrolytic capacitor /, Jim Thomson |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [Amps] Why are we building amps rather then transmitters? (Tubes vs. Solid State), W2XJ |
Next by Thread: | Re: [Amps] Why are we building amps rather then transmitters? (Tubes vs. Solid State), W2XJ |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |