Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: "Steve Terry" <gFOURwwk@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 23:55:12 +0100
"Conor" <conor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.2519aadd81ec193e98972f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <2lqua593ju0n037udd29pa80889cgho506@xxxxxxx>, Spike says...I'm sure i heard this reply on the 555, but involving swarr grease
I think Conor meant to say "Just get one rated for 100 percent duty
cycle", but it didn't come out quite right. If he'd tried it, he would
have discovered that the experient would almost certainly be a
(costly, embarrassing) failure
Yet commercial broadcast stations manage it so I fail to see how that
classes as a failure.
I'm mildly surprised that someone of Conor's apparent technical
qualifications wasn't aware of the implications inherent in using an
SSB transmitter rated at 100W, at that power level for FM. All the
relevant rigs have a power rating for 100 percent duty cycle much
lower than that for SSB, and say so in their specifications.
For a start, it wouldn't work dumbass as a SSB modulator can't form an
FM signal can it? That's why multimode transceivers have a seperate
board in for FM.....
Conor
Steve Terry
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Conor
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- References:
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Yeti
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Yeti
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Yeti
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Yeti
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- From: Spike
- Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Disgraceful BBC News 24 reporting (again)
- Next by Date: Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- Previous by thread: Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- Next by thread: Re: IC706 MKIIG HF PA?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|