Is there possibly anything that could happen to a amp

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio Amplifiers' started by N3JBH, Apr 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
  1. N3JBH

    N3JBH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Rich i am done with this. May you have a long and prosperous life and enjoy the wonderful thing's in it. I no longer wish to be involved in this subject and to be perfectly honest here any others with you. Now you can read in to that what you wish and make any comment's you desire. I am politely ending my participation on this subject. And i do not foresee my self actively seeking any further communications with or about you . Jeff
     
  2. VK6ZGO

    VK6ZGO Ham Member QRZ Page

    Come on,Jeff,Fair's fair!
    Your "Troll" did start this thread,after all,so you could hardly blame Rich for what followed!;)

    I'm quite sure Rich's devices work,although I've never in 40 years of RF work seen anything to convince me that the conventional circuits don't!
    That said, Rich isn't becoming a millionaire from these kits,so if people buy them it just gives them a choice,& it's not really doing any harm.
    We,on the other hand seem to be limited to being Tom's or Rich's "groupies"!;)
     
  3. N3JBH

    N3JBH Ham Member QRZ Page

    Oh i would agree any personal attack by him to me on this subject is fair game. Just i no longer need to drag this through the bush's as they. Any further thought's or personal opinion's are pretty much a moot point in my book. I did gather what i was looking for and this thread was very useful for that. Now that i have seen what i wanted too see i am satisfied believe or not . I left with pleasantries And wish good will. I respect those whom both on the forum and off the forum's input. Rather anyone else harbor's any feeling's good or bad for ever whom, Well so be it. I do not suggest i have or have not got the abilities or resources at my disposal to pass judgement on this topic. I made my comment's and they are what the are. With that being said i would be happy to read on if others have anything more to add to this topic but as for myself i have gained what i was after and thank those whom participated in it... 73 Jeff
     
  4. W1QJ

    W1QJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Jeff, You can't insult Rich. So don't even try. Rich is like a guy I recently saw in a movie. it was a short scene in a movie where basic trainees were learning from the tough drill sargent on how to resist the effects of "waterboarding". The DS covered there face in (burlap?) and started puring water over them, each one immediately caved in to submission. So the trainees dared the DS to have it done to him. He layed down on the table they covered him with the (burlap?) and started vigorously pouring water over his face. They were trying to get even and kept the buckets coming one after another, The DS didn't move a muscle or make a sound. After several buckets of water they thought they may have drowned him. They quickly pulled the burlap off his face and saw him laying motionless with his eyes closed. They thought they drowned him, with that suddenly the DS opens his eyes and spits a big mouthful of water into the guys face!! This is how picture Richard to be. So may as will give it up. G3HZO has ended the debate in my eyes, too bad Tom isn't around for the finale.
     
  5. AG6K

    AG6K QRZ Member QRZ Page

     THE FINALE: The term "VHF suppressor" is a misnomer since the R//L device is not a VHF attenuator, it is a VHF-amplification reducer. It accomplishes this by reducing the parallel-equivalent R presented to the anode at the anode's VHF parasitic resonance. Lower parallel-equivalent R =s lower amplification. The bottom-line is that lowering the VHF Q of the R//L device lowers VHF-amplification - thereby reducing the chance of VHF parasitic oscillation.

    • "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof. "
    - John Kenneth Galbraith -
     
  6. AG6K

    AG6K QRZ Member QRZ Page

     Cheers and congrats on dismounting Jeff. Nobody can ride a dead horse.
     
  7. AG6K

    AG6K QRZ Member QRZ Page

     
  8. N3JBH

    N3JBH Ham Member QRZ Page

    G3HZO has ended the debate in my eyes, Mine as well Lou.
     
  9. G0HZU

    G0HZU QRZ Member

    I revisited the NiCr vs copper wire VNA tests and used a slightly better test fixture and I've written up a short study report.

    Basically, the results are pretty much the same as before but I've included some graphs generated from the VNA data.

    At 300kb it's too big for the QRZ uploader so I've up loaded it to here:

    http://www.4shared.com/office/6y6pMW10/Nichrome_vs_Copper_Wire.html

    It's been written in a hurry so there may be a few typos but generally it should be OK :)

    Thanks :) Note that my call is G0HZU not G3HZU. The early G3??? series of callsigns date back way before I was born!
     
  10. KD0CAC

    KD0CAC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Not interested in sighing up just see .
    I am interested , but there is just too much sigh-up stuff going on .
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page