Lazy Senior wrote:


Which amp is best for my circumstance?



Which amp tube would be best for AM - 572's - 811's - 3-500's or the
high gain ceramic tubes?

Thanx

Lazy Senior

Lazy:
People dont seem to read what you are asking - Suggestions for a modern
linear amp to be used on Am. --A simple question-- but everyone "wants"
to tell you it cant be done,shouldnt be done, or you dont need high
power,buy another xmtr, etc etc.

Yes, I Know people use Linear amps with old xmtrs, I have talked to many
of them.

Lazy Senior

Lazy Senior wrote:

Lazy:
People dont seem to read what you are asking - Suggestions for a modern
linear amp to be used on Am. --A simple question-- but everyone "wants"
to tell you it cant be done,shouldnt be done, or you dont need high
power,buy another xmtr, etc etc.

Yes, I Know people use Linear amps with old xmtrs, I have talked to many
of them.

Well, yes, but you can use ANY modern linear amp, just as long as it is
rated for full power at AM.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Lazy Senior

Lazy:
People dont seem to read what you are asking - Suggestions for a modern
linear amp to be used on Am. --A simple question-- but everyone "wants"
to tell you it cant be done,shouldnt be done, or you dont need high
power,buy another xmtr, etc etc.

Yes, I Know people use Linear amps with old xmtrs, I have talked to many
of them.

Lazy Senior



Ya know... You specifically asked what type of "linears" would have
been use back when AM the common mode. Your question was
answered. Now your starting with the backtracking BS about
a modern "amplifier."

If you "know" people who are using linears with old
xmtrs", why not just ASK THEM WHAT THEY ARE
USING and quit trolling this newsgroup
with your BS?

Peter k1zjh

Uncle Peter wrote:


If you "know" people who are using linears with old
xmtrs", why not just ASK THEM WHAT THEY ARE
USING and quit trolling this newsgroup
with your BS?

Peter k1zjh


Same old crap from usenet, its why I hardly use it for getting info. Too
many assholes like you. Self Proclaimed experts always call you a troll
when they cant supply you with usefull info.

If you think I am trolling just put me on your kill list, I wont miss you.

I asked a simple question, you just gave me bul**** answers. Most of the
really good replys I got via email.

Dont bother replying I am not looking for a flamefest....

Lazy Senior

Same old crap from usenet, its why I hardly use it for getting info. Too
many assholes like you. Self Proclaimed experts always call you a troll
when they cant supply you with usefull info.


Crap in, crap out. I still think you're a CBer trolling. I say it again,
why
not ask all of your AM buddies who you state are running linears??????

The BS meter is pegged.

Uncle Peter wrote:

The BS meter is pegged.


Is that why the call you use "Peter k1zjh" is fake? From Qrz. com - The
callsign K1ZJH is not in our database.

You gonna use a callsign make sure it is valid - just like this response:

.................................................. ...........
Uncle Peter wrote:

The problem is a ham linear will not deliver 1000 watts carrier
power on AM. It would have to be rated for 4kW to do so.
PEP on AM is at least 4X carrier.

Pete

.................................................. .....................

Everyone knows cept you that legal limit AM is 375 watts carrier...

I just dislike self proclaimed "experts" that know little and show it on
usenet under fake calls.

You made a real fool of yourself this time Peter k1zjh......

And YEAH, I got a ham license, all those nice private emails I received
with thoughtfull answers, got my call....

Lazy Senior (no fake call - you wanna know who I am - private email me)

Lazy Senior wrote:
Uncle Peter wrote:

The BS meter is pegged.

Is that why the call you use "Peter k1zjh" is fake? From Qrz. com - The
callsign K1ZJH is not in our database.

You gonna use a callsign make sure it is valid - just like this response:

The FCC thinks it's valid. Whether or not it's in QRZ.com is irrelevant.

--
Mike Andrews W5EGO

Tired old sysadmin

Mike Andrews wrote:



The FCC thinks it's valid. Whether or not it's in QRZ.com is irrelevant.


Hmmm, a new nocoder vanity call? No, most tech lites I know have common
sense, Uncle Peter acts like an Extra.........

Lazy Senior

Lazy Senior wrote:

Is that why the call you use "Peter k1zjh" is fake? From Qrz. com - The
callsign K1ZJH is not in our database.


From the FCC website:

Federal Communications Commission

Callsign Results [ULS DATABASE]

Callsign K1ZJH
File Number 9504040209
Applicant Type I
Service HA

Licensee Name BERTINI, PETER J
Address 20 PATSUN R
City SOMERS
State CT
Zip 06071-1810
Operator class E

IIRC - that last item is Amateur Extra?

Then there is:

http://www.cq-vhf.com/Log%20Periodic.html

Now who looks "the fool"?
Sheeesh...
--
randy guttery
P1-8-14610 (I'll save ya' the trouble of looking that up, since you seem
"look-up impaired" - that's FCC License Radio Telephone First Class
w/Ships RADAR issued 5/30/78 - converted to FCC PG-8-4546 current and
active).

Randy or Sherry Guttery wrote:




Now who looks "the fool"?
Sheeesh...

Unlike our USA President, I admit my mistakes. I was a fool responding
to Uncle Peters flame. He was nasty to me first. I simply was looking
for intelligent answers to maybe stupid questions but answers to things
I didnt know - Peter called me a troll - not true -I am just a average
stupid ham trying to learn.

I truly thank everyone who tried to help me - and there were many
private emails. Thanx to all cept Peter.

Only Peter tried to ridicule me and I apologize for taking his bait.

Lazy Senior