On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:12:35 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:

He has a lot more inductance that he thinks, so maybe that
helps and I suspect his output lowpass filter (seen in the photos but
not on the schematic) is part of the matching network.

I'm really surprised that with the construction and documentation
presented he could get FCC type acceptance.

Hi Wes,

Still and all, a good story of the exploit.

Well given the measurements, it seemed some filtering was necessarily
unmentioned. And given the FCC type acceptance (obviously allowed),
the measurements (or rather the quality of the gear) were sufficient.
I especially find the scrawled notes submitted with the acceptance
application a time capsule back to the days before computers (or
seemingly the IBM selectric).

Still and all, he described where he was going, and offered how he
thought he got there. To translate that to today's specifications
"missing" the output Z of transmitters (obviously part and parcel to
the canon of the design engineer who built them) because of their
irrelevance - that is a stretch of imagination right off the showroom
floor. And then to notice in the ad copy, they can build to other
output Z's...

I find the novel modulation techniques interesting though. Seems like
an alphabet soup of modes has sprung up over the years.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 02:42:21 GMT, Dave Shrader
wrote:
Cecil, methinks you posed an incomplete question :-)

WHAT!!? NEVER! Well hardly ever (apologies to G&S).

Dave Shrader wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Assume a 100+j100 ohm load and a 100-j100 ohm transmitter
directly connected with no transmission line. The system
is matched. Are there any reflections? Now install a
transmission line. Will an SWR meter read the same thing
in both cases?

What's the Zo of the transmission line? Is it sufficiently long to act
as a transmission line?

Cecil, methinks you posed an incomplete question :-)

Yep, a deliberate act to get you to consider all possibilities.
What Z0 did you assume? For what Z0 is your SWR meter calibrated?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 07:17:03 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
What Z0 did you assume?
He hardly ever says a BIG BIG Z! ...well give three cheers and three
cheers more... (further apologies to G&S)

God bless the Cween.

Walt
========================

Really Walt, the introduction of God and the royal family to your conjugal
match philosophy is a little far-fetched. I never suspected it but what
brand of Bourbon are you on tonight? I recognise the symptoms.

(Funny smiley)
----
Reg.

Reg wrote:
"Really Walt, the introduction of God and the royal family to your
conjugal match philosophy is a little far-fetched."

They like to be on the right side too, but sometimes even the royals are
wrong.

I went all the way to London in july to wade in the Diana Ditch. When I
arrived, it was surrounded by a wire fence posted with this notice:

"Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fountain -

There have been a number of slippage incidents in a section of the
Fountain.

The safety of our visitors is very important to us. As a precaution,
there will be no acess to the Fountain until a full investigation has
been completed.

We apologise for this inconvenience.

The Royal Parks."

Well written explanation. Maybe next year? My 5 year old granddaughter,
a student in Queen`s College, enjoyed the Hyde Park Lido, so the outing
was rewarding anyway.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 23:17:56 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:

Reg wrote:
"Really Walt, the introduction of God and the royal family to your
conjugal match philosophy is a little far-fetched."

They like to be on the right side too, but sometimes even the royals are
wrong.

Perhaps Reggie is more a fan of the Sex Pistols:
"God save the Queen
the fascist regime,
they made you a moron
a potential H-bomb."
(my regrets to G&S)

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 23:49:42 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

snip

Although I may jokingly profess ignorance of American electrical measuring
instruments, for several years I was the Government-approved Head of
Laboratory of a measurement standards laboratory of second echelon to the
British National Physical Laboratory. I was familiar with the excellent
qualities of HP, GR, Fluke and similar instruments. I played an original
part in the conversion of the assessment of National worst-case measurement
uncertainties to statistical uncertainty assssment. But I don't brag about
it.
----
Reg, G4FGQ

Well, Reg, your joking concerning the measuring instruments misled me. Sorry
about that. But I don't call your leveling with us on your experience and
accomplishments bragging. The more we know about our friends on line the greater
the enhancement of our communication, even the humor will be more appreciated. I
know that I'll have more appreciation of Punchinello than before.

Now, from a previous post of yours:

Really Walt, the introduction of God and the royal family to your conjugal
match philosophy is a little far-fetched. I never suspected it but what
brand of Bourbon are you on tonight? I recognise the symptoms.

(Funny smiley)
----
Reg.

Yeah, Reg, I must have been on something pretty strong when I said that, but I
can't remember what it was.

Another subject.: I'm wondering if I have your correct email address. During the
past two years, or more, I've sent you several emails with no response. Yet you
respond to my posts on this rraa in a cordial and friendly manner. In one of my
emails I asked if I had said something that offended you so that I could
apologize, but no response. During a cruise on the North and Baltic Seas two
years ago I was in London at both the beginning and end of the cruise. I emailed
you twice while in London and three times from the ship, asking for your phone
number so I talk with you to learn how to find you for a visit.

I first used the address you show on your posts with the 'zzz', but it came
back--wrong address. I then used your address without the 'zzz' with no
response. Can you help me understand what went wrong, because I really wanted to
meet you while in England.

Walt

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 23:17:56 -0500, (Richard Harrison)
wrote:


Well written explanation. Maybe next year? My 5 year old granddaughter,
a student in Queen`s College, enjoyed the Hyde Park Lido, so the outing
was rewarding anyway.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard, I had finished my first college semester while still 16, but your
5-year old granddaughter a student in Queen's College? From your genes? Were you
a PhD at ten or twelve? Holy Gee Whiz!

Walt

On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 05:47:51 GMT, Richard Clark wrote:

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 23:17:56 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:

Reg wrote:
"Really Walt, the introduction of God and the royal family to your
conjugal match philosophy is a little far-fetched."

They like to be on the right side too, but sometimes even the royals are
wrong.

Perhaps Reggie is more a fan of the Sex Pistols:
"God save the Queen
the fascist regime,
they made you a moron
a potential H-bomb."
(my regrets to G&S)

Apparently the only G&S the Pistols knew about was 'Pirates'.