Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20997 invoked from network); 29 May 2002 02:16:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO marstons.services.quay.plus.net) (212.159.14.223) by exhibition.plus.net with SMTP; 29 May 2002 02:16:50 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: (qmail 24529 invoked by uid 10001); 29 May 2002 02:20:41 -0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (193.82.116.70) by marstons.services.quay.plus.net with SMTP; 29 May 2002 02:20:41 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.33 #2) id 17CsuM-0004v6-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 29 May 2002 03:09:50 +0100 Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com ([64.12.136.7]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 17CsuL-0004uZ-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 29 May 2002 03:09:49 +0100 Received: from WarmSpgs@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id l.cf.17be8c09 (4242) for ; Tue, 28 May 2002 22:09:09 -0400 (EDT) From: WarmSpgs@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:09:09 EDT Subject: Re: LF: Loop Amperage ~~~~~~ To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 120 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In a message dated 5/28/02 7:30:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, William.Ashlock@edwards.boc.com writes: << So, it appears that all I am doing, when power limited like this, is to spread out the 1KW power loss over a larger portion of the back woods! But at least it's doable. Comments, please. >> Do-able, but hopefully with less loss, given that it appears we'll be stuck with a 100 watt TPO limit instead of 1 kw. And, unless some of the commenters make some very persuasive arguments, we'll be stuck with 1 w EIRP, rather than 1 w ERP...a very significant 2+ db difference. 73, John