Message-ID: <4BA11B44.4020103@gmx.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:11:16 -0500
From: "Mike.WE0H" <we0h@gmx.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <000c01cac5f1$3fac3100$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <9afca2641003171010o6d43092fl20f121eaaa6a9d50@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9afca2641003171010o6d43092fl20f121eaaa6a9d50@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LF: 9 kcs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Awesome news Mal!!! Go for it and remember as the YL's would say, bigger 
is better...hi hi


Big power and big antennas OM...

Mike
WE0H




Roger L wrote:
> Now your really talking Mal. We all hope you go ahead with this.
> 
> 73s
> Roger G3XBM



> 
> On 17 March 2010 16:45, g3kev-Mal wrote:
> 
>     If I get time and a NOV for 9 kcs my proposed approach for TX would
>     be an IC 706 on 900 kcs divided by 100/driver chip TC 4427 and a
>     couple of FETS class D for an output of a few hundred watts,
>     designed for 50 ohms, 50 ohm coax to antenna 200 feet away from
>     shack as at present for 137 and 500 kcs.
>     Use the existing 1/4 wave inv L for 500 plus 2 additional ones same
>     spec all in parallel and base loaded by inductor to resonate on 9
>     kcs, use existing ground radial system not too elaborate. Antenna
>     height is approx 100 ft vertical and the rest to make up the 1/4
>     wave is horizontal.
>     The speculators, gamblers and dreamers might be able to guess what
>     distance I might cover.
>     Let me compare your figures !!
>     Assume pwr to be 400 watts at base of antenna.
>     Using 9 kcs figure for convenience, but 8970 kcs would prob be the qrg
>      
>      
>     de mal/g3kev