[Milsurplus] TCM-2

[Richard]

That's pretty close.  My TBW, with guaranteed output of 100 Watts, (from 
memory) measures 190 Watts.  Two 803's should be at least 380 Watts.  
Noting that the TBW has no parasitic suppressors, the 803 is probably 
more stabile and a better choice than the 813 and other beam-power tubes.

Richard, AA1P


On 07/05/2017 01:04 AM, Kenneth G. Gordon wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2017 at 3:13, howard holden wrote:
>
>> Looking at the tube lineup it's a GO-9  (or a TBW) on steroids.....should be a fun rig to operate.
> Yes. That was kinda what I figured too.
>
> The pair of 803s will operate within specifications at 350 watts input each. Output will be
> slightly more than 400 watts for the pair.
>
> That "Navy-rated 125 watts output..." means, "Tune it up into an antenna, put a brick on the
> key, and come back in a month or so and it will still be outputting 125 watts." ;-)
>
> A pair of 813s isn't all that much better at the same voltage: 2KV.
>
> Funny thing is, both are rated at 125 watts plate dissipation. The 813's plate dissipation rating
> is actually closer to 250 watts, though.
>
> Anyway, it is fun to speculate.
>
> I don't understand why more hams didn't jump on the TCM. It would have been a perfect ham
> rig for CW. It is small, it is VFO controlled, it covers all the main ham bands, its power
> requirements are reasonable, it is very stable, keying sounds very good. Maybe there weren't
> very many of them made. I dunno. It is a really neat rig.
>
> Ken W7EKB
>
>