[Milsurplus] TCS-12 AM output.

[Kenneth G. Gordon]

On 27 Apr 2019 at 19:44, Hubert Miller wrote:

> In the examples I gave of the 3BZ coastwatcher radio and the maybe
> suitability of the Navy TCH, you DO want to squeeze all the AM watts
> you can get. The TCH has an AM output up to 1/3 the CW output.  This is
> very approximately -6 dB from CW. But -some coastwatchers were not
> trained in CW - by those I mean the Australian civilian observers - so
> had to use AM or nothing to communicate. In this case, with low power,
> the extra watts might mean the difference between message got through
> and "heard carrier, couldn't make out rest."

Yes. That is true. But in the case of "up-grading" the TCS, we are talking about ham radio 
usage. In such a case, the added 10 or-so watts PEP won't even be noticed by the receiving 
op.

AM is "difficult" anyway: 2/3 of the transmitter power is in the "carrier" with only 1/3 in the 
useful sidebands. 

I've never been a fan of AM. It always seemed such an ineffecient means of communication 
to me. Which is one of the biggest reasons I've always liked CW. Controlled-carrier AM is, 
at least, a BIT more efficient. Some 20% more, as I recall it.

In addition, CC-AM works much better with a linear-amp, and is far less expensive to 
implement, neither requiring a second heavy-duty power supply, nor any "heavy iron"..

> My opinion anyway. -Hue 

Same here. :-)

Ken