Can you try the vanilla SiHF520 for the next test, I'd be very interested in how they perform!
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
ERF2030+ new version indestructible?
- Thread starter rabbiporkchop
- Start date
I'm not the guy that did the test and I think it would be difficult to convince him to try testing other components in a similar manner.
Guess he really isn't an experimenter in that sense, okay just throwing suggestions out there.
I would do it here, but I don't own any Stryker radios...
73
He risks burning traces and permanently destroying a radio every time he does one of these experiments. I think he's just trying to figure out the limitations of this particular transistor. I guess he figures that he found something good and there's no point in looking for something else.
Last edited:
If you're willing to provide the radio I'm sure he'd be willing to do the test
Never refer to anything as "indestructible". There are those who see that as a personal challenge.
I'd still like to see how long they last with a direct short. He only shorted it for a couple seconds here.
Last edited:
Me too! The power is not that great but instead of 4db gain, it has 16db gain. It takes very little input drive to get full power out. I would rather have 4X the gain and 1/3 the watts if I have to choose between the two. I get heard often over people with a lot more power. They have their gear setup so poorly they are wasting at least 50% of their power.
I hate liars more than anything else on this earth. Just like so many that sell things he is taking credit for thing he had nothing to do with. Palomar has not developed any technology. Palomars New Wafer Technology" just them being liars that is what pisses me off about companies like Stryker and Yeti.com when they take credit for designs they have had nothing to do with besides placing their name on it! You can not trust a liar!
I agree about liars, but what did he lie about?
Contrary to what some folks think, Eric is a semiconductor process engineer.
Last edited:
Just make sure the company that is doing the "wafer" and processing of the sand grain for Palomar is not going to sue Palomar if any Patents get infringed upon. The (Any - really) Manufacturer has machines that have proprietary technology that is being used for this process and didn't exist back then - Palomar may have made the circuit used in the package but is not responsible for the manufacturers processing. They have a contract - either way - he is finding a niche market for a product that works and keeps the manufacturer on the map and their employees working.
This is an international market issue, and copyrights and patents are the stuff that holds up any technological advancements and parts.
It would be saying that I have Motorola making a part for my radio - that I have designed myself - The radio or the part? Whom do I represent?
IF he submitted a design and has the patent - that is his business and liability - the company he is using to manufacture these parts has processes and technology to make his product is not represented when he says things like that. One can only represent the other. You don't want to make parts that make any FCC Type accepted radio - non- acceptable - else he would have been placing it in a TO-220 package - so I'm sure he doesn't want to rock the boat too much. You also don't want to take proprietary information and mis-represent the engineer either.
BUT - he doesn't want to lose that company - if another were to copy the idea and sell it as their own. The company he does business with could care less - they just want the $$$. Didn't we learn ANY LESSONS from Dynascan and Uniden - Tandy and Midland? It's the fact that the manufacturer itself can become the sole proprietor and force Palomar's hand. Uniden is an industry in itself.
So to say - one is unique - and the other isn't - is how I interpret the word "Liars". It goes hand in hand. It's a mis-representation and in some circles - an insult to the manufacturer and makes the company appear to represent more than it should - again - a liability as mis-representation of facts.
It's how RCI and Ranger Communications got into hot water.
:+> Andy <+:
This is an international market issue, and copyrights and patents are the stuff that holds up any technological advancements and parts.
It would be saying that I have Motorola making a part for my radio - that I have designed myself - The radio or the part? Whom do I represent?
IF he submitted a design and has the patent - that is his business and liability - the company he is using to manufacture these parts has processes and technology to make his product is not represented when he says things like that. One can only represent the other. You don't want to make parts that make any FCC Type accepted radio - non- acceptable - else he would have been placing it in a TO-220 package - so I'm sure he doesn't want to rock the boat too much. You also don't want to take proprietary information and mis-represent the engineer either.
BUT - he doesn't want to lose that company - if another were to copy the idea and sell it as their own. The company he does business with could care less - they just want the $$$. Didn't we learn ANY LESSONS from Dynascan and Uniden - Tandy and Midland? It's the fact that the manufacturer itself can become the sole proprietor and force Palomar's hand. Uniden is an industry in itself.
So to say - one is unique - and the other isn't - is how I interpret the word "Liars". It goes hand in hand. It's a mis-representation and in some circles - an insult to the manufacturer and makes the company appear to represent more than it should - again - a liability as mis-representation of facts.
It's how RCI and Ranger Communications got into hot water.
:+> Andy <+:
Well that's a surprise! Would serve to explain a thing or two.
At least HE knows what he's buying when he has his number printed on them.
73