AH6RR -- Please, don't malign me.  I did design the AT-AUTO and I own all of the rights to it as well as the firmware Copyright.  I do support this tuner in the form of (free) firmware updates as well as repair and upgrade.  I answer the phone and e-mail EVERY day, including Saturday & Sunday.  Not just on Tuesdays, etc., as you have repeated here.

You (and anyone else) are welcome to contact me.  Please peruse my website and you'll see that I do indeed support this tuner.  I also think you will find that those folks that have dealt with me and my company are very pleased with the service that I provide.  I (thankfully!) no longer have any involvement with palstar (buzmeg).  To set the record straight -- I did file suit against them twice... So, when/if you phone them, do not expect them to represent me or my interests, etc. in a charitable or truthful fashion.   

FWIW:  I'm sure I've never been contacted by "your friend".  However, I've been contacted by many folks and have serviced many AT-AUTOs.  Please have your friend contact me directly (via my website) and I think he will be pleased with the actual (non-palstar) reality.  Search for my name and AT-AUTO and you'll find my website.

Thanks & 73,
Don Kessler

Try a Cooper Bussmann KLM-15 fuse.  Be prepared for sticker shock!

Mouser usually stocks them. 

Folks,

I'm going to partially weigh-in here.  I know ALL of the history behind these amps.  Most of the history is not important or is otherwise not appropriate for this venue.

I agree with Dan (KK3AN).  But I'm not at all unbiased -- just a warning up front.

I was involved in the original purchase of these amps from An Wireless by Palstar.  At the time, I knew these amps needed re-design and I ended up spending the next 14+ months redesigning the entire line of amplifiers.  This is the amplifier line that AN Wireless took back from Palstar.  These reasons will probably not be disclosed (certainly not by me).

The original Commander amplifier designs were terribly antiquated, with lots of undocumented changes, and most of these components are now obsolete or are otherwise "unobtainium."  These were OK designs in the 1980s, but were quite problematic and not up to contemporary standards for form, fit, or function.  After redesigning these amplifiers, the decision was made by Palstar not to support the legacy amplifiers.  I agreed with that position as I was one of the persons behind that decision.   The primary reason was obsolescence of the original design, but also due to the fact that some inherent problems, while engineered-out of the redesigned amps, were not feasible to "cure" by retrofit into the legacy amplifiers.  It is difficult (at least for me from an ethical standpoint -- my perspective only) to implement a repair in a legacy amplifier, knowing that the underlying problem/cause for failure remains, even after the repair.  One such example is the fact that the toroidal coil used in the tank for 160-80-40m operation would "melt down" when running high power on 80 or 40m.  This is not "preventable" in the stock legacy amplifier...

There are certainly others (as mentioned by Dan) that do service these legacy amplifiers and do a good job of it.  It made sense at the time, and it still does to me at least, to continue to endorse these other repair facilities that do service the legacy amplifiers. 

The decision by Palstar, and now by AN Wireless (Dedicated RF) not support the legacy amplifiers is one that I absolutely agree with.  This is not always an easy decision to make as one risks possible alienation of owners of legacy Commander amplifiers, but I think it is a necessary one.  I think most folks will recognize that this is also a reasoned and reasonable decision.  The last time I checked, neither Collins or Drake (both companies are still doing business) service Collins or Drake ham amplifiers.  It does not make sense for them to do so.

Again, just my biased 2 cents, but I agree with Dedicated RF's position on this issue and I would (and definitely will) recommend them to others.

Thanks,
Don

You might try this link:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/KesslerEngineering_ATAUTO/

Thanks,
Don

Al,

Hello.  I just read your e-ham posting. 

I fail to see why I should be included in this forum topic as it was Palstar's decision to get out of the amplifier business.  This was a business decision between Palstar and AN Wireless.  It most certainly did NOT involve/concern me.

While you are certainly free to post anything that you wish, when it involves me, I would ask (and expect) that you only post something that you have first-hand knowledge about and that your posting be factually correct -- Your's isn't.  It is obvious that Paul has your ear, but I must say that based upon your comments, that you are most profoundly misinformed!

You are probably aware that I have brought legal suit against Paul both in Civil court and in Federal court and that these legal issues are still on-going.  Paul Hrivnak knows fully well why I left, and the exact circumstances, etc.  I will not comment further, however, the details as you relayed them on e-ham are simply WRONG. 

While I'm not going to ask that you correct/amend/remove them, I'm certainly going to forward them to my attorneys as Mr. Hrivnak and I are legally compelled not to disparage each other. 

Rest assured, your expressed intention not to do business with me is certainly welcome.  You and I have conducted no prior business, nor have we had any other involvement with each other whatsoever (as far as I know).  Based upon that, I would ask that you not comment on me, nor my business since you have no factual basis for such (negative) comments.  I think you will find that those with whom I have done business with do NOT share your opinion.

Furthermore, I do NOT understand the basis in fact, nor the motivation for your negative comments regarding AN Wireless.  Period!  I personally know the owner (Dan Simmonds) and I will attest that he is a person of integrity, and a genuine "stand-up guy".  I would most certainly conduct business with him with NO hesitation or reservations.  So unless you have first-hand knowledge to the contrary which you are willing to share, I respectfully suggest that you also not disparage AN Wireless or Dan Simmonds.  Dan runs a fine business, has a well-deserved outstanding reputation, and lots of repeat customers. 

Cheap shots and innuendo like your's have no place here or elsewhere!

Respectfully,
Don Kessler

Folks,

I am earnestly seeking your assistance.  Please contact me directly if you have done any of the following AFTER 30 July, 2010

1.  You have purchased an AT-AUTO directly from Palstar

OR

2.  Purchased an AT-AUTO via E-Bay from seller "Soundzgud"

OR

3.  Had Palstar perform the QRO Keyline Upgrade

OR

4.  Had any AT-AUTO service from Palstar that included uploading or upgrading the firmware.

OR

5. Had any AT-AUTO service from Palstar that involved installing a new AT-AUTO control board

Any information you can provide is greatly appreciated.

Thanks & 73,
Don

Folks,

I am earnestly seeking your assistance.  Please contact me directly if you have done any of the following AFTER 30 July, 2010

1.  You have purchased an AT-AUTO directly from Palstar

OR

2.  Purchased an AT-AUTO via E-Bay from seller "Soundzgud"

OR

3.  Had Palstar perform the QRO Keyline Upgrade

OR

4.  Had any AT-AUTO service from Palstar that included uploading or upgrading the firmware.

OR

5. Had any AT-AUTO service from Palstar that involved installing a new AT-AUTO control board

Any information you can provide is greatly appreciated.  

Thanks & 73,
Don

OK -- Thanks.  I didn't mean to make it so, but thanks for the input.
Don

Folks,

I need your input.  Please weigh in and tell me if I am off-base... 

Palstar sells a product, can't/won't provide tech support and then passes their unsupported customer to me, expecting me to honor their obligation to support THEIR customer.  Palstar makes money, leaves their customer high and dry, and I haven't made a penny.

The customer then contacts me for help (which I willingly provide).

I don't think it appropriate of Paul/Palstar to leave their customer's in limbo but more significantly -- I think it is extremely unprofessional to then totally screw their customer and then pawn their tech support obligations off onto me. 

I sympathize with the plight of (my competitors') customers so I answer questions and provide tech support and hope to make them a future customer of mine.  Shouldn't Palstar/Paul actually provide support to their customers instead of pawning them off?

The text below is a portion of a recent e-mail I received.  I've received a number of similar requests from customers who are not getting proper support from Palstar.  Please let me know your comments.

Thanks!
Don

>I spoke with Paul at Palstar this morning about the interface cable I
> bought from Palstar to work with my new Flex5000A and the AT-AUTO tuner I
> bought several months ago.  The cable they sold me is labeled "Kenwood
> Cable AT-AUTO".  One end has a round 5-pin connector; the other end is a
> white plastic six pin connector 3 over 3.  In looking at the back panel of
> the two devices, there is a round connector on the AT-AUTO.  However, there
> is no connector on the Flex500A for the other end.
>
>
>
> Adding to my frustration, Paul pleaded ignorance of the specific
> connections even suggesting that I call Flex support.  He then gave me your
> email address as the one who designed the connector cable.

I just want to express my thanks again for all of the words of encouragement and support.  The future looks much brighter now!

73,
Don

Would anyone be interested in a liquid cooling option?  This would be more complicated, but would make it much quieter.

Thanks,
Don

I can't go into very much detail but things at Palstar were not as I thought they should been and I left in February, 2010.  I filed a lawsuit and we settled out of court.  As of 10 June, 2010 I own exclusive rights to the AT-AUTO.  After 30 July, 2010, Palstar is no longer permitted to manufacture, market, sell, etc., the AT-AUTO. 

I wish to express my thanks to all of the folks who have been so very supportive throughout this entire ordeal.  Sorry, but I don't care to discuss palstar or its owner.

That said, I am currently revising the AT-AUTO hardware design to provide additional features (USB, etc.) and to generally update the performance.  I'll be standing up a website soon with more details.

I'm also seriously considering making a fully-automatic QRO amplifier kit that would interface automatically with the AT-AUTO...

Thanks,
Don

Mike,

Thanks for the info.  I know that Greenstone is marketing an 8877 clone but just not sure how attractive the tube would be -- I thought they were being built in Vietnam.  Also I believe that the pentalabs tube structures are made somewhere in Asia, but the tube itself is then assembled in the US, using the asian-made components.  I might be wrong on that however.

Back to the kit amp...
I think this is a very interesting issue.  Part 97.313, etc., are standards that affect everyone -- hams as well as manufacturers.  But I think I'm missing your point.  If the other manufacturers are able to meet these specifications, then why wouldn't the kit amp also be able to meet these same specs if properly engineered and manufactured?

97.313 specifies maximum permissable power, etc.  There are amps sold now that can exceed these limitations but are still legal for sale in the US.  It is the responsibility of the operator to adhere to the power level rules, etc.  As far as harmonic regulation, etc., that is up to the designer (me in this case) to come up with a design and implementation that adheres to and achieves the mandated emission specifications.  I agree that the kit would certainly need to meet all such requirements for spectral purity, etc., but clearly this has been achieveable by the other manufacturers.  Why would a well designed & engineered "kit" not be able to similarly & consistantly meet such performance specifications?  I would be very interested in speaking with you directly about this -- You've got plenty of expertise and I value your inputs.

Thanks,
Don

OK -- I've been struggling with the liability aspects of the kit amp, and I think the associated risks could be addressed.  Several folks have highlighted probably the other greatest single motivator -- price.  Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty darn frugal with my money -- I'm currently in a 12-step program for recovering cheapskates...

The amplifier that I am contemplating will have features that most QRO+ tube amplifers do not have such as automatic tuning, etc.  It is difficult to compete with the manual tune amps like Ameritron, etc., on price, even if the labor costs are reduced due to it being a kit.  I'm not bashing Ameritron or any other amplifier manufacturer -- I'm just using them as an example since others have used them as a cost comparison.  They do in-fact provide good value per dollar.

My preference would be to stick with American made tubes.  However, in this day and age, that pretty much limits the choice to Eimac (CPI).  In doing so, I end up paying a premium for tube(s), probably making the amplifier unattractive when looking at it purely on the basis of price.

The question that I'm build up to in a long-winded fashion is this:  Would the perceived value of the kit amplifier diminish it if used a foreign tube?  Some sources have dried up or have also become quite expensive, and I worry about future availability.

First -- Thanks to everyone for commenting.  This is something that I am definitely interested in doing, but it is still just a notion at this point -- nothing more yet.  The biggest worry isn't pricing, etc.,  It all comes down to potential for litigation.  This will have to be managed before I could go further.  I really think that this could be priced attractively and still be profitable.  I'll have to really examine the costing to make a definitive conclusion.

All that said, I know from recent experience, that a "kit company" can certainly source parts much more reasonably than an individual could.  The biggest single expense (except possibly the tube(s)) is the cost to assemble.  This cost would be transferred to the consumer as he has to assemble it. 

Solid-state is attractive from the "no tuning" perspective, but finding one that is clean and will produce 1500W CW, continuously would be a very tall order and extremely expensive.  Also, replacing finals in a solid-state amp is often problematic.  Much of the attraction of a solid-state amp wanes when compared to a full power, auto-tune amplifier.

Thanks again for all of the comments -- please keep them coming.

73,
Don