Article: 101512 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: <@club-internet.fr> References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:06:38 +0100 Message-ID: <43d777e2$0$26399$7a628cd7@news.club-internet.fr> in french we say : "rançon de la gloire..." too much people for the same bandwith... "N9NEO" a écrit dans le message de news: 1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Bama sites seem to be getting more and more erratic. I've always used > the edebris site because I never had any probs. Now it's nothing but > probs just like the real BAMA SBC site. > > 73 > Bob > Article: 101513 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: ritchi50@optonline.net Subject: FS: TWINS Collins 32V-3 & Collins 75A-1 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:44:50 -0500 FS: TWINS Collins 32V-3 & Collins 75A-1 VERY nice shape both of them. The only thing that was repainted are the cabinets. Front panels look GREAT!! Price: 1800.00 Or 1000.00 for 32V-3 And 800.00 for the 75A-1 All plus shipping You can see picture on qrz.com or eham or qth.com ritchi50@optonline.net Article: 101514 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Bob W7AVK Subject: FS: CW Filter Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:45:23 -0800 FS: New Old Stock, never installed, optional CW Filter for several older Yeasu Rigs. Yeasu model number XF-455C, 8 pole, 500 hz bandwidth. $42 which inclucdes postage within USA 73 Bob W7AVK Article: 101515 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: Subject: Re: TWINS Collins 32V-3 & Collins 75A-1 Message-ID: <58OBf.15676$Jd.2335@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:59:45 GMT oh , oh , oh how nuch power does this 32-v put out? 600 w?? or maybe the 75-A1 receives strereo FM also. get lost wanker wrote in message news:a77ft1tmacj73lnpqoalcc2bb4uhf1b555@4ax.com... > FS: TWINS Collins 32V-3 & Collins 75A-1 > VERY nice shape both of them. > The only thing that was repainted are the cabinets. > Front panels look GREAT!! > Price: 1800.00 Or 1000.00 for 32V-3 And 800.00 for the > 75A-1 All plus shipping > You can see picture on qrz.com or eham or qth.com > ritchi50@optonline.net Article: 101516 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Edward Knobloch Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:07:50 GMT N9NEO wrote: > Bama sites seem to be getting more and more erratic. I've always used > the edebris site because I never had any probs. Now it's nothing but > probs just like the real BAMA SBC site. > > 73 > Bob > Hi, I've had good luck with the edebris site using FTP directly: ftp://216.24.174.245 Just remember not to try to download more than one document at a time, or you'll get the "Too Many Connections (1)" warning. The downloads are slow, but at least they happen. 73, Ed Knobloch Article: 101517 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: ritchi50@optonline.net Subject: FS: RCA 77-DX Microphone Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:06:51 -0500 I have forsale a RCA 77-DX Microphone. This is an old RCA Vintage Microphone and works great on my Collins 32V-3 I'm selling this microphone because I just don't use AM anymore. Looks great not beat up at all. Make offer, I'm ready to sell. Please don't ask how much, Just make offer. Thanks for reading my ad, also has the rca bag cover. ritchi50@optonline.net To see a picture go to: QRZ.COM Article: 101518 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: - exray - Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:38:18 -0400 Message-ID: <11tg6fst4hsaqc7@corp.supernews.com> References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138231981.617117.80130@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> N9NEO wrote: > > And lastly mr Knobloch I will try FTP. Thanks for the suggestion. I > think I may need an ftp client. No? Last time I used cute ftp, but > that was many years ago. > > regards, > Bob > N9NEO I see you are using Mozilla. Type in the ftp address as a URL and it may do the trick just fine. GL, Bill Article: 101519 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: Collins 32V-3 HF Transmitter NICE!!! Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:05:30 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3aoat1589n2cv0bgf8osbaituhaln7el1u@4ax.com> Gary (and anyone else who cares), since my last post, which responded to several other posts on the topic of PEP in an AM transmitter, I looked up some things and cleared up a major misunderstanding in my own mind. I will add that as comments to the part of your post, below, which is relevant to the issue. As far as all of your definitions below, PEP wattmeters, S-metes, SSB signals are concerned, I think you made a lot more mistakes than you realize. However, I'm going to delete all these irrelevant parts (most of what you said) and concentrate on the source of the confusion. I may make comments in a separate post on the parts I deleted fro this one. On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > > Let's review some definitions to start: > > AVERAGE POWER > > Average power is found by squaring RMS voltage and dividing by > resistance. Or RMS voltage times RMS current. > > > PEP > deleted > > PEP WATTMETERS > deleted > > > S METER READINGS > deleted > > > AM TRANSMITTER > deleted > > > CONVERTING RMS TO PEAK > deleted > > > AM LINEAR > deleted > > > POWER IN SIDE BANDS > deleted > > > PLATE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE DOUBLING Here is the crux of the problem. Earlier today I looked in my old RCA receiving tube manual and transmitting tube manuals at the transfer characteristics of many dozens of tubes and I looked at them with this question of PEP for an AM signal. I will incorporate some of what I learned as comments on your comments. The basic fact that I was not aware of is that there is an apparent conflict between the relationship between plate current and plate voltage if you look at the curves that show plate current as independent of plate voltage and then ask how do you get, on modulation, a peak input power four times the unmodulated input power so you can get a peak, on modulation, output power that is four times the unmodulated output power. > It is easiest to see with a triode tube that is plate modulated. Nah, "easiest" has nothing to do with it. Triode has nothing to do with it. The issue is that all of the triode transfer characteristics curves I saw showed plate current to be _proportional_ to plate current (but with offsets and some non-linearities, which are mostly unimportant). When I looked at all the tetrodes and pentode curves, then, yes, they all showed plate current independent of plate voltage. However, at any given plate voltage, plate current was also _proportional_ to screen voltage (also with and offset and some non-linearities). Now, it makes sense that if screen voltage is made proportional -- in some fashion (usually a screen voltage dropping resistor connected to the modulated plate supply)-- to plate voltage, then plate current will increase, or decrease, in parallel with plate voltage as modulator voltage adds, and subtracts, from the B+ plate voltage (all as the modulator output signal varies with audio input waveform) > Doubling the plate voltage will cause the plate current to also > double. >From the curves, the relationship between plate current and plate current might not always be exactly a 1:1 relationship, but to an approximation this doubling is an acceptable understanding. And, that is how, on peak input from modulation one gets four times unmodulated input, and output will be proportional to input which can be looked at as average or peak, but the peak output on modulation will also be four times unmodulated output. > That is if the tube is capable of providing enough emission. That is a separate issue and anyone designing a circuit and sellecting a tube for use needs to understand the specifications in the manuals. > This must be a linear function in order to avoid distortion when > modulating. Almost nothing is perfectly linear. All audio circuits will have measureable distortion (IM, harmonic, and others). The only criterion is whether the distortion is acceptable. > Tubes that are weak may not be able to provide this. That is one > reason that PEP may not fully reach 4 times the carrier power with > 100% modulation. I think for this issue one needs at least an oscilloscope to even start measuring and investigating what is going on (and they need to be wideband or sampling scopes, too). "Meters" are just indicators. > Screen grid tubes are not linear in this respect. Plate current is > somewhat independent of plate voltage. That is why you must also > partly modulate the screen along with the plate when using a screen > grid tube in the final. There is an equally important reason why you must, and preferably, fully modulate the screen voltage as well as the plate voltage (and this is almost never discussed). If you ever have screen voltage above plate voltage, then screen current will go up dramatically and so will screen heat dissipation. You could melt the screen grid with just one word into the microphone. You can blow the screen grid almost instantly just by accidentally having screen voltage present without plate voltage. You want to have a linear plate voltage to > plate current relationship. > > This is also why a lot of broadcast transmitters use triodes in the > final. Easier to maintain linear modulation. I think, if you looked at as many transfer characteristics, as I did earlier today, for transmitting tubes, you might appreciate that there is more heterogeneity between triodes than tetrodes or pentodes in terms of plate I/V relationships. Broadcast AM transmitters never gave us any kind of high fidelity so linearity was never that much of an issue. In broadcasst FM transmitters, power and voltage linearity anywhere in the RF chain was irrelevant. > > HANDBOOK > > All this can be found in the AM section in some of the older > handbooks. I was never very satisfied with much in the handbooks, whether early or late. >The newer ones do not cover AM very well. They are covering tubes and analog subjects less well, too. Everything is going digital, solid stae, chips, and software. Art, W4PON > 73 > Gary K4FMX > > > > Article: 101520 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500 Message-ID: Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube manual). This is a KW input class C triode. >From the curve: at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current 2 kV 500 ma That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current 4 kV 750 ma looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with reality is pure conjecture. If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about peak (instantaneous) output power. Article: 101521 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: " Uncle Peter" References: Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Message-ID: <9kXBf.14911$bF.14484@dukeread07> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:26:52 -0500 "Straydog" wrote in message news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0601252142230.9221@panix3.panix.com... > > Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope > power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing > of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than > the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare > or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! > Terman explains how high-level Class C modulation works in Radio Engineering (1932 edition) on page 370. Article: 101522 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Clif Holland" References: Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:47:46 GMT Are you as dumb as you seem?? -- Clif "Straydog" wrote in message news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0601252142230.9221@panix3.panix.com... > > Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope > power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing of > tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than the > impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare or > almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! > > Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube > manual). This is a KW input class C triode. > > From the curve: > at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current > 2 kV 500 ma > That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp > > at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current > 4 kV 750 ma > > looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 > a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near > linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero > current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated > slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, > current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 > miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, and > at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be > doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. > > My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start > with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions > about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like > 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with > reality is pure conjecture. > > If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter > output > and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load > and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then > and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about > peak (instantaneous) output power. > Article: 101523 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Message-ID: <43D871CA.70E7A98B@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:53:53 GMT N9NEO wrote: > > Mr Terrell, > > I am an old Tin Can Sailor Outta Pearl and have a DD214 as well. Thanks > for your service, and prey for our young children in the military, and > for those we have lost and for their survivors. Thank you for your time in the service as well, Bob. The sig is being used because of a few derogatory comments made to me online about US Veterans, and my work with local Veterans. I am 100% disabled veteran, but I volunteer my time for the local Vets helping Vets" program, as well as help provide working computers to local disabled and disadvantaged Veterans in Marion County. My latest information is that there are over 48,000 Veterans in Marion County and a lot are either senior citizens, or disabled, so much so that the VA recently opened a second outpatient clinic in Marion County, and is expanding the VA hospital in Gainsville due to the heavy workload. Also, due to the warm climate and the large protected areas of the Ocala national Forest there were a little over 2000 homeless veterans living among the trees in makeshift camps about a year ago. Its had to help most of them because they were told "NO" so many times in the past that they don't trust people who do offer to help. We are working an another round of having volunteer doctors and dentists visit the more populated areas in mid April to try once again to help some of them back into society. We already try to provide them with food and clothing, but most won't leave their camp for fear of it being raided or torn down while they are gone. Its a very sad place to visit. BTW, I hope you meant to say "Pray", not "Prey" Lousy spell checkers! ;-) > And lastly mr Knobloch I will try FTP. Thanks for the suggestion. I > think I may need an ftp client. No? Last time I used cute ftp, but > that was many years ago. > > regards, > Bob > N9NEO "Cute FTP" from Coffee Cup Software is available all over the web for free. If you have trouble finding it just e-mail me and I'll get a copy to you. I got my copy from one of the "Web Builder" CDROMS. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 101524 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Doug Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:47:10 GMT On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope >power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing >of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than >the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare >or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! > >Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube >manual). This is a KW input class C triode. > >From the curve: >at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current > 2 kV 500 ma >That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp > >at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current > 4 kV 750 ma > >looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 >a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near >linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero >current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated >slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, >current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 >miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, >and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be >doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. > >My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start >with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions >about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like >400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with >reality is pure conjecture. > >If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output >and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load >and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then >and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about >peak (instantaneous) output power. Methinks you are way too hung up on the abtract theory of how linear tubes are. In practice the majority of AM transmitters rated at 100 watts of carrier output are indeed putting out 400 watts PEP with 100% modulation. As another poster pointed out, this is easily proved by using an oscilloscope or with SOME Peak reading wattmeters. The FCC certainly agrees with the 4:1 ratio. That's why when the Amateur power levels permitted by the FCC in the USA were raised to 1500 watts output PEP, the net result was that users of A.M had to REDUCE carrier power to approximately 375 watts output. Many diehard AM'ers and even the ARRL vigorously protested this net reduction of power for AM use. As I remember the FCC grandfathered the old power limit of 1000 watts DC input to the final amplifier for Am'ers but only did so for a couple of years. Back in the good old days, I used to run a Technical Materiel Corp GPT-750 AM transmitter on 3885KHZ. I ran 1KW DC input on the plate with 100% modualtion. That required a 500 watt modulator in the transmitter. The pair of 4-400A's in the rig easily achieved a power output of 800 watts under class C high level modulation. Thus I was legally running 3200 watts PEP output power. The power supply exceeded 3000 volts and was rated at 1.5 amps CCS, easily achieving the peak power demands.. You are sort of beating a dead horse. this was extensively discussed everywhere in Amateur circles about a decade ago. Doug/WA1TUT Article: 101525 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "NORMAN TRIANTAFILOS" Subject: test Message-ID: <%o7Cf.37346$Le2.34994@trnddc04> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:11:23 GMT test Article: 101526 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: <3aoat1589n2cv0bgf8osbaituhaln7el1u@4ax.com> <6xwBf.11951$bF.2404@dukeread07> <9jadt1lhkf6n6kpvd74t1bc8d7hodngtq0@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Collins 32V-3 HF Transmitter NICE!!! Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:59:43 GMT Good explanantion! "Gary Schafer" wrote in message news:ej7ft11qo9ncn2cc8ct05k6hf9t4ckbtqg@4ax.com... > > Let's review some definitions to start: > > AVERAGE POWER > > Average power is found by squaring RMS voltage and dividing by > resistance. Or RMS voltage times RMS current. > > > PEP > > It helps to fully understand exactly what PEP is in an SSB > transmitter. Then it is easier to see in an AM transmitter. > > Peak envelope power is important because that is how the FCC defines > how much power we can run. > > Let's look at the FCC definition of Peak Envelope Power: > > "Peak envelope power output of a transmitter is the AVERAGE power at > the crest of the modulation envelope over at least one rf cycle." > > NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH AVERAGE POWER READ ON A METER as it swings > around! > > If you think about what that is saying it will make sense. If you > transmit just a carrier with an SSB transmitter of say 100 watts. That > is 100 watts average power output. It is also 100 watts PEP output. > (in this case the envelope is infinitly long) If you were to key it on > and off in the CW mode the power relationship would be the same. 100 > watts PEP on each CW dash or dot sent. > > If you now switch to the SSB mode and modulate the transmitter so that > the peaks on the scope looking at that signal reach the same height, > the transmitter will be putting out 100 watts PEP. > > If you were to modulate that same SSB transmitter with 2 equal > amplitude tones you would get a scope pattern that looks similar to an > AM signal modulated with a single tone. The crest (or peak) of the > waveform represents 100 watts PEP same as with voice but with the > tones it is easier to see as the waveform will be stable. > > If you were to increase the speed of the time base on the scope and > spread the waveform out you would see that each crest of the audio > wave form has within it many cycles of the RF frequency. These many > cycles of RF are the AVERAGE power contained in the signal. > > You will note that the maximum AVERAGE power is only reached for > several RF cycles at the crest of each audio cycle. > > This is what is known as PEAK ENVELOPE POWER. (see definition above > again) > > > PEP WATTMETERS > > A true PEP reading watt meter will show the peak envelope power of the > above signals as described. > There are a lot of so called PEP watt meters on the market. Not all > are able to properly read. Even the Bird meters have problems with > some types of wave forms. > > > S METER READINGS > > S meter readings will vary according the particular receiver being > used but most all S meters are peak responding circuits. Most will > read pretty close to the peak values, depending on the decay time of > the circuit some may not hang up there like others do. If you think > about it if you have ever been plagued with pulse noise like ignition > noise it only takes a very narrow pulse occurring at a rather slow > rate to hold the S meter up high. Increasing the rate will not > increase the meter reading. > > Likewise with an SSB signal, once the station is transmitting his peak > power on a regular basis, increasing mike gain or increasing > compression will not raise the S meter reading maximum. > > The AVC circuit in the receiver must respond to the peaks or the > receiver would overload the detector if the gain was not cut back when > a peak was received. The S meter reads AVC voltage. > > > AM TRANSMITTER > > It is best to try and understand the output signal of the AM > transmitter before trying to coralate it with what goes on at the > input side. Swapping back and forth can be confusing. > > Take our 100 watt carrier output transmitter again. Measuring the > output voltage of the RF we find that it is 70.7 volts RMS across our > 50 ohm load. P = I squared / R so 70.7 x 70.7 = 5000. 5000/50 = 100 > watts. > > Let's modulate 100% with a single audio tone. We get out of it a 100 > watt carrier and two 25 watt side bands. 3 distinct signals. As you > stated before the carrier always remains constant. > > If we look at the output signal on our scope we will see that it looks > similar to the SSB signal that was modulated with 2 tones. We see the > modulation envelope. We can again expand the scope's time base and > look at the RF cycles within each modulation peak. Same as with the > SSB signal, at the crest of the modulation envelope is the peak > envelope power of the composite signal. > > Now let's get back to measuring that PEP. We know that the carrier > alone had a power of 100 watts which produced 70.7 volts across a 50 > ohm load. If we look at the scope with and without modulation we see > that the voltage output doubles with modulation so it will be 141.4 > volts RMS at the crest of the modulation wave form. > Again P = E squared /R. 141.4 x 141.4 = 20000. 20000 / 50 = 400 watts > PEP. > > If we were to measure this with a good PEP wattmeter we would see the > meter also indicate 400 watts PEP. > Again some so called PEP meters do not do well on this type of wave > form. The carrier tends to confuse the meter as it causes an offset > in the voltage being read by the meter and the meter tries to average > it so the net result is some gets subtracted from the reading. It is > due to the way in which the particular meter circuit operates. > > > CONVERTING RMS TO PEAK > > It would seem at first glance that you could find the peak power of > the 25 watt side bands and add things together but that doesn't work. > You can not convert power. THERE IS NO RMS IN POWER! > > There is a wide misconception that there is something called RMS > power. There is no such thing! There is only AVERAGE power and PEAK > power. (note the FCC definition of PEP) > > You find average power by using RMS voltage. But once you multiply or > divide, RMS term, the RMS goes away. > So once you have power you can not multiply it by 1.414 to find peak > power. > > To find peak power you must first add the voltages together or find > the peak voltage of an rms voltage by multiplying by 1.414 then > finding power. > > > AM LINEAR > > Operating an SSB transmitter and amplifier in the AM mode, if properly > set up, will produce exactly the same looking output signal as a plate > modulated AM transmitter. > > If we have an SSB amplifier that will put out 1000 watts PEP on SSB it > will also put out 1000 watts PEP on AM. > But in order to do so the carrier output must be limited to 250 watts > output. It must be tuned up in the CW mode for 1000 watts output. Then > when switching to AM the carrier is reduced to 250 watts output > without touching any tuning controls. The amplifier must still be > tuned to be able to produce the 1000 watt peak envelope output. > > When we modulate the 250 watt carrier with AM the peak envelope power > at 100% modulation will reach 1000 watts pep (or 4 times the carrier) > just as it did with the plate modulated AM transmitter. Looking at the > output with a scope we will see the voltage double with modulation > verses just the carrier. > > > POWER IN SIDE BANDS > > As a note is seems that having 2 side bands with the same information > in an AM signal is useless but it is not. > In the detector of the receiver the energy in both side bands combine > and add together. So rather than using only 1 side band of 25 watts > you are really using 50 watts of side band energy. So a 3 db addition. > There is also another 3 db gained in the detector because of the > voltage doubling with the side bands being coherent in the detector. > So the carrier is really the only thing wasted. > > > PLATE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE DOUBLING > > It is easiest to see with a triode tube that is plate modulated. > Doubling the plate voltage will cause the plate current to also > double. That is if the tube is capable of providing enough emission. > This must be a linear function in order to avoid distortion when > modulating. > > Tubes that are weak may not be able to provide this. That is one > reason that PEP may not fully reach 4 times the carrier power with > 100% modulation. > > Screen grid tubes are not linear in this respect. Plate current is > somewhat independent of plate voltage. That is why you must also > partly modulate the screen along with the plate when using a screen > grid tube in the final. You want to have a linear plate voltage to > plate current relationship. > > This is also why a lot of broadcast transmitters use triodes in the > final. Easier to maintain linear modulation. > > > HANDBOOK > > All this can be found in the AM section in some of the older > handbooks. The newer ones do not cover AM very well. > > 73 > Gary K4FMX > > > Article: 101527 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "NORMAN TRIANTAFILOS" Subject: test Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:51:52 GMT test My Logbook NORMS PLACE http://realham.blogspot.com Article: 101528 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: Collins 32V-3 HF Transmitter NICE!!! Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:26:21 -0500 Message-ID: References: On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:05:30 -0500, Straydog wrote: > > Everything that I commented on was to try and help you understand the > things that YOU brought up on the subject and apperently did not have > a full understanding of. Yes, and all of the threads, including my own reflection and further study, helped me develope a better understanding of an issue that never had been presented to me by others in a complete manner. This includes the apparent conflict between Ip/Vp curves which in all tetrodes and pentodes or nearly all that I've seen that show Ip independent of Vp over a range that would normally be used under real conditions in AM. I have more comments, below. >> >> Gary (and anyone else who cares), since my last post, which responded to >> several other posts on the topic of PEP in an AM transmitter, I looked up >> some things and cleared up a major misunderstanding in my own mind. I will >> add that as comments to the part of your post, below, which is relevant to >> the issue. As far as all of your definitions below, PEP wattmeters, >> S-metes, SSB signals are concerned, I think you made a lot more mistakes >> than you realize. However, I'm going to delete all these irrelevant parts >> (most of what you said) and concentrate on the source of the confusion. >> I may make comments in a separate post on the parts I deleted fro this >> one. > > Yes I would be interested in where I "made mistakes". > >> >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: >> >>> >>> Let's review some definitions to start: >>> >>> AVERAGE POWER >>> >>> Average power is found by squaring RMS voltage and dividing by >>> resistance. Or RMS voltage times RMS current. >>> >>> >>> PEP >>> >> deleted >>> >>> PEP WATTMETERS >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> S METER READINGS >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> AM TRANSMITTER >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> CONVERTING RMS TO PEAK >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> AM LINEAR >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> POWER IN SIDE BANDS >>> >> deleted >>> >>> >>> PLATE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE DOUBLING >> >> Here is the crux of the problem. Earlier today I looked in my old RCA >> receiving tube manual and transmitting tube manuals at the transfer >> characteristics of many dozens of tubes and I looked at them with this >> question of PEP for an AM signal. I will incorporate some of what I >> learned as comments on your comments. The basic fact that I was not aware >> of is that there is an apparent conflict between the relationship >> between plate current and plate voltage if you look at the curves that >> show plate current as independent of plate voltage and then ask how do you >> get, on modulation, a peak input power four times the unmodulated input >> power so you can get a peak, on modulation, output power that is four >> times the unmodulated output power. > > As I first explained, there is a direct relationship in a triode > between plate voltage and plate current. You (and others) talked about a doubling of plate current with a doubling of plate voltage and gave no basis for this statement. That is why I said "it is > easiest to see when looking at a triode". And, I stand by my comment below. > A tetrode does not have that same direct relationship so it gets a > little more complicated to modulate a tetrode. And, you can use the same phrase -- "direct relationship"-- for triodes vs tetrodes and above. It is just that the "direct relationship" will be different and anyone who compares the characteristics of two or more tubes will see that. >> >>> It is easiest to see with a triode tube that is plate modulated. >> >> Nah, "easiest" has nothing to do with it. Triode has nothing to do with >> it. >> >> The issue is that all of the triode transfer characteristics curves I saw >> showed plate current to be _proportional_ to plate current (but with >> offsets and some non-linearities, which are mostly unimportant). >> When I looked at all the tetrodes and pentode curves, then, yes, they all >> showed plate current independent of plate voltage. However, at any given >> plate voltage, plate current was also _proportional_ to screen voltage >> (also with and offset and some non-linearities). Now, it makes sense that >> if screen voltage is made proportional -- in some fashion (usually a >> screen voltage dropping resistor connected to the modulated plate supply)-- >> to plate voltage, then plate current will increase, or decrease, in >> parallel with plate voltage as modulator voltage adds, and subtracts, from >> the B+ plate voltage (all as the modulator output signal varies with audio >> input waveform) > > Operating almost as a triode as far as modulation goes. "almost" is another one of your mistakes because, "as far as modulation is goes," you will definitely need to modulate the screen grid which is in tetrodes and above but is irrelevant for a triode which has no screen grid. > Glad you understand. > > I assume that when you say "plate current and plate current" that you > mean to say plate voltage and plate current. Yeah, I make mistakes, too. Not my first, not my last. >> >>> Doubling the plate voltage will cause the plate current to also >>> double. >> >> From the curves, the relationship between plate current and plate current >> might not always be exactly a 1:1 relationship, but to an approximation >> this doubling is an acceptable understanding. And, that is how, on peak >> input from modulation one gets four times unmodulated input, and output >> will be proportional to input which can be looked at as average or peak, >> but the peak output on modulation will also be four times unmodulated >> output. > > The PEAK ENVELOPE POWER output will be 4 times the unmodulated output. > Re-read the deffinition of PEP which you deleted. Yeah, I read it. Some of us have heard the rumor that the FCC has lawyers write its material, not engineers. I wasn't too impressed with that definition, by the way. > One tries to operate the tubes in the most linear portion of the > curve. The non 1:1 relationship is called distortion. I would make a distinction between non-linearity and distortion. I can think of situations where non-linearity is part of a characteristic of a device or circuit but distortion (a word which is a specification on an output signal which is less than perfect) is irrelevant. >> >>> That is if the tube is capable of providing enough emission. >> >> That is a separate issue and anyone designing a circuit and sellecting a >> tube for use needs to understand the specifications in the manuals. > > It is not a seperate issue. It is an all important issue whether > operating or designing. The cause of not enough emission can be from > several causes. Too low fillimant voltage, It should be possible to assume that the tube has the correct fil voltage on it. > improper screen voltage, Why would anyone build a circuit and not understand the need for the proper screen voltage? > final loaded too heavy, Any time one sees output power go down with more loading, they should know better. > not enough grid drive, In a class-C amplifier with self-generated control grid drive, the plate current has always gone up in my tubes (sometimes this is mentioned in the manuals and handbooks). Or, the clamp tube limits the plate current (eg. Johnson Rangers) or fixed bias from a separate control grid bias supply limits plate current (I've had this, too, in my homebrew creations) or a cathode resistor (and I've done this, too, in one of my homebrew rigs). weak tube, etc. Any of > these can be the cause for low PEP compared to carrier power. All of the above are _abnormal_ situations or conditions. They are otherwise irrelevant to the fundamental question of the relationship between Ip and Vp and determining peak input power. >> >>> This must be a linear function in order to avoid distortion when >>> modulating. >> >> Almost nothing is perfectly linear. All audio circuits will have >> measureable distortion (IM, harmonic, and others). The only criterion is >> whether the distortion is acceptable. > > "Must be a linear function" denotes as near linear as practicable. Of > course nothing is perfectly linear. And, acceptable can range from specifications of 5-10% audio harmonic distortion given in equipment reviews for some older rigs compared to some of the most recent rigs which are much much lower (mostly for purists, not me) >> >>> Tubes that are weak may not be able to provide this. That is one >>> reason that PEP may not fully reach 4 times the carrier power with >>> 100% modulation. >> >> I think for this issue one needs at least an oscilloscope to even start >> measuring and investigating what is going on (and they need to be >> wideband or sampling scopes, too). "Meters" are just indicators. > > Yes indeed a scope is a must to properly set up an AM transmitter. It > also helps to understand what is happening. The reason I suggested > "looking at the wave form on a scope". I agree. > You do not need a wide band scope. Only one that will cover the RF > frequency that you are operating on. I have actually used both "narrow band" (DC to 500 kc) and "wide band" (DC to 20 mHz) scopes to do this and the narrow band scopes can have such a rapid decrease in sensitivity at the lowest ham bands that the only way to get vertical deflection is to raise the RF voltage up to hundreds of volts and you can't get that from a 50 watt rig without a RF transformer between the rig and the scope to raise the input voltage and then you may overheat the (usual) 1 megohm input swamping resistor in most scopes that is across the input terminals. This is another thing people need to think about before they just use "any old scope." The other option is to use a diode and capacitor (with an appropriate RC time constant) to measure the _envelope_ of the RF coming out of the transmitter, but I consider this kludge as a kludge to be avoided. >> >>> Screen grid tubes are not linear in this respect. Plate current is >>> somewhat independent of plate voltage. That is why you must also >>> partly modulate the screen along with the plate when using a screen >>> grid tube in the final. >> >> There is an equally important reason why you must, and preferably, fully >> modulate the screen voltage as well as the plate voltage (and this is >> almost never discussed). If you ever have screen voltage above plate >> voltage, then screen current will go up dramatically and so will screen >> heat dissipation. You could melt the screen grid with just one word into >> the microphone. You can blow the screen grid almost instantly just by >> accidentally having screen voltage present without plate voltage. > > It is not that great a problem. You can't say this without saying under what conditions it is not a great problem. The small external anode tubes (eg. 4X150, and on up) all have, in their spec sheets, a strict warning about losing plate voltage with screen voltage present. All of those physically small tubes have much lower max grid dissipations than the old big internal anode tubes. > Audio has a very low dity cycle. If > the screen is fed with a resistor the screen current will be somewhat > self limiting. There are many transmitters that get abused in this > manor. However it is best to control it properly. I think it unwise to present to people that this problem "is not that great" and you can't say things like "low duty cycle" when you also don't distinguish between voice typical duty cycle and a sine wave audio from a signal generator that could maybe triple the screen dissipation or more. Self limiting the screen current (with a screen bypass) may not be enough and even then an increased screen current for a continuous current (vs. a varying current with lower average value) could also damage the screen resistor. I would not treat this issue as lightly as you do. >> >> You want to have a linear plate voltage to >>> plate current relationship. >>> >>> This is also why a lot of broadcast transmitters use triodes in the >>> final. Easier to maintain linear modulation. >> >> I think, if you looked at as many transfer characteristics, as I did >> earlier today, for transmitting tubes, you might appreciate that there >> is more heterogeneity between triodes than tetrodes or pentodes in terms >> of plate I/V relationships. Broadcast AM transmitters never gave us any >> kind of high fidelity so linearity was never that much of an issue. > > As you learn more about AM transmitters you may change your mind on > this point. I am thankful that an issue that has bothered me for decades has been considerably cleared up in the last two days. However, although people here talked about Ip doubling with Vp, no one here explained the descrepancy between this claim and all of the tube curves that show Ip (in tetrodes) as independent of Vp! I had to put that one together by myself. Modulating the screen is not as linear as simply > modulating the plate of a triode. >From all the curves I saw of both triodes and all screen grid tubes I can only say that you can't say one is "not as linear" as the other without specifying the tubes to be considered AND going into technical details that are far beyond the scope of our discussion. > Simply modulating the screen along with the plate works well for some > type screen grid tubes but not others. Sometimes the amount of > modulation to the screen must be limited. You can overmodulate the > screen and have it cut off well before the plate voltage swings to the > cutoff point. It will have the same splatter effect as overmodulating > the plate. Other tubes need more audio applied to the screen to > modulate properly. > Distortion is usually highr when modulating a screen grid tube than > when modulating a triode. I would agree these are some of the details. I can think of more. >> In >> broadcasst FM transmitters, power and voltage linearity anywhere in the >> RF chain was irrelevant. > > I won't comment on FM transmitters for fear of being accused of > introducing extranious information to the thread. :>) Fine, I just wanted to give an example where linearity of any kind in the RF chain is irrelevant. >> >>> >>> HANDBOOK >>> >>> All this can be found in the AM section in some of the older >>> handbooks. >> >> I was never very satisfied with much in the handbooks, whether early or >> late. > > There is some good stuff in the older handbooks regarding AM. Its a mixed bag for me. And, I'm an old timer that appreciated simpler circuitry and the situation that because of that it is easier to understand what one is doing. All contemporary rigs are so complicated that a high understanding of what is going on requires much more study, repairs often require sending the rig off for long periods, and if the rig is even not that old but specific chips are no longer available then sometimes it is easier and simpler to repair and maintain the even older tube rigs for which discrete devices are still available and there is enough extra space inside for kludge fixes if restoration fixes are imp.ossible. My two cents irrelevant to the original subject). Art, W4PON > 73 > Gary K4FMX >> >> Art, W4PON >> >>> 73 >>> Gary K4FMX >>> >>> >>> >>> > > Article: 101529 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:31:08 -0500 Message-ID: References: On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >> >> Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope >> power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing >> of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than >> the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare >> or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! >> >> Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube >> manual). This is a KW input class C triode. >> >> From the curve: >> at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current >> 2 kV 500 ma >> That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp >> >> at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current >> 4 kV 750 ma >> >> looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 >> a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near >> linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero >> current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated >> slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, >> current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 >> miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, >> and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be >> doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. >> >> My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start >> with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions >> about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like >> 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with >> reality is pure conjecture. >> >> If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output >> and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load >> and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then >> and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about >> peak (instantaneous) output power. > > You can't just look at static curves. Consider that with AM modulation > there is usually grid leak bias on the final tube being modulated. > This allows the grid voltage to somewhat follow the modulation and > helps smooth out the non-linearity in the plate. This was discussed in the RCA transmitting tube manual, but it also referenced the technical references which go into this in much more detail. However, if you want to say "you can't just look at static curves" then you also can't just say "doubling plate voltage also doubles plate current" either. > If you have access to any of Termans books, as peter said, there is an > excellent section on how modulation works. > He in fact shows that "plate current follows plate voltage almost > exactly with modulation". His words. > > He also says that "triodes have considerably less distortion than > screen grid tubes". I will decline to check this but words and phrases like "almost exactly" and "considerably less" are unquantitative. > 73 > Gary K4FMX > Article: 101530 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:47:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Doug wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >> >> Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope >> power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing >> of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than >> the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare >> or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! >> >> Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube >> manual). This is a KW input class C triode. >> >> From the curve: >> at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current >> 2 kV 500 ma >> That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp >> >> at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current >> 4 kV 750 ma >> >> looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 >> a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near >> linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero >> current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated >> slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, >> current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 >> miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, >> and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be >> doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. >> >> My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start >> with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions >> about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like >> 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with >> reality is pure conjecture. >> >> If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output >> and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load >> and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then >> and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about >> peak (instantaneous) output power. > > Methinks you are way too hung up on the abtract theory of how linear > tubes are. > > In practice the majority of AM transmitters rated at 100 watts of > carrier output are indeed putting out 400 watts PEP with 100% > modulation. As another poster pointed out, this is easily proved by > using an oscilloscope or with SOME Peak reading wattmeters. Well, I'll buy into the scope measurement. I'll also buy into my prior incomplete understanding of Ip vs Vp relationships when the tube curves are looked at without realizing that screens have to be modulated as well as plates. I don't like wattmeters (with mechanical needles) that claim to indicate peak watts or have peak watt scales. But, that is my prejudice. > The FCC certainly agrees with the 4:1 ratio. That's why when the > Amateur power levels permitted by the FCC in the USA were raised to > 1500 watts output PEP, the net result was that users of A.M had to > REDUCE carrier power to approximately 375 watts output. I remember some of that. But at that time I was an SSB user only. > Many diehard AM'ers and even the ARRL vigorously protested this net > reduction of power for AM use. > As I remember the FCC grandfathered the old power limit of 1000 watts > DC input to the final amplifier for Am'ers but only did so for a > couple of years. > > Back in the good old days, I used to run a Technical Materiel Corp > GPT-750 AM transmitter on 3885KHZ. I ran 1KW DC input on the plate > with 100% modualtion. That required a 500 watt modulator in the > transmitter. The pair of 4-400A's in the rig easily achieved a power > output of 800 watts under class C high level modulation. > Thus I was legally running 3200 watts PEP output power. > The power supply exceeded 3000 volts and was rated at 1.5 amps CCS, > easily achieving the peak power demands.. And what do you do now? If you don't mind me taking a little more of your time. And, what about all these guys I hear on AM (160 & 75) who say they are running Johnson "Desks" at 1 kW input, and modified former AM broadcast transmitters with 833s in the final? > You are sort of beating a dead horse. this was extensively discussed > everywhere in Amateur circles about a decade ago. A decade ago I was not interested in anything AM. A decade ago I had nothing that would even come close to putting out any power that would have even made me have to think about this FCC specification. Recently, out of pure nostalgia, I partly restored a very chopped up Johnson Ranger and got it back on the air, on AM, to my considerable delight. Otherwise it was too chopped up for a full restoration (to include CW). Similarly, lots of things I was interested in a decade ago, I'm not interested in any more. And, I spend much more time at the bench now than at the microphone. Art, W4PON > Doug/WA1TUT > > Article: 101531 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:18:51 -0600 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: How to earn money with PAYPAL!!!! 37 References: <1137709653.497618.151660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <174c$43d041ea$18d6b488$14817@KNOLOGY.NET> <1137785765.969348.81760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <43d974fb$0$33682$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> hhc314@yahoo.com wrote: > Same here Cecil. > > The young kids don't have a clue about Social Security, because it > isn't important to them at their time in life, nor was it for me when I > was 25. None of us ever thought that we would live to see 65, hence it > was just like income tax, something that you simply had to pay. > > The problem is not for us elders, but for the younger people who will > hopefully someday reach 65. Today, most of these kids don't realize is > that the fault with the Social Security system is not in its basic > design, but what I beleve is called SSI that allows anyone regardless > of age to claim benefits unser Social Security by claiming some form of > disability, even if they have never contributed to the system. > > Just as an example, when I went to the Social Security office to claim > my earned beneits, I was the only American present in the waiting area > containing roughly 30 applicants. Most of these individuals were there > seeking SSI benefits, few were American citizens, and most had never > paid a dime into the system. This is precisely the problem that Social > Security faces. > > No wonder Social Security is in trouble. It is comparable to a > corporation that pays dividends to people that don't even own stock in > the company! > > 'Nuff said on that subject. > > Curmudgeonly yours, Harry C. > Social Security is in trouble because when they figured the original numbers, the average person lived to 65, so the government thought they would, more or less, never really have to pay anything significant out. That changed due to decent medical science, as most people in this group (rraa is where I am right now) are more than aware. Social Security has been busted for more than a couple decades, and none of the bastards in the Senate or Congress or the Administration have had the balls to let it just disappear. It is a dinosaur. And please note I never mentioned a party here, since all are guilty of just covering their asses just to get through another term. And, at 52, I am one of the people that's going to lose evcerything that the government stole from me and gave away in this deal, so don't start ripping me for not caring. Tom K0TAR Article: 101532 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: " Uncle Peter" References: Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:22:53 -0500 "Straydog" wrote in message news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0601252142230.9221@panix3.panix.com... > > > > looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 > a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near > linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero > current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated > slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, > current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 > miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, > and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be > doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. > > My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start > with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions > about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like > 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with > reality is pure conjecture. > > In some cases it is a lot easier to accept what is technically correct, and work backwards to correct erroneous conclusions. First, a Class C amplifier is driven into grid conduction, almost to the point of plate saturation. High Level AM modulation is applied to the SCREEN and PLATE, only doubling the plate voltage as in your 6F6 example to show a non linear relationship isn't a valid argument. What is the operating Class of the tube, and did you account for the modulating voltage also being applied to the screen grid? To quote Henny: "A linear relation must exist between plate voltage and tank circuit current for good operation... In such a modulated amplifier, the output peak will be four times the unmodulated carrier and the continuous power output with complete modulation is 1.5 times the power at zero modulation." Note that is only true for a true Class C power amplifier stage, and not for Class A or B. I doubt that Henny or Tenny based their texts on conjecture or misguided realities. Pete Article: 101533 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: " Uncle Peter" References: Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:29:00 -0500 " Uncle Peter" wrote in message news:cufCf.16380$bF.7979@dukeread07... > > I doubt that Henny or Tenny based their texts on conjecture or > misguided realities. > > Pete > > Henny or Terman!! Arggh! Typo. Article: 101540 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Message-ID: <43DA38F1.6000804@nucleus.com> From: Ken Subject: FS: Original RCA Rack Shelp Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:16:38 GMT I have an original RCA 19" rack shelf, for such items as the RCA BA6a or RCA 86A compressor Limiter The unit is in very good original condition,from 1950's, asking $125.00US I can send photos to interested parties Thanks Ken Gold 403-239-4956 Article: 101541 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:57:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:drcg4o$7mc$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > The harder the modulated tube is driven into class-C conditions and > saturation, the more linear does the plate modulation become. > > Operation of the tube becomes independent of curvature in the tube's > characteristic. The plate current operating angle is small. > It behaves more like an on/off switch. > > The more non-linear it is, the smaller the operating angle, the more > linear is the modulation. ====================================== PLATE MODULATION. It's really all very simple. Imagine a class-C triode amplifier with very small operating angle and running nearly into saturation. The plate load is a tuned tank circuit having a high impedance at resonance. Or it can be a Pi-tank circuit. Makes no difference! With the high impedance load, conditions are such that whatever is the DC plate voltage, the RF plate volts swing down to a very low plate-to-cathode voltage. Ideally it should be zero volts. But in practice it cannot fall below the positive, peak, instantaneous, RF grid volts. This corresponds to the instant of peak plate current. The RF voltage across the tank is then very nearly EQUAL to the DC plate voltage regardless of the tubes characteristic curves. Curvature doesn't matter. It is obscured by the small operating angle. The tube is conducting only for a small fraction of the time. Modulate the DC plate voltage at an audio frequency. With 100 percent modulation the DC plate voltage swings between a very low voltage and twice the DC supply volts. And so do the RF volts across the tank. The job is done. You have an almost perfect linearly modulated amplifier. It is necessary only to ensure grid drive is just sufficient to drive the tube into saturation when the DC plate volts is twice the DC supply volts. It will then remain saturated at all lower voltages. With a triode, saturation occurs when the RF plate voltage swings down to not much more than the peak RF grid volts. With a beam tetrode, saturation occurs when the RF plate voltage swings down only to something less than the DC screen-grid volts and 100 percent linear modulation cannot be achieved. But 100 percent modulation is always undesirable because of the risk of over-modulation. With a bipolar transistor, modulation can be even more linear because, with the high impedance tuned tank, the device saturates or 'bottoms' at very nearly zero RF collector volts. About 0.7 volts. ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 101542 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:32:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: "COLIN LAMB" wrote in message news:ypqCf.4633$1n4.1234@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... > The more non-linear it is, the smaller the operating angle, the more > linear is the modulation. > ---- > Reg, G4FGQ. > > Hello Reg: > > Does this mean that you are going to have a software program for us soon? > You have written us programs for almost everything else useful in ham radio. > Actually, what I need is a program that designs a maximum legal limit AM rig > using the parts I have, and that then tells me where to get the parts I do > not have with the least work and expense. > > 73, Colin K7FM ========================================== Colin, A real amateur would visit hamfests, look around the junk, take a selection of the junk home, then sit and think about what he could do with it. If you stick out your tonge and pull a funny face, the stall holders might throw something at you - for free. The bits and pieces left over can be put towards the next project. ;o) ---- Reg. Article: 101543 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: Subject: Re: RCA 77-DX Microphone Message-ID: <0zvCf.28135$H71.15745@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:40:28 GMT >Microphone and works great on my Collins 32V-3 Oh yeah, that 450 watt rig. >I'm selling this microphone because I just don't use AM anymore But your right up there with the slop bucket gang on HF - breaker good buddy. wrote in message news:rhmft1ti6u9hbe1rl6l7df0r7njq0vmgkm@4ax.com... >I have forsale a RCA 77-DX Microphone. This is an old RCA Vintage > Microphone and works great on my Collins 32V-3 > I'm selling this microphone because I just don't use AM anymore. Looks > great not beat up at all. > Make offer, I'm ready to sell. > Please don't ask how much, Just make offer. > Thanks for reading my ad, also has the rca bag cover. > ritchi50@optonline.net > > To see a picture go to: QRZ.COM Article: 101544 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: Collins 32V-3 HF Transmitter NICE!!! Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:06:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <9jadt1lhkf6n6kpvd74t1bc8d7hodngtq0@4ax.com> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-732003899-1138399618=:11605 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:45:57 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:26:21 -0500, Straydog wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>> The PEAK ENVELOPE POWER output will be 4 times the unmodulated output= =2E >>>>> Re-read the deffinition of PEP which you deleted. >>>> >>>> Yeah, I read it. Some of us have heard the rumor that the FCC has lawy= ers >>>> write its material, not engineers. I wasn't too impressed with that >>>> definition, by the way. >>> >>> Well then if you don't believe anyone you should go and look it up for >>> yourself. You will find that same deffinition in the ARRL handbook. Oh >>> I forgot you don't believe what is in there either. Then try some of >>> the Collins Radio SSB handbooks. Maybe Art Collins didn't know what he >>> was talking about either? How about in the IEEE handbook. >>> >>> Keep in mind when trying to understand PEP that there is no peak power >>> involved. It is all average power. >>> >>> Also when calculating side band power and carrier power that is all >>> average power too. Forget about peak power. >>> >>> Once you understand how this works then you can work from there to >>> figure out the rest. >>> >>> I have eliminated all the other stuff as you seem to be going round >>> and round only for the sake of arguing and not for understanding. >> >> I'm sorry but how you can write a sentence, above, like "Keep in mind wh= en >> trying to understand PEP that there is no peak power involved" when you >> use "PEP" and "peak power" in the same sentence and say something that >> sounds like "its there but it isn't there." > > Let me explain: There is peak envelope power and there is peak power. > Peak power is seldom used. Peak power is the instantaneous power at > the very peak of the voltage and current. You will see peak currents > discussed in tube manuals often. Yes, and I've looked at them very often. The term "instantaneous power"=20 seems more appropriate to me since it implies a time dependent function,=20 but that is just my prefernce. More below. > Our 100 watt carrier output transmitter with no modulation is 100 > watts average power as we talked about before. The actual peak power > is 200 watts output. (nothing to do with modulation right now) This is > found by multiplying the 70.7 volts RMS output voltage by 1.414 to > find peak voltage. That gives us 100 volts peak. Divide that by 50 > ohms and we have 200 watts peak output power. Note that peak power is > 2x average power with a sin wave. > > PEP > Peak envelope power does NOT involve peak power as above. It only > deals with AVERAGE power. > Remember the definition of PEP: The AVERAGE power out at the crest of > the modulation waveform. > (perhaps the "peak" in peak envelope power is a misnomer) I think it very well is a misnomer, but that is also maybe "my" problem. Defining what we mean, and explaining very technical issues bery=20 accurately is much more difficult than most people realize and sometimes=20 people read things and still don't understand what they are reading. Just= =20 about everything you wrote above and below is fine with me except that=20 I've already explained several times in several posts that the problem I=20 always had, for tetrodes and above, is that all the published curves show= =20 Ip being independent of Vp and I could not see how, under modulation,=20 there would be enough instantaneous input power to give a 4X instataneous= =20 output instantaneous power. Now that I realize that modulating screen=20 voltage can make Ip move in proportion to Vp, and thus give double current= =20 at double voltage, my problem with understanding this dissapears. And,=20 this was the major basis for my squabble with the PEP spec on the 32V3=20 original post. Non linearities are still an issue, but minor. I guess I am= =20 just dismayed that nobody is reading what I'm saying to see what I'm=20 saying but they all jump in to talk about everything except the problem=20 that I more or less figured out by myself after re-reading, thinking, and= =20 getting some stimulation from the discussions. But, thank you for your time. You need not repeat yourself any more. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D no change to below, included for reference and context =3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D > The modulation voltages, that we use to calculate PEP, in each side > band are also RMS voltages, they are not peak voltages. > In the figures below are typical voltages present in the signals at > the output of an AM transmitter modulated 100%. I gave these same > figures in another post. > > 100 watts into 50 ohms =3D 70.7 volts (carrier) > 25 watts into 50 ohms =3D 35.35 volts (side band) > 25 watts into 50 ohms =3D 35.35 volts (side band) > Total voltage =3D 141.4 volts (which is 2 x carrier > voltage) > > 141.4 x 141.4 =3D 20000 / 50 =3D 400 watts PEP. This takes care of our > PEP power. > > The amount of voltage that you see on a scope when looking at this > same modulated signal, if we actually measure them with the scope, > will be peak to peak voltage as that is what the scope sees. > > So measuring the composite signal voltage on the scope it will show > 400 volts peak to peak. Take =BD that to find peak voltage and you have > 200 volts peak. To find RMS voltage multiply that by .707 and that > will give you 141.4 RMS volts. This is what is used to calculate PEP. > > 73 > Gary K4FMX > > > --0-732003899-1138399618=:11605-- Article: 101545 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:28:07 -0500 Message-ID: References: On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:32:41 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:31:08 -0500, Straydog wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500, Straydog wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope >>>>>> power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing >>>>>> of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than >>>>>> the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare >>>>>> or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! >>>>>> >>>>>> Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube >>>>>> manual). This is a KW input class C triode. >>>>>> >>>>>> From the curve: >>>>>> at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current >>>>>> 2 kV 500 ma >>>>>> That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp >>>>>> >>>>>> at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current >>>>>> 4 kV 750 ma >>>>>> >>>>>> looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 >>>>>> a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near >>>>>> linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero >>>>>> current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated >>>>>> slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, >>>>>> current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 >>>>>> miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, >>>>>> and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be >>>>>> doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. >>>>>> >>>>>> My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start >>>>>> with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions >>>>>> about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like >>>>>> 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with >>>>>> reality is pure conjecture. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output >>>>>> and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load >>>>>> and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then >>>>>> and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about >>>>>> peak (instantaneous) output power. >>>>> >>>>> You can't just look at static curves. Consider that with AM modulation >>>>> there is usually grid leak bias on the final tube being modulated. >>>>> This allows the grid voltage to somewhat follow the modulation and >>>>> helps smooth out the non-linearity in the plate. >>>> >>>> This was discussed in the RCA transmitting tube manual, but it also >>>> referenced the technical references which go into this in much more >>>> detail. However, if you want to say "you can't just look at static curves" >>>> then you also can't just say "doubling plate voltage also doubles plate >>>> current" either. >>>> >>>>> If you have access to any of Termans books, as peter said, there is an >>>>> excellent section on how modulation works. >>>>> He in fact shows that "plate current follows plate voltage almost >>>>> exactly with modulation". His words. >>>>> >>>>> He also says that "triodes have considerably less distortion than >>>>> screen grid tubes". >>>> >>>> I will decline to check this but words and phrases like "almost exactly" >>>> and "considerably less" are unquantitative. >>> >>> Do you even know who Terman is? >> >> Yep, and I've even looked in his books. But its more than I want to go >> into. > > His writings are very easy to understand compared to many engineering > books. He leans less on the math and more on practical explanations. > He was one of the most highly thought of professors in the radio > field. Although his books were written in the 30's and 40's, they do > not include some of today's newer discoveries, they are very well > written to explain circuit theory and things like modulation. Fine. Maybe next time I see some of his works at a hamfest, I'll take a look and see if I might want to delve more deeply. I might add that I've looked at and own one of the RSGB ham handbooks which are sometimes more detailed than the ARRL handbook. However, I also want to keep ham radio a hobby for me rather than a vocation (as, say, an EE) >> >>> I would doubt that you do or you would not make statements like that. >>> As a matter of fact if you had read any of his work you would not be >>> making most of the statements that you are in these threads. >> >> I don't have the benefit of reading his works, I'm presuming that you >> have, is that correct? > > I am not an expert by any means but I often refer to a few of his > books. Well, there are a lot of gaps in my knowledge, too, and, yes, I know there are books out there that go very deeply into theory, math, etc. My other favorite books are the bil Orr (I think W6SAI?) "Radio Handbooks" which I also think are very nice and cover things differently. >> >>> At first I thought that you were interested in learning but I see you >>> would rather argue for the sake of arguing. >> >> Very early in my comments I brought up the issue of Ip being independend >> of Vp in all of the curves (these are facts) for tetrode and pentode >> transmitting tubes and receiving tubes and nobody but nobody called >> attention to the possibility that this conflict with claims of plate >> current doubling with plate voltage doubling could be resolved by >> including changes in screen voltage proportional, in some relationship, to >> changes in plate voltage. A few of your statements were a little >> bit helpful but even the comments in the RCA transmitting tube manual were >> weak in dealing with this issue. > > That is exactly what I told you in my very first post to you. That was > the one that had several different topic headings. The one that you > deleted most of the headings as "incorrect information". > > This was under AM TRANSMITTERS. > "Screen grid tubes are not linear in this respect. Plate current is > somewhat independent of plate voltage. That is why you must also > partly modulate the screen along with the plate when using a screen > grid tube in the final. You want to have a linear plate voltage to > plate current relationship." Well, you also deleted my response to this, too. >> >> What is a further issue is why the FCC decided to drop steady DC input >> (easily measured with a plate current meter) in favor of making PEP output >> measurement the new criterion by which transmitter power is to be >> measured. The only thing I can think of is that there were, in the far >> past, some AM amateurs who were running some form of ultra modulation or >> super modulation and putting KWs of audio on a 1 KW DC input to the final >> signal and the FCC didn't like that. Maybe if any of you have some >> background on this, you could mention it. > > That could have been part of it. It is difficult to tell exactly how > much power is really going out with different types of modulation. Yes, One other thing I was thinking about way back then as to why they could come up with this way of measuring power was that someone told someone else in the FCC somethin glike this: since the books say that in grounded-grid amplifiers, a part of the input drive power gets fed through to the antenna, maybe someone could build some kind of weird grounded-grid amplifier where the final has a DC imput of 1 kW and the final is driven with 5 kW of input drive power and the final puts out, say 0.5 kW and 4.5 kW of drive power feeds through the final and adds to the 0.5 kW from the final to give 5 kW of output with just 1 kW to the final and goes into the antenna and its legal. I don't know, just my wild speculation. > Probably the biggest reason for the change was SSB. Watching the plate > meter kicking up and down was not a very accurate means of measuring > power but in the old day's access to a PEP watt meter was almost non > existent. And, scopes were big and expensive, too. Personally I always just looked at plate current while saying "ahhhhhhhh" and multiplying by plate voltage and telling people VxI=watts and that is my "average" power DC INPUT. And, I've heard, on the air, all manner of misunderstandings of power. I actually heard one guy say "And, I'm getting 700 watts DC output out of my linear" and I was wondering how you get DC out of an RF output SO-239 connector off a commercial linear amplifier. :-\ > Now with a PEP wattmeter it is much easier to read power output than > it is input power. Well, I'd rather not trust the needle meters. At least I'd want to check it against a scope with bandwidth high enough to measure those voltage peaks under voice modulation (as I've done with my Ranger). > Another part of the change was to reduce the maximum power that hams > were able to use. As discussed the 1 kw input AM transmitter could > easily have in excess of 3000 watts PEP output and lots more with some > modulation schemes as you refer to. Yes, and it all seems so silly to me. I always had the feeling that talking (in the old days) about 2 kW PEP when 1 kW input was the max was more of a ego hype ploy to make people feel they had something when, from a practical point of view, the S-meter was going to be responding to the average power which was easier to measure anyway. But from this one can argue in lots of branching directions. > SSB also could have well in excess of 3000 watts PEP output as well. > The old means of measuring SSB power was the plate current meter on > the final not kicking over the 1 kw DC input level. The meter had to > have a time constant of less than .025 seconds. No sluggish meters > allowed. But the average power in speech is only around 10 to 20% and > that is what was measured. And, you could have some weird speech waveform with funny transients in it that spiked up, too. ' Anyway, 73 > 73 > Gary K4FMX > > Article: 101546 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Joe Curry" References: Subject: Re: Plate-modulating tetrodes and pentodes Message-ID: Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 02:34:00 GMT Or, if you use a separate, fixed, screen supply, feed the screen through a 10 henry choke.This allows the screen to "float up" to audio frequencies. I've done this several times with plate modulated 813s, both singly and in parallel pairs. 73, Joe K3ICO "David J Windisch" wrote in message news:mImCf.49264$tK4.8755@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com... > Iirc, among tips for doing subject operation "much more better" is to feed > the screen-grid from a dropping-resistor connected to the modulated-DC > side of the modulation xfmr. > 73, Dave, N3HE > Article: 101547 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <0zvCf.28135$H71.15745@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Subject: Re: RCA 77-DX Microphone Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 00:11:24 -0500 Message-ID: <89c83$43dafd12$97d56b99$13538@ALLTEL.NET> It does in fact put out the power he says is does, however to compare apples to apples he has to plug it in to his 339.36 volt wall outlet. Probably was recently connected to an 11 meter 63 dB gain antenna. "YT" wrote in message news:0zvCf.28135$H71.15745@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > >Microphone and works great on my Collins 32V-3 > > Oh yeah, that 450 watt rig. > >>I'm selling this microphone because I just don't use AM anymore > > But your right up there with the slop bucket gang on HF - breaker good > buddy. > > > > > wrote in message > news:rhmft1ti6u9hbe1rl6l7df0r7njq0vmgkm@4ax.com... >>I have forsale a RCA 77-DX Microphone. This is an old RCA Vintage >> Microphone and works great on my Collins 32V-3 >> I'm selling this microphone because I just don't use AM anymore. Looks >> great not beat up at all. >> Make offer, I'm ready to sell. >> Please don't ask how much, Just make offer. >> Thanks for reading my ad, also has the rca bag cover. >> ritchi50@optonline.net >> >> To see a picture go to: QRZ.COM > > Article: 101548 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Subject: FS: 12BY7a, UHF Mitrek, mics,2m amp From: "JB" Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 07:39:35 -0800 Message-ID: Various stuff http://tekstuff.freespaces.com Article: 101549 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: ritchi50@optonline.net Subject: Wanted: Collins KWM-2A Round Emblem Message-ID: <5h6nt1lgbj6j02qke2u88qib0m77r9f21f@4ax.com> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:22:03 -0500 Wanted: Collins KWM-2A Round Emblem Please state condition and price. Also please leave number to call. Thanks Rich Article: 101550 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "EdT" Subject: FS: Swan 500CX Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:43:31 -0500 Message-ID: <11tn7pkdgj4375b@corp.supernews.com> Cabinet has no dents but has been repainted. Some small scratches in the paint. Numerous scratches in the front panel but all lettering is ok. Rcvr works great, xmtr loads to full output. It has the 100/25kc calibrator factory installed. Inside a bit dusty but not rusty. Power supply is the 230xc, ps and speaker cabinet. PS has original paint, some scratches and works fine. Asking $175 for both plus shipping from 22601. Thanks for reading, Ed KC4FD. Article: 101551 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Bill Powell Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? Message-ID: References: Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:57:20 GMT Nope - same one - same serial numbers Guess his shill bidder pushed it a little too far? On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:28:28 -0500, K3HVG wrote: >OK... he says not... guess it isn't. > >K3HVG wrote: > >> Is it my imagination.. or is that the same SX-100 that was sold a few >> days ago for $1600? The ad pictures are the same, although the >> completed auction pictures have been deleted. Just curious. >> Item #5857172450. I was considering putting mine up, given the prices >> offered... (or not?). >> Article: 101552 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Brian Hill" References: Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? Message-ID: Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 12:38:20 -0600 "Bill Powell" wrote in message news:nvbnt11k9chlthkibig7l3vv5luafh2tfc@4ax.com... > Nope - same one - same serial numbers > > Guess his shill bidder pushed it a little too far? > > LOL. Yea he's a real class act. B.H. Article: 101556 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: chris+news@suslowicz.org (Chris Suslowicz) Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:49:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: In article , Straydog wrote: > >On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, K3HVG wrote: > >> Is it my imagination.. or is that the same SX-100 that was sold a few days >> ago for $1600? The ad pictures are the same, although the completed auction >> pictures have been deleted. Just curious. >> Item #5857172450. I was considering putting mine up, given the prices >> offered... (or not?). >> >> > >At this rate, it may become profitable to build "reproductions" and make >out like a bandit. It may just be a bandit, of course. (Someone is/was auctioning a T1154/R1155 setup that was sold a few weeks ago in England (the buyer is in England and very happy with it, apparently); but... the same items (including serial #s) reappeared for sale in the US. Very Suspicious.) Chris. -- a.s.r: You will not soon find a more wretched hive of ranting and pedantry. We aim to please, so duck. -- ADB Article: 101557 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Charles P.L. Stokes" Subject: Clegg 22'er Message-ID: Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 15:26:18 GMT I have a Clegg 22'er for sale with Instruction Manual and schematic. It's like new and worked fine when last turned on about 5 years ago. -- 73' WB4PVT Charlie Article: 101558 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Ron H" Subject: Central Electronics 20 A Phase shift question Message-ID: Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:13:52 -0600 Setup: CE 20A to dummy load 1 KHz audio input tone scope accross the output of the phase shift network ( 90 deg shift) Observation: The X-Y scope display shows a very nice circle which varies in diameter with the amplitude of the input and also varies in diameter (although less variation) with the input frequency. The inside of the circle always looks to be a well defined circle but the thickness of the line has some variation around the circumference. Thin and sharp at 6:00 thru 10:00 and a little thicker from 12:00 to 2:00. The two signals look great in the time domain just like two sine waves out of phase. Question: Is there something going on that needs correction? K3PID Ron H. Article: 101559 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 17:18:38 -0500 Message-ID: References: On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Chris Suslowicz wrote: > In article , > Straydog wrote: > >> >> On Sat, 28 Jan 2006, K3HVG wrote: >> >>> Is it my imagination.. or is that the same SX-100 that was sold a few days >>> ago for $1600? The ad pictures are the same, although the completed auction >>> pictures have been deleted. Just curious. >>> Item #5857172450. I was considering putting mine up, given the prices >>> offered... (or not?). >>> >>> >> >> At this rate, it may become profitable to build "reproductions" and make >> out like a bandit. > > It may just be a bandit, of course. (Someone is/was auctioning a T1154/R1155 > setup that was sold a few weeks ago in England (the buyer is in England and > very happy with it, apparently); but... the same items (including serial #s) > reappeared for sale in the US. Very Suspicious.) > > Chris. Thanks for the FYI. I've heard all kinds of funny stories and I'm not an expert on eBay stuff, either. There could be "operators" who just set up multiple userids on eBay and sell the stuff to themselves (who would find out?) but the rising prices get recorded somewhere and someone I know who knows a lot more about how to do this says you can look up recent past prices for specific things. Then, if you do this, it looks legit and -- guess what-- it credibly pumps up the "going" price on stuff. I was looking for some boatanchor receivers a few weeks ago and saw bidding going --as far as I was concerned--beyond what I would consider as reasonable. I backed out. > -- > a.s.r: You will not soon find a more wretched hive of > ranting and pedantry. We aim to please, so duck. -- ADB > > Article: 101560 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Joe" Subject: Nice D-104 (Black) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:22:03 GMT Anyone need a nice D-104 Night Eagle with preamp before it goes to "that other place" $40 + actual shipping costs from 11030 (around $7 USPM with conf) USA 50 only Big Photos http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d104.jpg http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d1042.jpg -Joe "NOSPAM" Article: 101561 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: STEVE TROOK Subject: Re: Nice D-104 (Black) References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:19 -0500 what is it wired for??? I am interested. Joe wrote: > Anyone need a nice D-104 Night Eagle with preamp before it goes to "that > other place" > $40 + actual shipping costs from 11030 (around $7 USPM with conf) > USA 50 only > Big Photos > http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d104.jpg > http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d1042.jpg > > -Joe "NOSPAM" > > Article: 101562 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: <5h6nt1lgbj6j02qke2u88qib0m77r9f21f@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Wanted: Collins KWM-2A Round Emblem Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:26:56 GMT Eblem available for 5 KW rig only - might work with your VFO..... wrote in message news:5h6nt1lgbj6j02qke2u88qib0m77r9f21f@4ax.com... > Wanted: Collins KWM-2A Round Emblem > Please state condition and price. > Also please leave number to call. > Thanks Rich > Article: 101563 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Central Electronics 20 A Phase shift question Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 11:58:01 -0600 Message-ID: References: I assume you mean the audio phase shift net... This suggests another signal getting in that is somehow affected by the audio voltage level. What you describe could be related to the scope astig adjustment. or How about RF in the scope. Kill the RF somehow. Or power suppkly hum. 73, Steve, K,9.D.;C'I "Ron H" wrote in message news:lJ6Df.7716$XG4.7514@fe14.lga... > Setup: > > CE 20A to dummy load > 1 KHz audio input tone > scope accross the output of the phase shift network ( 90 deg shift) > > Observation: > > The X-Y scope display shows a very nice circle which varies in diameter with > the amplitude of the input and also varies in diameter (although less > variation) with the input frequency. The inside of the circle always looks > to be a well defined circle but the thickness of the line has some variation > around the circumference. Thin and sharp at 6:00 thru 10:00 and a little > thicker from 12:00 to 2:00. > > The two signals look great in the time domain just like two sine waves out > of phase. > > Question: > > Is there something going on that needs correction? > > K3PID > Ron H. > > > Article: 101564 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Jack O'Neill Subject: Re: Nice D-104 (Black) References: Message-ID: <36wDf.89$C11.51@fe12.lga> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:07:09 -0500 Joe wrote: >Anyone need a nice D-104 Night Eagle with preamp before it goes to "that >other place" >$40 + actual shipping costs from 11030 (around $7 USPM with conf) >USA 50 only >Big Photos >http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d104.jpg >http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2pdtg/d1042.jpg > >-Joe "NOSPAM" > > > > And the old heathkit clock still ticking!!!! Amazing!! 73 Article: 101565 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: vozoeu@optonline.net Subject: XxX Secret BathCam Shots XxX 4547 [1/2] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:56:32 GMT Here i post secret cam pics of my mother in the bath tub , i hope u like them. lqzsdghsmizuuuiwsdrjffbpmlzqvfncsdijfejelpodxjzufrxxpslrqwgpczomzbpldruqosuqsclq Article: 101566 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:26:59 -0600 Message-ID: References: <2hlgt11412cqb72lm3br4qtsb2il7u3p6n@4ax.com> Jumping into the middle of a thread with a single, but useful, comment, Steve, K9DCI says: "Gary Schafer" wrote in message news:nmsit19q25el331ev90tk8djq0ri5egpmu@4ax.com... > On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:31:08 -0500, Straydog wrote: > > > > > > >On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500, Straydog wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope > >>> power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing > >>> of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than > >>> the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare > >>> or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! Probably because the screen and supressor grids are not the main controlling grids, but are there only to reduce Ip vs. Vp and control secondary emission off the plate respectively. > >>> Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube > >>> manual). This is a KW input class C triode. > >>> > >>> From the curve: > >>> at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current > >>> 2 kV 500 ma > >>> That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp > >>> > >>> at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current > >>> 4 kV 750 ma ... OK OK TWO comments... I think someone else pointed out that this is a static situation and in a circuit, the supply voltage and the plate voltage are not the same thing when you have a tank circuit in there. 73, Steve, K9DCI Article: 101567 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:33:22 -0600 Message-ID: References: <2hlgt11412cqb72lm3br4qtsb2il7u3p6n@4ax.com> <0m7jt19blpu5a113nem2940o2hv5h2e2ga@4ax.com> "Straydog" wrote in message news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0601271707530.11605@panix1.panix.com... ,... > >> What is a further issue is why the FCC decided to drop steady DC input > >> (easily measured with a plate current meter) in favor of making PEP output > >> measurement the new criterion by which transmitter power is to be > >> measured. The only thing I can think of is that there were, in the far > >> past, some AM amateurs who were running some form of ultra modulation or > >> super modulation and putting KWs of audio on a 1 KW DC input to the final > >> signal and the FCC didn't like that. Maybe if any of you have some > >> background on this, you could mention it. While possibly (probably) true... DC was easy to measure (by hams) and RF power difficult to measure in the early days. As time progressed, RF power became easier to measure and, after all, was the thing which would cause trouble as far as interference was concerned. 73, Steve, K9DCi Article: 101568 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: hhkenx@optonline.net Subject: Amateur Sisters Shower Time With Dildo... 5563 [1/2] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:27:15 GMT Here i post secret cam pics of my younger sister (big tits) in the shower getting it on with her dildo, i know its sick but i want to get into filming porn so i picked her as my first subject. Download her here, hope you like her :) vjkimjzwrdwcvnezblzvwfkyqwszrlbjeqvwtjhxyhghkoxzlcotgqndppoksshkmewbpxgfsjfzoyxjznxm Article: 101569 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: mddwix@optonline.net Subject: MOTHER AND SISTERS XMAS DILDO LESSON 676 [1/2] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:54:04 GMT Hi Sick i know but i filmed my own mother showing my sister how to use a dildo 1 night over the xmas period, Download the pics here and hope you enjoy :) bfcbhifitfbrhkrpnwywltgbyoextemslvkhztfkjfxnhtjvofjkmxipehxt Article: 101570 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: mddwix@optonline.net Subject: MOTHER AND SISTERS XMAS DILDO LESSON 676 [2/2] Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:54:05 GMT begin 644 MomsisterXmas26.12.scr M35J0``,````$````__\``+@`````````0``````````````````````````` M````````````````````@`````X?N@X`M`G-(;@!3,TA5&AI,P@23)=#$K0^P1TH8A!'J*>AQ6J%81;8&*(\"(8B+AJ=>H6*L0FB:#UKR<; M`7H@"VK^HI*).:V`3`,0+C!@__L?S"D[.70U4B0DL5V:C:J8S7`+(06#&R&X MX53_7Z_1UW\PH>!CLD/B@[7?ZO4K\HFK#E%[J8MDM`@0=?^WA>0B>H3H.A9I MA7WB.H7`?_@$A)G!,/PLEH_>%*6,"9`9#+!T3'LUROT2L/!#FCCO)"(>X"_1 M_#$`#C1V@V+.4`Y[D6'N#[4TA"-N!,+1['X:I0L]1CM5K?;G!8AK"!"AL`0# MS-$@#%3%58#F1IP9@D)4X@@!>4$Q=X!GS\8O!S6UC(.5GLM*=$D)I(U13+MT MY=(%GM`-FGA1IJ]-K8)T&^L-6"T,!T)HX\<$%Z<,F*&4"#+!4Y!^0U/V*.QY M'"WN>A?[KY:S0#$D#(@%CTY_+"QM,:CG0DYPS4@<%'$:XO5^#_?\6+`F(GLY*; M2N'#XFX^`1ZEHP@_5)@/`7UR?%(`8NSO#E:/=8_G/."`M:_4L0R(L,(*J0!I\U2PU<2@/'S:I^&!%(3K"Y MW#SQ[Z3O2C$[/T9MR8BS.+,0IM`=/)YXO+@A"R0&L.\[S3^!%,#E>I%BAG2) MF!;EZ.OIXX(!2"V#M0S."&R_-5A/+-#Z2JZIP5$$A"+J2^0FPHGA`P?G!/S) M`/JE)OX<$'$]$7L)5%Y<"L,[IRC2I1S$!PI3EG!9',N=@9Q=RL&Z0(D#8]C8 MQ+D($J;$A"&X-FB\DF[`'-39%O@"CC"7@JEFWX#<@RYP%=0MGJ@D@3Q!I)#* MQ`=AUU.B)<)/4()F_Z>3:@&%F,508[08J/HQ$@N/8Y'*/TNP!*M:4/M'_?T$ MYZ%50)GU.]%'C]F/AL(HAP5V+4YQNIKB:ZIJTD8H MJ)@F["9A[*0G/FH4`!77LBY7%C,>SYF_PL;#Y<`:0]@%,NH[@3@QD8.YZ?\9 MI+!"8IPSC:H?J`S(+:F?0=N[U!0++4IHPZT0'O3`HO@WTGKN3HH)B?2+N99E M5)KRH*]4,-B-U9IF?"U@5I`I!-;74F14I(H=J#\QF5T05HMYZOHOD\1VP<\K MP4;.R_M#R9S@G$T:6]7UG%YTWX:K>WXHN@86*(V@@B>.$/R0=N"M01`=H)BY M3!Y=XW$@8*"A>;[(3R-<'O30XDE*J7070P$&B\_1ANM,K`%/532/.XQ8,-?E M+P<).9@B*!#PHNX+G!L0'%%"UP7M589;<$!R1P&=R]_SC[N*GTO-2!I39,5M MF@_-'D4^R54GZ&DI1,T`J,Z*OI9*HR!\4#Q7\@N_`:$R2`'M-S(H@JI;GF-4 MH](]7]TZXC(3"=+&>C'%[VL+OJ,E"1KE\E`0<$LH.ELVOJ*@\Y'W<\QYF!@: M8M_!%-Q.%@W0_QB<,$$T^GR6)?)M"PGA7$&2-%J@IVW,VPA.Y3AWK2O*-#A/ M8'TCBHPN614**J&5VI26@,UMWYFY2_%?(VI!@[:_4BQ;IQHI:C+BI@U3.C@+ MP#;_96`XK!>$V$*MP$\=4\_1^LF?'$.("1'6I2PID\P-+OS`>Y`M3\.L@=1& M'U)[D18Y7X3>K@QUBBF;&GNHNS<9O(]11]'S((8C+H+"_GP055\*/"IF9(G6 M@1JI@$-6\^57T(+._O@+'[K[*SD[CGJS]\2?GD,,.)!*XJ:*O)" MH%4$U7P/<$((-C5;1/L0?[*E(NN/.@'-16.RA8%IJ!5B+&,$E^LN';W18H9@ M:5R]%8ZKXY26P[',H&&X>MP;#&"J5X(-MHK5)ODJ<`U$Z!:``F'\KS]ACZ&H MU_*AU5)G4031PC=\&B?_O&XXB=A5(`*U%Q`QMA8JR M%]2H/UE3D>@`N9N%O^CQ^@0LO&Z7=44V2('*7B1I-HL]I]H\Z!2LDG![3*!8 MHF8N2)Y`(K*RD.)/?+#(D0^0Q<\<-69.DU/@^*LN)U6@^"$/>![Q^Y,8#\TB M1-=*_8FM2\:_ZDTI76'BA!2$X1^9:$D'K'`!I0I/ M71A4^"HR(Q0.+Z59X!QHX%24#+!BII,(D:#Q#C>'+1(5S=AD"B6'3,G6!DZ& M?E+Y'\P''X,84Z'G:$4%:%U7[JD"Q_/1U=*V$J&JB(TT(VFDM(#"\F?D5Z!7 M@E]B4)%7-+-I!(DI1XFF[DK_UPE9V&:":1`*C1Z(#N8T*0(B_,OY,((?567T MB\WKTA:8$2"9)MCL;&N9*P-#Y*TP0F^-P=2-`5>&*I5@W!1'Z7(P-$B2I'HX M6IE4".32T9(%^E6);&W!!SN7`'[LRZ.1N;X(2]\.KB\W8*#XAT?`E:9G%HMGAT ML1T1#@Y$42_V_`&%PD.@@X8,E`JLB(DV%CCR;6@8=AJ'[OK%!5GPP?AI=3D1"ODK6H8?FCW7/N+"B4!6.>AF(;M(O`@8%QD`^7*7'JP% MBE8%*-J89#@7D[.%OL1''R34`P*4@KH8#8TE0E6CA;H.6'@=S)`M%WNQ)528 M"6[0S*&=>AFRQR'R;4RI#`0!<;-H;0)-J`-"E'=?,X3"TK$QDJ[]&*`*Z**U M*A`QNO-J7GTN*ZD1`[D6,99H(&D,T=L<7CXGU0DJ@\_2`99*.O]%5HJ#-8?S M;T(4^'M2 M?A[QMH17=G1ACR,2):UY>?'DS&I.+?_YVP/)EGAB':E^=L-@-9KJ8H2"^9T, M64R=:I.98--5+KI6+4II2Z&.(VO+%5Z&5?A+DW[H-*-,H#8#%&&8`U09 MY0/<'"4-U!RECF)*O+4:C7D:\DE8`.=$C_1L:,GI9\\)^"^U0]4`QI-AQ3R+ M/,.@?1]/K8"(E*J7P,'<<^=5"D)^@-*(97C&A)SA\[:KGS[5TP2E*SI%8 M0L<30I(&DB97$WQCIOR'HVXCZCQIZ6-3Q\94Y*&+F5J-6CF5V,N_P!/-2"]4 M:ISUHYXII9WJMO.Z]4PQP:X_V-.$.RZ4&5\0*0Y6*R"I(8X[X#%7'T&ICI2T M4[DSUBXD=9LH+*ZH@ZN@JY>5;2:E2-EN;"00S8L_]/`PF62WAM+<>[2EY]S! MBG/?3Q:[,)1.V%13PP"GXVWO#&'%?=L27^0';(2C=%%N%.C22`>H77#M`NU^ M-,$CD\:+V$3/X%Q4S@93"1IL,(^PXG^/[-FB7*%BD=,-E*>O"88#B+\+]0X#2F"U9B?;] MJ'G%+\"UYBBSM*&H(LV$#0FXVY@EC($''N1VR=L\Q#TGE3?:H,J-\>*[&$-9 M_(WVJF'%@'*NB-!5*I'RHRB%C:+(HD'G0"ZS'!5<@2;1&I9W;>)N6VP(U7*E M0T;T$F0LB!"&J#]N:#V`-FX=Y]G$YZ7^C>1SQ=%:[0'>IFJ91(Z.*J9!9CV= M88?1;PFSE.JJYN M2[@IXND(+9),U-26S.1ZBE:BM4@L*-[->)$JOUPO6'^)[D#Z#DV\NP.^$40 MKO[0NIPX^LE#17$T"%<+6F90BIT-6Y%1;*&05#V8U*.4;OO M`:33#QZ4Q3OFQCQ[S;@/%"-M MO+5&8'SD&1EK`*P8YGF^-,2>!PH2OS3*]X%TZ'M%1XB4+[2^@<^]$IU.^-G1 M5JR&19U/<@^EI`(:*7XK%%-[$,$ZJ7-],2=94FY`_B+X;A":\8<%1BJE)0T( M!JY/B)$,!`;I;@=_/ZI+_G2]7*(MI,0>"C@)*=)0RO%#^T+.$5](V'V.%Q+V MNH'4RN/]Y\MM;-/INHN_#U%B@^J#B9FN/ MR1VAV">[T:S'[CSR/V65)/XWGI0J"W_*(J<<.8^E!-("Q[R1"N"\O4+I<=)' MC^"YC>?ZIS>++:))M#/IM[,]F6[40@C9/5E&RX5L;X[*M(@^O2P8E%.OF$0. M@I.I5(\7]8_KXJ0J3)G#]=+9AV/$5"[?<\Q$:Q001:PVCYN;KM0$=`TW/3*L%U/P6)TE M+L@XQSOL,8VLN\D9Z2H4:&E(`=#"$J*A2R?T3<*(78QJX5?O6S<*^D6#&5Q6 MRL4=90\Z7.E2-!O,DL8%VOM6F*&C=NW((%8G)@@YC\:+A12]]Y*!U&#$5.9` M!P*QZ1'$9E>"C24JP7H'=H)6E5\#:*VE6(YUC32[S!>T%CGQ4$J*;@^ M5WHR*3_%CA)!*B!1"YVV&22S"&,4J#8#1C%;=8J(N=71`[J%KI41)U3:BT%8) MKP9>'RM?L+)2RW0'50:X\%+V4:92)J*1:WKLYXNVT;H<(/VI/UPF4&4.*M9[ M<4LQO&O&`JC>3OP=-9C0?14J-6+*!P&-$T';VA7_*CJK/\_1W3Q#&Z@RE(?/ M'V7C%!TT#?U42.,MJTGSKZPKAT&`L1;WI+5+3D/M8%V"`YC#<E^B?]FX@XOIZ83)NP MCP<_:&`!&A@S+A'72:&P8*T99:I`BB$PHP.J-9@YFOG$*'^@`%!'U-0\R M^$_H`SS2`(`3F:<.-$:T&3C`L1HS5`L0`)4"IU`JV/0Q0MW&NT+=-0RD#]^C M8$=C+PBL3L3Y%]>6/H*4X7EAS_$8^V7??+)>G&QABS92O_.H/UT.$$V91[P" MC(N1^PI/&=50_=61VT^VMQT:CO7J>Y$28PQNYX#K_E$6`Y1JT^N]DRCXVO6, M$4^^Y5>PA@L?/''4ZJ>HOQ_S4PR/1*Z4-H>31$Q'S!GE4]"L.'_&:/=>M[!Q M-8!IR"P5ULBBVYM12C_KB;,<%)>-+CGF[6M(^;D=Y`&>A>`KB-]((M^:52N3GY7OO::VB1^Y0 MA:QL"$(*>?'O4)5OOI7L*BV0%JFT,];0,(L=)!T1,2(I5J%J(\:JV=5(<=&! M.N>JN;@B>Y)Y997BK=N5,RO_92-Z,?K*:VW8F&EQ_B0!VJG#FZNL*DW?4.]2 M`8%C*(.O8'"59@HZ@NA'RRI1;2`H3]R%4EQIY]>YOOE2FKGQSIJ`](*8ZLBOXE6?D8#1V%LHSK\4.Z"L0K0%BC1KDRS/=[SJ($TS+@.,R<.)

AA#9@46P3)A942$6Q\1)%@UF!P1]>5NT*GHCHNZFU]UIE"W*?/DQ MP?0J^%PI0P+96Y5AKX_.H&`A$MQ,_P&#&6.QQH3JT:X&'1@CG?I3Z>CU2L7N`60]T!39)%XGKA?&9SE%.DZ$P7>A0?^Z"!8X(@2 MO^,1RD`S0N.I0O4H4]5=#2ES&VEY6@BB96JY0;I2*\JK"_8C'(\K0?VY(7QOMP:^!]^"H+8%1P+:K@D<$UO5DDV2+$UK0E@2U6/I;+)M_B[WF M_X;`Y'8%1`*#V*,-Z0ZFK1W:[:,S$IY'4X_M@\B@9U20>8+"38IZ MAZ+"(SEAU&\HP@:A%^]`G$DFC&V_&D@A:K\L^0=FU)T.PW"4V;5%'.G'3\L' M()IU`AZ&G"-W22B/K^.U\9"J@0CAVHKXXU_U4AAUX,C?QD/#2PP]C'.Z9?XD M_#$0Z6=R9R"GEW*PZY7Y\UA,\5A&FR!A2OG[C\;^C("A0>%R:!1W:A*=\5'M MXLM\-'2Y")#,"*BC5/?76/PPH!#QP$!A'!3@J_T/;-V`!-5R5'TGRL@;,.YN M0W,H$C9.M"BRH'I=P?1^0L\%(B=H#_U=CSVQK*%#22T$8#_Q$ MQE\OL*Y"<19(7!EB*DP$DZ.0H]3-B:(IM4[:K3R2MCN1]:`)R^I]%#!U483Q MBGQ%G?1X(B9\,QEJ#>]-E`J"8'+!K^4\7P`IEZ8U*OH8U30>"@X^-50J[BC8 M1Q\*O!^TQVOO0-O4/V@K3B#X'ZLJRZS:"J2PJ.O:9#I[P\9]HV&XBU=)?^V% M<5$3%=I2"U24F3/,XWJ*ZDO-03!\#BG1U8D3]@"50+0%$X!H]BX*?3B8=@%9 MV;W']I\FMDFN2B09*MRSRB)AN/UB%%$?J1=*XH8_I@VG6= MC"5AS@^2;[IN%>A"44#:T5VNY;B38K=N85(AV75JC8BK96_"D*.2S"]:55(* MK48[&NZ#YQH==\<=^GDP^)UM]>BHYKN,.SU<^4%:J!Y`BU$K(Z5=1I-2?E0G M^<*)UUR.UP$=X`SPEPI0GY8B2[,0&1:\SXI_Q3ZJ,\H=,;Q,?JBY:/<81:JC MTNPK35)M2WM$,&(I1?3YOCGI*$>0)%J(]>;H;2W@AV"?9A,-0SOCGW]>,`K" M:)JI\X8_"S]_W/33$\6LZ\_FO M1/)14`9:TX!(E(F,K)#L.JX?&\;83%46;0R)Z`/U.W=J3Q<4E10770YE\%[< MJ:SKTWDWA4V;3%=T])@O1+LBOMPH()%5]T23;)B M$;712L@I^OUX7Q=W:7L+I9M=5\Z!]9CO?`4A0F^+OPS`?\V(<@.+*LO]6`%; M;:Y@56U=E8/>2Y4)>4SB5EF=/?1>40%CR$F(OH`3`NZ5`'B2^(<0&O@41 M`2"FZ("4S!V@?HOR5%_FKFYA;#$6/;NX%AJ(1>I&"XMPET4/"*)IF!)Y]+`S M&*FK'MIUVT5A'V>"3[=F[<`K:E,\RX59M$#YG]2B%%894ARE>N-KHXXW@W@_ M$+F2ZNK3SU%0C9%W`D]O`N\7@*J*UHL/.W\C6JMI5[,EN4N:Z9]R4+3?,ON, MRT.ER@?59`,RZZ"/T+%[&(E5+:A`S,NFBKCPV6(K\F"T]<.JZ6B12A`:GN67 M=1QE]/FBJ"]VHE]'4@_VDG2-QHFHP(=Z##?:^ZR$T+5DI71,!"_C.`TH<;?! MLH363V@'2)OKLW8V\+0\4+EQ2+4^J>Z+JLPZDH'Z[2US^O!Z=#8?\_"Q=!_)GFAUPZ.6'/C<45 M):FUI*AZZM.Z`JD0KD_9HU561F^DZ(GM)\O+U@$3>?]0CM$^>)OK%0X*,S:E MVPVCN0OMGSA331K%1Q)$F@25H>7VJ48AE7XU.$J+Z2$4]6D<:R9\@6BWZ^;2:@N!@`3IA"JK('E5X M%+F\N2DG>T=)%LA''*BU/#?GM+QE]V@U4\N3&SXC=0>3GN?,D2^2L%Z5*`]&"CPZ>V+HI>.KCMRJM*9ZB#@J?*,>&S>"12(LR M8K14%'U!Z5-6H%"BS>I;0Q_?_2W)P8;S#=VW!UW_R*0@FF"D5Q*M)^(PZ&*K M4Q;919+DB+XJ"F(,4#">J)_(>QU?$7OO'`3`TC!4$8Q7!5@$ MW=:5:FS;M'1C80JR+<6R-HK92N>%D46")7*+VIDM)V]N!"?-PVH(X9#(0I+:51@`-3X[@(^0C:M#`8?#I6: MM$N;=D'2"R6F91L6[9IBR)8X6.1>ER.T)1\!`)(H,$`_\!I(1`;*Q2-%!+Z> M#S/<(Y6-Y8GB%QB8/!](-@%+>GT>SF&/\&T<0"@`?1+UB(86P23LGKX"'X'.^[UD`/"P`G?(,*=$0K$`#.#!>$,- M:$`#OL'[_`3>X6F@QH.?A]/:!!50R(2VLLX*T%A!*+-R=XT#<\%9&IJ&>+K9 M.O6S<^2`XF$-D64*X*0UT]7#(9RN":/PP%1'1Z@#&PK8GBV4@+%8J@)W;'T3 MUB:_HE4%6`2Q@]MP62W083%V#3?7 MTL18FA8AZ`XR#&?'!K$M7[Y^"3Y"1T9L\?(`(0P$IJ`91[$K0X MD%[_3NP8(H;A?I&3EM*9+G!HQNLG$(NYA#B$P5#V8T>C!>G1"):&V!D&S)F" M_%@3+L9K>.%]Q@GSN'./&0+04\R-D'6!/0,Q!A20;LP$SDUEY,5BBF"06[B\ M;6KK[PV)>SUWSA43<&,\X&\C+X)G$9ZCA.+FAL$R)3A26!PDA2$(!$=Q+-)! M`*[^50W!`2^LNRLG;,W47]U*O4DI2P4").0$UW8)/3_L!Q;I7E`/+OK(S1B1 M"ACU0:4(T#6&CFP:"T=Z1%7CH MF`@V&_1I3B4RZ>+A9W]C+))VSA`G96)LH3.14LY"H?+EHZ(B*-*E#CX3Q'+1 MF;0R8/P--.B9KH%6;3U=L_$`E>W6+-L\4PP"G,AQ., MX"E@)P1DD(/V''NJ501$J"D8%S4>VS'X01NX*4F'*TS9-\IX#`I,/"",^@`# M,A4XRN;AJ6)NT1&;<32@+.&.1&@PP>&%2S$-_M9,`1JJ,5@Q?H[DK3#.>B6I M5@#CZ0`)OJ0PX<'JC1@0F^_NW2/R69&/3X()KKAQTT%D13%;05]P;%&`,,<9 MLPAIN+^16VJ[<)#L4M,#5#3:22P$UP95,L7F40\U*"D&-^@PVO_ MG'I[5R:9.Y.EQ1;VD,`'T@?J:F%0FK.4@/)\QM)J5%`2XY)DT+HM/(-4YR+,!S@H\'!0@H$T44Y/4@$3&'HP+&>G@#1J`%[*021-F\^9,,$PA$J-`@$B.H),"DB"\L:+1HWNQ MSB+%H-Y"F\PE66*V;H0&MC=9ZX"M%H&'BG2%8HW,%)1$!*!GI"@/%)N&,^"2 M)D0"-35:XQLF82=.K9A/G%6$G&HUZ8#1*=7QAJ8#A+)V"5%5=) M3E2_Y$.Y/9C%@["$JBU&U1(.Z"#6@XIDK388+:"0K7(6*Y.RLY+,TTZ5`@S1 M>WH!YM@!F46#DF+BRKR.5'ND&+5AJRE9V&B4R@/WZ%E5S4"H;V%\>W=Q/;U" M6^IE6#A""=)7Q\&5D)(DQ-)F=665')O&R.D)'\1NC=1M5Z'XC(!$36?(P];T M,[L:T%#+00Y0[!2L-*\0[+QB>0!82DJ\#M-IY8D$/&VTN!'SX#()+*K#``@6 M20IL35A#.^,+C2Y`#;,-08UD$&:615I=J,TIS2@[&`WE`3.**NEP0UB M0Y:$!02\Y*,RCER$_'QT:\AH5PVWMT7I@CNT;5TL=(P-)MH_8]E/)A*97RUM"W2&`-5$'8%$\U%E"@O$44(ND9?H>A@]PBW1@*'5IT?4 MH?P29PFX1-8C2#15">8H$>=UT]F1V=D,L`#4,0"B+A&/[QR&7BK-4.*<$<`1 ML$I$)<(KH96)L\18)>02;93H2]Q1A$P31%,B*1)4B:A+;"6N+4&6`+@$6R+N M$G()^$OP)81.(Y13(BEA4HFG!)7CM`H`N#&`8BP!CNTVER'A@8\525+`R7E#V91@1(65+*14-1--]H)M";A)3]IYHI^`+"\,8C M,5N?>S7[1$;.D=-<&F4)7D("KN0)-L[:`$9IC,(\!F#,5&X6XGZ//`Q&#,M8 M,OTL[-!*'AR*>=)9\LOG$(-W&&`,LRI.'G,_+YXXC[(TI>29HGO4L[PP$WXE M6^5D5HHW#N/*@N<`)C*GEVI>0!^,"Q+X2F)>+VHI<'9BB>=WW2J.GRC+P5*. MK7-@ZJ&SRHL"IZ"HJ.)'*(QE*6L"7RWS@R,(Z"`P$2".`H@*K+&/"2./+Z:E MH2C#!4AHA,'7NQ&"^04A%@S&/#NT%(01)=_^#1P',8"D%3XX4^CYSKVT4O?+ ME(L%,0"OGQSXA^45ZT1F$*:P?&ZLU&R862RQWF,J;(0_@3+ZH]75)%^Y28D: MRU!BET",,O(T:``"$PO;N&&;:G0,Y>5'03!F,0@U:&R974BML$IRH+E!$;0- MD=M91]2ABNPJ`$YPBC?6L5:;#$1S1;`A0"1V*PB`>%O*K6HH6&SLKED3"JBY MQF!8QJ)0@CNT``Z!<`2Y.#Q`@)P'5W:+V00`!H$&!``.@7`$M7 M@\0(,?_K"VCT`0``Z!<`2'M':@!H$&!``&C`>T``Z!<`2!L)P'4%@_\%?-MH MP'M``&@EFD``C85D_?__4.@7`$L_@\0,:@5J`(V%9/W__U!H$&!``&AGG4`` M:@#H%P!%_VH`Z!<`1T_H%P!'EV@@FD``4.@7`$N3@\0(B<8)]G0FB?&#R/]` M@#P!`'7Y@_@(=A5HT`<``.@7`$A[B?"#P`10Z!<`1T-HRI!``&H!:@#H%P!( MMZ/4?D``Z!<`1Z,]MP```'4':@#H%P!'3V@$`0``:,![0`!J`.@7`$>O:`0! M``!H`````-CLB#$````````#``,````H``"`#@```$```(`0````6```@``` M``#8[(@Q`````````0`!````<```@`````#8[(@Q``````$```#H``"`B``` M@`````#8[(@Q`````````0`!````H```@`````#8[(@Q`````````0`)!``` MN`````````#8[(@Q`````````0`)!```R`````````#8[(@Q`````````0`) M!```V`````"Q```(!@`````````````(MP``%```````````````'+<``,0" M``````````````<`00!0`%``20!#`$\`3@```````````"@````4````*``` M``$`"```````X`$```````````````````````#___\`_?W]`+Z^O@"ZN+@` MN[FY`(:'AP"`@(``P,#``#`P,```````JZZO`/#O[P!K:VL`75U=`+2RL@!R M<7$`AH2$`*RJJ@#7U]<`T-#0`,G(R``X-S<`.#DY`)>5E0"^OK\`=W9V`(V, MC`#4TM(`N+>W`,3$Q`"HIZ<`1T='`$Q,3`#.S]``[M[5`*:GJ`!85U<`JJFI M`)R:F@!>7EX`?WQ\`,7$Q`#FYN8`?'Q\`$E*2P#&QL8`2TM+`(>&A@!V=G8` M.CHZ`$]/3P"LK*P`GIZ>`$A(2`!!04$`B8B(`%A86`"*BHH`,3$Q`*&@H`!) M24D`='1T`/GY^0#__OX`8F)B`#0T-`"?G9T`34U-`(*"@@"WM;4`Y.7E`(^/ MCP!]?'P`[>WM`+R\O`!Z>GH`S7D` MC(R,`+FYN0"ZNKH`MK:V`)V=G0!_?W\`*RLK`"\O+P`S,S,`*BHJ`!@8&``: M&AH`$Q,3`!L;&P`U-34`-C8V`#L[.P`*"@H````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````5Q$7 M%QH&&4<1"P``"TU5`````$TW!P0W10,H4A<:$BD/#4(````^-U$20UD-!RTH M)Q&RE24R@7%``````+%P``114@-@X2&SLD4E)1 M``````<"``!.,F8G44U1$PTR)!$`````.QM%*0`2)A).*!D;$%A2%P`````F M)A4V`P$^`!I/;B@[-AD7/@```!HG-C80&R`40#8?#3LN&29)````-R0V-B@4 M)Q0G-A\G'A\9)@L````7!E@U%Q0B*A!!%4<.6"@7/@```#L.%S<[1QD.&Q`0 M31I91R8`````*1%,11%````````1``-``$`1@!I`&P`90!$`&4```N`&\`<@!G``````!$``T``0!/`'(`:0!G`&D`;@!A`&P`1@!I`&P` M90!N`&$`;0!E````4P!C`'(`90!E`&X`(`!3`&$`=@!E`'(``````%``&``! M`%``<@!O`&0`=0!C`'0`3@!A`&T`90``````1`!I`'(`90!C`'0`+0!3`&4` M>``@`%,`8P!R`&4`90!N`"``4P!A`'8`90!R````+``$``$`4`!R`&\`9`!U M`&,`=`!6`&4`<@!S`&D`;P!N````,0`N`#````!(`````0!6`&$`<@!&`&D` M;`!E`$D`;@!F`&\``````"@`!````%0`<@!A`&X`$8D%D,UIZ-+^Y=5-:`H=?2A+52K4)JU*L6++2/ M?@B\,$NX^$QYT/IJV-)FPBUA(/3%&ZNM;UCJ5>0%9ZC=A]5HX&"`2X"(&[U7 MJU962),OW/C)0H4B@,W_9S(Q!O!V52ID`D([F#+X&`<0)#X8<9`N6?U7KRR@ MS[UY<-=(8&I(WSX`P:>=AYT;PU1,K8D#9!DG,(%@@$D&3,9$M=)RBVZ@&DE+ M3Z!])9D&31//N/_Q#R;A@1*Z?3&96G03[(/6A#4-`JO-AYA?$KP/Q(42E?"# MD=>LI#$2IG^Q(16\<@+@,WG*!ZZ6[V+51-'[`M\-?:VIPVBK=DA=8]^0F3O@#5DP!!>4>M=A];NWKAT'@93%9AW4!08@^N`U# M!$[Q\)7$4[Z1()A^,,$/;*\O7>09D*#O@#Y>3]"H"U=37J@G0@A!G:_T6;\B M:NH*,,@%#(W>-MI"J;-VKJJ?$F@5J$0;*:REZ"G9>[`.;L`.:(T_A9!<#UF6 MR2T(&%6R\F(#4IH;PI)Z-<8"PD*PL-7KR5@>K#[3P%'EQB*)1:W'5FEB2RH$ M.(7T_._?V4*UA)4"B1G1X@@*!Y@'6TD8Z=I??Z#=<*X]1"_)+92K&/JE8/SP MZT;X)/]P3(A9^!PN-H"%$/&Q([!N\@*+]1QHE#9K#1/G856X1UH*)Y8:-=T( MUV35*C4"2;(;7"Q=Y8+!!V>98/M"#_=(?7`'3.[Q@<$#@P2(M`5[H!"72G:V M0,(HKE3[0`,,+$PR449S0XT!:B3""XK,1:7=W)#`@S9V6,/U.1K34'XU;102 MW+";Y\4T;64GO5MUX^#KUN:!@#^P!,9F@<^<&9Y#.:$!#`2ZQ%#I'V$EPH." MA^O&&!`%`02!#]N>:$W74$#>A.D'(YI92G0(HZK42U)#Z,88S$;,`](=+$/B>\!```#TG4(BQ:#Q@3Y$])S0KT``0`` MN0@````SP(VD)``````%``````/2=0B+%H/&!/D3TA/`277OB`='3776`])U M"(L6@\8$^1/2+V.GG````@_D"#X3M````03/`D`/2=0B+%H/&!/D3 MTA/`277OB40D%.E&_O__N0$```"0`])U"(L6@\8$^1/2$\D#TG4(BQ:#Q@3Y M$])RY$E)=3&+P[D!````C:0D`````(O_`])U"(L6@\8$^1/2$\D#TG4(BQ:# MQ@3Y$])RY.EI````28O!BTPD%(OH,\#3Y3/``])U"(L6@\8$^1/2$\!)=>\+ MQ8O8N0$```"-FP`````#TG4(BQ:#Q@3Y$](3R0/2=0B+%H/&!/D3TG+D/0`` M`0!S%#W_-P``EW_?__C6PD M&(MT)""#?@8`=$Z+3@*+="0D,\"#^01R,XVD)`````"-9"0`BQX#P]'C@],! M,\.#Q@2#Z01T%8/Y!'/HN@0````KT2ORN00```#KV(MT)"`[1@9T!#/`ZP:+ MQRM$)"1>7UO)P@@`````````P```#````+8P```````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` *```````````````` ` end Article: 101571 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Benjamaniac" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:29:15 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> I'll be 50 here real shortly. Ben wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > Article: 101572 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: " Ron in Radio Heaven" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:23:10 GMT I'm 53, I've been collecting since 1970. A ham since '90 or '91 I think. Ron Article: 101573 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: David Stinson Subject: Re: How old are you? References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:38:30 GMT nc183d@aol.com wrote: > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I'm 49.... About to top "The Hill." Article: 101574 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Mike Andrews" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:55:30 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> nc183d@aol.com wrote: > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. I'm 59. Got my Novice late in 1962, and my Second Phone in 1963. Laid out of ham radio until Jan 2005, when I got my General, but was doing BA electronics all along, for Lockheed Missiles & Space, Lockheed Electronics, the Air Farce, and various universities. -- The EFF is so obsessed with their vision of a utopian "everyone's free" web that their anti-big brother paranoia makes them wish to see the web destroyed before it could ever be corrupted by anything a terrible as any form of regulation. It's sooo noble of them. - Christopher H. Article: 101575 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "CLFE" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:00:59 -0500 Message-ID: <43ded2e3$0$25068$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> "Mike Andrews" wrote in message news:drmjj2$mgk$2@puck.litech.org... > nc183d@aol.com wrote: >> Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age >> group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the >> folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking >> SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that >> picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many >> 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my >> elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How >> old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? >> rgds, Mark S. 48 - will be 49 in a couple more months. Have been interested and screwing around with Electronics since I was about 8. Took electronics up in High School shop. Got Novice ticket in 80, moved up to Tech about a year later. Moved to Extra about 8 years later. Went on to get Commercial license. Own my own electronics company. clf Article: 101576 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: - exray - Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:18:39 -0400 Message-ID: <11ttlogilpah629@corp.supernews.com> References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> nc183d@aol.com wrote: > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). It was that way 30 years ago too! I'm 52. Got my Novice ticket in 1970. -Bill Article: 101577 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Charles" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:33:32 -0600 I guess that I am the "old man" 62 (1959 started) wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > Article: 101578 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:51:19 GMT 42 been a ham for 26 years been a BA nut for about 22 years wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > Article: 101579 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Charlie Hugg" Subject: Wanted Mosley WARC Kit for Mosley CL-33-M Beam Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:15:04 -0600 I am looking for the CL-33-M-WARC Kit to convert a Mosley CL-33-M to a CL-33-M WARC so that I can work the WARC Bands on my Mosley Beam. The Kit must be complete and in good shape and shippable to 79602. Please e-mail your price and the condition of the kit. Thanks, Charlie Hugg, K5MBX Article: 101580 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:41:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> nc183d@aol.com wrote: > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? 52. Got interested in elctronics in 5th grade, 1964-65. When I moved to a new house a neighbor gave me (now long gone) two ARRL handbooks from the 40's and 50's but was not a ham. I read those until they fell apart. Never could learn the code and went into computers instead. In 1993 I earned a no-code tech. I tried everything that I could even to the point of talking a cpo on the train to work and talking to myself in morse code. But I never could copy enough to pass. I asked the local VEs and then the ARRL VEC about taking a sending (only) test and they refused without a doctor's note. I then found out about Code Quick and learned to copy in about 2 months. I got as far as the 13wpm test and then had to stop taking tests in preperation for moving here. When I left the states in 1996, I was able to copy about 35wpm. But could never get above about 10wpm with a straight key. I've never been able to "get it" with a bug or a keyer, my brain is not wired to think in letters. The U.S. advanced was good enough for an Israeli extra license. I had not used it in years and have recently gone back on the air. Radios are rare here so there is no chance of building a boat anchor collection. Each transmitter must be on your license and an import permit is needed for them. What I do have is usefull and still works well, a Drake TR-5, Ten-Tec Triton IV digital, Argonaut 509, and a "modern" rig, a Kenwood TS-430s. 73. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ Article: 101582 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "kh" Message-ID: <0QMXZWh9EdSr-pn2-UqgZF8HcZurc@localhost> Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? References: Date: 31 Jan 2006 06:23:07 -0600 On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:57:20 UTC, Bill Powell wrote: > Nope - same one - same serial numbers > > Guess his shill bidder pushed it a little too far? > > > On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:28:28 -0500, K3HVG wrote: > > >OK... he says not... guess it isn't. > > > >K3HVG wrote: > > > >> Is it my imagination.. or is that the same SX-100 that was sold a few > >> days ago for $1600? The ad pictures are the same, although the > >> completed auction pictures have been deleted. Just curious. > >> Item #5857172450. I was considering putting mine up, given the prices > >> offered... (or not?). > >> Well, if he says it's not, then it is. ha. What's really troubling is what if martyn and gottahaveit were not "pushing it a little too far." What if, he's smarter than that. Say he has two or three shills, they bid up an SX-100 or whatever to irrational heights, do it two or three times. It's a private auction so we don't know what's going on. Then he actually puts one out and without too much shill action gets even half that price. He walks away with real money. de ah6gi/4 Article: 101583 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Subject: Re: How old are you? From: k5dh@raytheon.com (-=H=-) References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:23:42 GMT Interesting thread. I just turned 47 last week. Got my Novice in July 1977 while in College at Delaware Tech (club call sign was WB3CSM; long since defunct). Upgraded to General and then Advanced within just a few months. Finally got around to the Extra in 1990. Got the vanity call in 1996. Always a CW operator, not much fone. Been a fan of tube gear and of QRP ever since the beginning. I can't recall a time when I didn't have some of each kicking around the shack. Not a collector; more of a dabbler. I buy 'em, fix 'em up, make a QSO or two, then sell 'em. My fun is in the repair and restoration, I guess. Looking back over my nearly 29 years of hamming, the majority of folks at hamfests have been made up of two groups: old timers and very-newcomers. Still that way today. I think the mainstream hams do more of their shopping on eBay and the 1-800 numbers. 73, Dean K5DH (formerly WB3JBG, KA5JVU, KC5NG) In article <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, nc183d@aol.com says... > >Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age >group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the >folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking >SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that >picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many >30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my >elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How >old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? >rgds, Mark S. > Article: 101584 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Heytubeguy" Subject: WTB:90sec-2M RELAY Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:44:58 GMT Looking for 12v, 90 sec to 2 minute , 9 pin miniature tube relay. Advise as shipped price to 65714; used ok if good and guaranteed not DOA. Tnx heytubeguy Article: 101585 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "M. J. Powell" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:34:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> In message <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, nc183d@aol.com writes >Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age >group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the >folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking >SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that >picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many >30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my >elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How >old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? >rgds, Mark S. I think I beat the others. I'm 74, licenced in '52. That's why I'm on BA! Mike G3IJE -- M.J.Powell Article: 101586 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Leanne" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:53:17 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "M. J. Powell" wrote in message news:YgHdEUFkl13DFw$3@pickmere.demon.co.uk... > I think I beat the others. I'm 74, licenced in '52. > > That's why I'm on BA! I was licensed in '52, but I'm not telling although Mike is a bit older. Leanne - W1WXS Article: 101587 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: - exray - Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:30:53 -0400 Message-ID: <11tdomtsbl1rf7e@corp.supernews.com> References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> N9NEO wrote: > Bama sites seem to be getting more and more erratic. I've always used > the edebris site because I never had any probs. Now it's nothing but > probs just like the real BAMA SBC site. > > 73 > Bob > Maybe you should increase your financial donation to help things. -BM Article: 101588 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: msix@nmia.com Subject: Re: Help:Hammerlund SP-600 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <43c3e68d$0$95989$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> Steve wrote: >On the 3.45-7.4 MC band (only), received signals are somewhat >distorted. Normally, when tuning in a CW signal with the BFO on, >you'd expect an undistorted tone as you tune. On my radio, it'll >sound more like a growl. Signal strength doesn't seem to matter. For some reason some SPs have too much LO injection on one band. Try lowering the 105 Reg with a pot and see if that does it... 73 W7ZFB Article: 101589 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: Re: Collins 32V-3 HF Transmitter NICE!!! Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:34:59 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3aoat1589n2cv0bgf8osbaituhaln7el1u@4ax.com> I think Gary Schafer's analysis (below) is basically correct but I have minor comments to add (in addition to my earlier post, also quoted below, claiming the 400+ peak output just could not be possible, but I think I was wrong about that). See below. On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Gary Schafer wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:07:30 -0800, Don Bowey > wrote: > >> On 1/24/06 2:31 PM, in article 9jadt1lhkf6n6kpvd74t1bc8d7hodngtq0@4ax.com, >> "Gary Schafer" wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:40:54 -0800, Don Bowey >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 1/24/06 12:57 PM, in article 6xwBf.11951$bF.2404@dukeread07, "Uncle >>>> Peter" wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Straydog" wrote in message > >>>>>> My understanding of AM transmitter technology would estimate that a 32v3, >>>>>> with ~120 DC input (two 6146s, or were they still using one 4D32?) would >>>>>> have at most (class C, plate modulated) 70% X 120 = 80 watts of CW carrier >>>>>> output. 60 watts of audio on that final tube (as a non-linear high level >>>>>> mixer) will at best, double the _instantaneous_ (peak) input voltage, >>>>>> therefore power to 240 watts (plate current will _not_ double even if the >>>>>> plate voltage doubles on peak audio cycle [look at your tube curves again >>>>>> of iP vs vP at constant biases]) which you could only attempt to measure >>>>>> with an oscilloscope. Peak output? Could it be more than 240 x 0.7 = 168 >>>>>> watts? I doubt it (unless he's got something like "super-modulation" in >>>>>> the rig). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Without delving into the limitations of the 32V3, according to the info >>>>> from an ARRL publication: >>>>> >>>>> "..since the amplitude at the peak of the upswing is twice the unmodulated >>>>> amplitude, the power at this instant is four times the unmodulated, or 400 >>>>> watts." >>>>> >>>>> Average power, on the other hand, will be 1.5 times carrier. A Class C >>>>> amplifier with high level modulation should produce an instaneous PEP >>>>> of 4x carrier power. >>>>> >>>>> Pete >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Getting back to basics: A 120W (input) power, class C stage, will require >>>> 60W of audio (using a high-level, e.g. plate, modulator) for 100% >>>> modulation. If we assume 85% efficiency, then the output will consist of a >>>> Carrier of 102W and two sidebands of 25.5W each. >>>> >>>> In my opinion, any other explanation is useless. Do remember that the >>>> carrier amplitude does NOT vary with modulation. >>>> >>>> Don >>> >>> >>> I don't remember the 32v3 specs but a pair of 6146B's is rated for >>> 120 watts carrier output on AM. 6146A's are rated for 100 watts output >>> on AM. >> >> My Viking had a 4D32 final and it would load to well over 100W. >> >>> >>> Assuming the 120 watts carrier output, when modulated 100% the voltage >>> doubles and the current also doubles on modulation peaks. Doubling the >>> voltage and doubling the current works out to 4 times the power. This >>> is of course Peak Envelope Power of the signal which would be 480 >>> watts. >> >> Where does the double voltage come from at 100% modulation? I can only >> account for a 50% rise in voltage. >> >>> >>> You can not just add the audio power to the carrier power to find PEP. >>> You must first add the voltages together. >> >> Good idea, if one knows the voltages...... >> >>> >>> Peak envelope power is what the FCC is concerned with for maximum >>> allowable power of 1500 watts. >>> >>> Although when advertising an AM transmitter it is common to state the >>> carrier power and not try to confuse people by stating the PEP power >>> and not stating that is what is being speced. >>> >>> 73 >>> Gary K4FMX >>> >> >> My point is that listing the PEP capability of an AM transmitter isn't as >> useful as stating it can output about 100 watts. >> >> Don > > > I agree stating PEP output of an AM transmitter does little. I also think it doesn't mean much even for an SSB signal (which is difficult to compare with AM coming from the same station) because the S-meter damping makes it difficult to measure signal strength. Also, for the power in two sidebands (only one of which is needed) and the waste in the carrier, the usual efficiency of a linear amp is about half of that for a (non-linear) AM final amp. But a > properly operating transmitter should be able to give pep at 4 times > the carrier power. I think this contradicts something you said below, and contradicts what I said in my post, above. See more below. Some transmitters do not have that capability > because of a poor modulator or too small finals, or power supply etc. > I, like Peter, was trying to dispel the somewhat misleading add of the > original poster. > > As far as the voltage doubling with modulation, you only need to look > at the output on an oscilloscope at the composite signal and you will > easily see that it does. Set the scope to show the carrier level at > say 2 divisions on the screen. With modulation you will see the > positive peaks reach 4 divisions on the scope. The negative peaks will > reach zero on the scope. Yes, and I have done this, myself and seen a carrier "band" on my scope, and when speaking into the microphone (on a Johnson Ranger), seen the high peaks go up to about double the height of the carrier and the valleys go down to about zero (below zero would take the carrier away thus leading to splatter). > Another way to look at this is when modulating the final the peak > audio voltage must equal the plate voltage for 100% modulation. In > order for the modulation to go to negative 100% the audio voltage must > cause the plate voltage to swing down to zero. By the same note in > order to reach 100% positive modulation the audio voltage must cause > the plate voltage to go to twice the dc voltage. Yes, but none of this explains where the "4X pep" statement comes from. In fact, even at the instantaneous double the plate voltage, there is no plate current increase. The (non-linear) tube is not a (linear) resistor where you double the voltage accross the resistor and cause the current to double, thus a quadrupling of power. Look at the curves in your tube manuals for any given control (triodes if no other grids are present) or screen grid (tetrodes or pentodes) bias. Above some threshold plate voltage the plate current is independent of plate voltage. Plate current is only affected by grid voltages. > It may seem confusing because if you add the average output power up a > 100 watt transmitter is only 150 watts. 100 watts carrier and 25 watts > in each side band. I think this is right. However if you add the voltage of the carrier plus > the voltage of each audio side band and then calculate the power you > will see that it is 4 times the carrier power. I don't think this is quite right and, after thinking about all of this, part of the reason I already gave above is also not quite right. Here is another way I think we can look at this question (see below): > 100 watts into 50 ohms = 70.7 volts > 25 watts into 50 ohms = 35.35 volts > 25 watts into 50 ohms = 35.35 volts > Total voltage = 141.4 volts (which is 2 x carrier > voltage) I think this is a bit of a mistake and it would be better to calculate peak power in the following manner: First, there is no peak output power from the carrier, the carrier is always there and at the same strength no matter if there is modulation or not. So, power contribution FROM THE CARRIER (whether modulated or not) is still only your 100 watts, period. The carrier contributes NO extra power to the peak power we're all interested in. Now, lets look at the power in the sidebands. I'll accept that 25 watts as converting to 35 volts, but that 35 volts is not added to carrier power because it is in the 2-3 kc spectrum above or below the carrier. So, use your formula below and get (35 X 35)/50 = 1225/50 = 24 watts. And, for the second (other) sideband, there will be another 24 watts. Total: 48 watts of audio translated to RF in addition to the 100 watt (constant) carrier. Thus peak power is 148 watts. Where is the conflict between my analysis and yours? Its in the way we think about modulator power output (usually stated as audio power must be about half of final DC input, thus a 120 w DC input class-C final needs about 60 watts of audio). So, when you look up, for example the specs on a pair of 6146s in modulator service (go look in the back of your ARRL handbooks, any of them) and see them talk about 110-130 watts for the pair in either AB1 or AB2! They don't tell you that is _peak_ audio power! For the same tube in class C, they are showing 50-70 watts (continuous RF) out for one tube. Not much difference in power specs per tube, but you won't get anywhere near those 110-130 watts of audio in continuous (i.e. average) power because the heat dissipation will melt the plates since class AB is much less efficient than class C. So, your example of 25 watts per sideband is more like an _average_ power specification and what we should be looking at is what is the peak audio power (or voltage) coming out of the modulator. That peak audio voltage out of the modulator has to be equal to the plate voltage and in the same direction to double the final amp plate voltage, and valley bottom audio equal to the final amp plate voltage but in the opposite direction to reduce plate voltage to zero or near zero. Final B+ voltage plus the audio peak thus shows up on the scope, transiently, as RF output voltage at double the height of carrier alone, and final B+ minus the negative audio peak, at the negative peak, causes the height of the scope trace to go, transiently, to zero. So, when THEY talk about 60 watts of audio power to modulate a 120 w DC input final amplifier, they are talking about more like 60 watts average power which really means something like 120 watts of peak power (and is in all of the tube manuals where specs for all of the amplifier classes are shown next to each other! [this is not the case for receiving tube manuals which talk about average signal output for tubes like 6L6s in classes A and maybe AB]). This gets us into the audiophiles' endless arguing about what audio power means and under what conditions and specifications (eg. the distortions) need to be made for considering peak audio power, especially in music audio (with eg. drum beat transients) rather than voice audio (more or less steady). My general feeling is that in the AM transmitter situation (and the SSB situation, too) that talking about peak power has only theoretical value and almost no practical value and is confusing. You can only measure it on a scope and S-meter readings will be subject to the damping factor in the mechanical needle, electronic fudging by so-called "peak reading" meters including the bar graph things, and any asymmetry in the voice waveform, and distortions and non-linear characteristics in the rest of the electronics. I have heard guys on the air using the same amplifier in a linear class mode who switch from AM mode to SSB mode and my S meters (on lots of receivers) show the same peak value on SSB as the steady value on AM, plus or minus maybe one or two db, at most. Guys would be best off talking about final amp measured DC input watts (continous) and/or final amp measured carrier (continuous) RF output watts and not say too much about their modulator power unless they have a scope on the instantaneous modulator output voltage and current and can actually make a real, valid, representative measurement of both peak and average power and be able to say "Oh, my actual, real, measured-on-a-scope instantaneous peak whatever is X plus or minus Z accuracy." Now, how about peak power input to your 100 watt incandescent light bulb at home? Remember your house AC line voltage (117 VAC) is measured and speced as RMS (root mean square), so peak voltage is 1.41 X 117, peak current is 1.41 x 1 amp, and peak power is thus 1.41 X 1.41 X 100 watts? About 200 watts? Is that meaningful? No, because it isn't. Think DC and why RMS specs are always used for AC circuits and VOM voltmeter scales. Thanks for your attention, sorry to be long-winded. Art, W4PON > P= E squared / R > > 141.4 x 141.4 = 19994 > 19994 / 40 = 400 watts > > 73 > Gary K4FMX > > Article: 101590 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Frank Dresser" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:35:01 GMT wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. There's plenty, if you define the boomers as those born between the late 40s and early 60s. Probably the majority on this group, as we are the most likely to have some sort of interest in both computers and vacuum tube electronics. >I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > I'll be 49 in a few days. Although I'm not a ham, I've been to a few hamfests. I'd guess the bulk of the guys at the fests were retired guys, but that might only mean that retired guys have more free time. But it's my sense that younger people have less interest in vacuum tube electronics, and most of what interest they have is in hi-fi audio and guitar amps. Frank Dresser Article: 101591 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Bob W7AVK Subject: FS: CW Filter Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 07:45:23 -0800 FS: New Old Stock, never installed, optional CW Filter for several older Yeasu Rigs. Yeasu model number XF-455C, 8 pole, 500 hz bandwidth. $42 which inclucdes postage within USA 73 Bob W7AVK Article: 101592 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: - exray - Subject: Re: wazzup wit BAMA Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:38:18 -0400 Message-ID: <11tg6fst4hsaqc7@corp.supernews.com> References: <1138153798.695122.218770@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138231981.617117.80130@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> N9NEO wrote: > > And lastly mr Knobloch I will try FTP. Thanks for the suggestion. I > think I may need an ftp client. No? Last time I used cute ftp, but > that was many years ago. > > regards, > Bob > N9NEO I see you are using Mozilla. Type in the ftp address as a URL and it may do the trick just fine. GL, Bill Article: 101593 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Straydog Subject: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:09:48 -0500 Message-ID: Since my earlier post (dealing with the question of what is peak evelope power output in an AM transmitter), I've been doing more scrutinizing of tube Ip/Vp characteristic curves. They are much more non-linear than the impression you get from just looking at the curves. Also, it is rare or almost non-existant to find Ip vs screen voltage! Lets look at the venerable 833 (from my RCA TT-3 transmitting tube manual). This is a KW input class C triode. >From the curve: at zero grid volts, 1 kV on the plate gives 175 ma plate current 2 kV 500 ma That's more than a doubling of Ip for a doubling of Vp at minus 50 grid volts, 2 kV on the plate gives 50 ma plate current 4 kV 750 ma looking in my RCA receiving tube manual (RC-20) I found for a 6FG6 a sharp cutoff tetrode that only at zero grid volts was there a near linear relationship between plate current and plate voltage (meaning zero current at zero voltage, and a straight line [which actually deviated slightly from a straight line] with some slope. But at 100 v on plate, current was 14 milliamps, at 200 v on the plate, plate current was 34 miliamps. Definitely NOT a linear relationship. For the 6EM7 a triode, and at any of a wide range of grid voltages, plate current could be doubled with only a 15-20% increase in plate voltage. My thinking on all of this leads me to claim that anyone who can start with a 100 watt carrier from an AM transmitter and make a few assumptions about 100% modulation and come up with a _calculation_ of something like 400 watts of peak power and represent that as having something to do with reality is pure conjecture. If anyone wants to put an appropriate oscilloscope on the transmitter output and measure the RF voltage of unmodulated carrier into an appropriate load and then measure the peak RF voltage when the carrier is modulated, then and only then do they have a reasonable _basis_ for making a claim about peak (instantaneous) output power. Article: 101594 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Frank Dresser" References: <0QMXZWh9EdSr-pn2-UqgZF8HcZurc@localhost> Subject: Re: $1000 SX-100 again? Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 15:53:28 GMT "kh" wrote in message news:0QMXZWh9EdSr-pn2-UqgZF8HcZurc@localhost... > > Well, if he says it's not, then it is. ha. > > What's really troubling is what if martyn and gottahaveit were not > "pushing it a little too far." > > What if, he's smarter than that. Say he has two or three shills, > they bid up an SX-100 or whatever to irrational heights, do it > two or three times. It's a private auction so we don't know what's > going on. > > Then he actually puts one out and without too much shill action gets > even half that price. He walks away with real money. > > de ah6gi/4 > If buyers got the idea that SX-100s had somehow become worth at least 500 bucks, then so would sellers. There's hundreds of nice SX-100s out there, and if only a fraction of those SX-100s end up for auction on ebay, then they'll be selling cheap, assuming the bids are coming from real bidders and not shills. Frank Dresser Article: 101595 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Steve" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:04:24 -0800 Message-ID: <43df8a8a$0$58086$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> I'll be 51 in a couple of weeks, going on 12 according to wifee. Been a ham since I was 18. As a dumb kid, I was always interested in electronics, and did a lot of dumpster diving for old radios and TV's. Hate to admit it, but I ruined quite a few for their parts. Had more than my share of military BA's over the years as well. Now I'm paying my pennance and restoring many of the old rigs I once destroyed. Steve W6SSP Article: 101596 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Message-ID: <43DF8F25.70A93D18@shaw.ca> From: Irv Finkleman Subject: Re: How old are you? References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43DF8EC4.7A6E5015@shaw.ca> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:24:02 GMT Irv Finkleman wrote: > > nc183d@aol.com wrote: > > > > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? > > 65! Licenced in 1957. > > Irv VE6BP > -- Oops! That should read licenced in 1958! -- -------------------------------------- Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001 Beating it with diet and exercise! 297/215/210 (to be revised lower) 58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!) -------------------------------------- Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/index.html Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/index.htm Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/index.htm -------------------- Irv Finkleman, Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP Calgary, Alberta, Canada Article: 101597 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Bill Janssen Subject: Re: How old are you? References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:29:47 GMT Charles wrote: >I guess that I am the "old man" 62 (1959 started) > > This news group seems to populated by a bunch of youngsters. I am coming up on 78. Bill K7NOM > wrote in message >news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > >>Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age >>group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the >>folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking >>SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that >>picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many >>30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my >>elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How >>old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? >>rgds, Mark S. >> >> >> > > > > Article: 101598 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "CLFE" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:31:30 -0500 Message-ID: <43df90da$0$25089$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> "Frank Dresser" wrote in message news:FsLDf.314965$qk4.24160@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > > wrote in message > news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age >> group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the >> folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking >> SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that >> picked up on it too. > > There's plenty, if you define the boomers as those born between the late > 40s > and early 60s. Probably the majority on this group, as we are the most > likely to have some sort of interest in both computers and vacuum tube > electronics. > > >>I only say this because I don't see as many >> 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my >> elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How >> old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? >> rgds, Mark S. >> > > I'll be 49 in a few days. Although I'm not a ham, I've been to a few > hamfests. I'd guess the bulk of the guys at the fests were retired guys, > but that might only mean that retired guys have more free time. But it's > my > sense that younger people have less interest in vacuum tube electronics, > and > most of what interest they have is in hi-fi audio and guitar amps. > > Frank Dresser > > Many of those "retired" folks had some good electronics backgrounds. Even if they were Mill workers - Coal Miners or the like, many ended up doing repairs to the equipment. So, don't let yourself be fooled that "all" these "retirees" were late comers into the hobby. Many of those "retirees" have ham set ups that would rattle your imagination. Then too, some of them would tell you - they grew up with radio but never took the time to get into it, and now that they're retired, they want to do so - so in that case - your assumption would be correct. The hamfests I go to are still pretty well populated by young and old alike. Maybe not too many "young" under say 30, but a handful. Enough to make me believe the hobby/profession isn't dead yet. As to those over 20 to say 40 - maybe not as populated as the retirees, but not far behind. Now for my 2 cents as to the above post (respectfully) Though many of the parts available at the time Vacuum tubes were used - were still available with transistors/ICs - and many still are yet today - isn't so much the reason for lack of interest. This argument has raged for the last few years at various times and even recently in another group. SMT has chased many away, but still - with all the "parts big enough to see and solder" without an Electron Microscope and thousand dollar soldering set - the younger group has seemingly NO interest. The SMD isn't the only reason. As I said in another group - you would think - that as much as these kids seem to be into computers (or were) - video games, cell phones, etc...... some would want to get involved. I said also that yes - though Cell phones and the like are created in China or where ever for sale here - the fact remains, someone still has to maintain the cell sites - and it takes knowledge to do that. We can ill afford to allow our technology and maintenance to be exported. When we cease "maintaining" as well, we're done. Our Technology then, may as well be tube state - because if we can't fix it, those who seek to destroy us would have an open hand at doing so. If the armed forces are the only way to get these kids to train now days, we're in trouble. The armed forces couldn't possibly keep up the pace. Just my 2 cents... clf Article: 101599 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Frank Dresser" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43df90da$0$25089$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: <1eNDf.315278$qk4.155216@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:35:57 GMT "CLFE" wrote in message news:43df90da$0$25089$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net... > "Frank Dresser" wrote in message > news:FsLDf.314965$qk4.24160@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > > > > wrote in message > > news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > >> Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > >> group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > >> folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > >> SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > >> picked up on it too. > > > > There's plenty, if you define the boomers as those born between the late > > 40s > > and early 60s. Probably the majority on this group, as we are the most > > likely to have some sort of interest in both computers and vacuum tube > > electronics. > > > > > >>I only say this because I don't see as many > >> 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > >> elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > >> old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > >> rgds, Mark S. > >> > > > > I'll be 49 in a few days. Although I'm not a ham, I've been to a few > > hamfests. I'd guess the bulk of the guys at the fests were retired guys, > > but that might only mean that retired guys have more free time. But it's > > my > > sense that younger people have less interest in vacuum tube electronics, > > and > > most of what interest they have is in hi-fi audio and guitar amps. > > > > Frank Dresser > > > > > > Many of those "retired" folks had some good electronics backgrounds. Even if > they were Mill workers - Coal Miners or the like, many ended up doing > repairs to the equipment. So, don't let yourself be fooled that "all" these > "retirees" were late comers into the hobby. Many of those "retirees" have > ham set ups that would rattle your imagination. Then too, some of them would > tell you - they grew up with radio but never took the time to get into it, > and now that they're retired, they want to do so - so in that case - your > assumption would be correct. Huh? How was I stating any assumptions about when hamfesters got into the hobby? >The hamfests I go to are still pretty well > populated by young and old alike. Maybe not too many "young" under say 30, > but a handful. Enough to make me believe the hobby/profession isn't dead > yet. As to those over 20 to say 40 - maybe not as populated as the retirees, > but not far behind. Well, the topic was interest in boatanchors. If you're saying that there's almost as many people between 20 to 40 with an interest in boatanchor radios as people over 65 -- you've noticed something I've missed. > > Now for my 2 cents as to the above post (respectfully) > > Though many of the parts available at the time Vacuum tubes were used - were > still available with transistors/ICs - and many still are yet today - isn't > so much the reason for lack of interest. This argument has raged for the > last few years at various times and even recently in another group. SMT has > chased many away, but still - with all the "parts big enough to see and > solder" without an Electron Microscope and thousand dollar soldering set - > the younger group has seemingly NO interest. The SMD isn't the only reason. > > As I said in another group - you would think - that as much as these kids > seem to be into computers (or were) - video games, cell phones, etc...... > some would want to get involved. Well, they sure sell a bunch of fancy video cards and other such computeralia at Best Buy and Circuit City and Fry's. I'm assuming the buyers are the gamers who are into upgrading their computers, much as the hot-rodders of my generation would buy manifolds and camshafts at the speed shop. >I said also that yes - though Cell phones > and the like are created in China or where ever for sale here - the fact > remains, someone still has to maintain the cell sites - and it takes > knowledge to do that. We can ill afford to allow our technology and > maintenance to be exported. When we cease "maintaining" as well, we're done. > Our Technology then, may as well be tube state - because if we can't fix it, > those who seek to destroy us would have an open hand at doing so. If the > armed forces are the only way to get these kids to train now days, we're in > trouble. The armed forces couldn't possibly keep up the pace. > > Just my 2 cents... > > clf > > Military threats are so last millenium. Given our huge trade deficit and our enormous foreign-financed budget deficit, they'll just fly over and buy everything with what used to be our money. Frank Dresser Article: 101600 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:38:52 -0500 Message-ID: <104d3$43dfa0c7$97d56b99$6970@ALLTEL.NET> 68, first licensed in 1956. Article: 101601 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138680630.827800.294360@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138687303.836655.56280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:41:40 -0500 Message-ID: <6fb77$43dfa16e$97d56b99$7163@ALLTEL.NET> You were a general at age 10? "Litzendraht" wrote in message news:1138687303.836655.56280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Well, > > I'm 61 > > Novice License 1955 > > General License 1956 > > Extra Class Permit 2003 > Article: 101602 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:40:43 -0600 Message-ID: References: <2hlgt11412cqb72lm3br4qtsb2il7u3p6n@4ax.com> <0m7jt19blpu5a113nem2940o2hv5h2e2ga@4ax.com> "Don Bowey" wrote in message news:C0044092.24D3E%dbowey@comcast.net... > On 1/30/06 2:33 PM, in article drm47i$6u0$1@engnntp2.cig.mot.com, "Steve > Nosko" wrote: > > > > > "Straydog" wrote in message > > news:Pine.NEB.4.63.0601271707530.11605@panix1.panix.com... > > > > ,... > > > >>>> What is a further issue is why the FCC decided to drop steady DC input > >>>> (easily measured with a plate current meter) in favor of making PEP > > output... > > > > > > While possibly (probably) true... DC was easy to measure (by hams) and RF > > power difficult to measure in the early days. As time progressed, RF power > > became easier to measure and, after all, was the thing which would cause > > trouble as far as interference was concerned. > > > > 73, Steve, K9DCi > > > > > > Even us guys with a commercial ticket used DC measurements to determine > input power; it wasn't a ham thing. Watt meters were used on lower powered > equipment, but it wasn't a requirement. Your "after all" comment is silly. > > Don Perhaps a poor expression of intent, but my intent was that it is the output power which the FCC (or equivalent) is concerned about, not input. As long as it bacame more feasable to measure output power, why not use that. Perhaps explicitly stating it was stating the obvious, but it was an attempt at being complete--sort of a flame insurance. 73, Steve, K9DCI Article: 101603 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Antonio Vernucci" References: Subject: Re: More on PEP, AM, average power, etc. Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:03:20 +0100 Message-ID: <43dfd099$0$4162$4fafbaef@reader3.news.tin.it> I understood your post as if you would like to gain some understanding = (without having to consult Terman) on why the voltage & current figures = you read on your RCA TT-3 manual for the 833 tube do not apparently = match the 400-W peak-envelope-power figure commonly quoted for a = 100%-modulated 100-W AM carrier. In my understanding, there are two main issues that you did not consider = in your reasoning: 1) the voltage / current pairs you quoted for the 833 tube correspond to = a fixed grid voltage (either 0V or -50V). In practice the grid voltage = is sinusoidal (at the carrier frequency) and, for a class-C amplifer, it = only causes plate current to flow when getting above the interdiction = threshold. So, plate current only circulates for a fraction of the RF = cycle (<180 degrees). Therefore plate current is not sinusoidal and its = average value (along half a cycle), i.e. what you read on a DC meter, is = closer to the peak value compared to a purely sinusoidal waveform. When = plate voltage varies due to modulation, the grid interdiction threshold = varies and so the circulation angle does. This turns into a change of = the average-to-peak current relationship. That said, it immediately = follows that simply taking voltage & current figures at a fixed grid = voltage would not make much sense. All what said does not take into = account the presence of the plate tank circuit which, as someone else = has noted, yields a remarkable effect on actual plate voltage & current = figures 2) the modulator is designed to feed a given load resistance (depending = on the modulation transformer winding ratio). If the modulator load = (i.e. the class-C final stage) does not show a linear current / voltage = relationship, the plate voltage will, partially, self-adapt itself along = the audio-frequency cycle, thus smoothing the tube non-linear behavior. In addition to that, there are other effects (like the grid leak bias = causing grid voltage to somewhat follow the modulation) that someone = else has already pointed out. The above arguments do not provide a justification of why a class-C tube = shows, in practice, a reasonably linear voltage / current behavior, but = they should at least give you sufficient evidence why your reasoning is = way too simplified to credibly deny the 1:4 PEP ratio of AM-modulated = signals. =20 73 Tony I0JX Article: 101604 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: spamatody@spam.spam.spam Subject: Re: Drake TR-4CW w RIT Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:05:50 -0600 Message-ID: <1pnvt1ponhcg2klnl48972b3v2tkr1pif7@4ax.com> References: On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:42:19 -0500, ritchi50@optonline.net wrote: >Drake TR-4CW w RIT >Please state price and condition. a million dollars and broke to shit Article: 101605 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Ron H" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: <6oRDf.38113$%I1.21193@fe17.lga> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:19:44 -0600 I'll be 61 in a few months, got my novice in 1960 ( I think ) Wish I still had the Valliant! Got out of Ham Radio for a few years to raise the family then got back into it and B/A mid 90's Ron H. K3PID Article: 101606 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: WD=?ISO-8859-1?B?2A==?=HCO Subject: Just a few Nakked Radios Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:21:27 -0600 Message-ID: http://www.oldrigs.com This weeks nakked radios.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:15:08 AM N5SRN --- MIKE --- SIG RPT: 20 OVER S9 COLD SPRINGS TX For SALE - DENTRON MT-2000A ANT TUNER GOOD CONDX $280 713-409-6020 - E-Mail Good on QRZ.com   ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:18:32 AM KC0QDG --- PHIL --- SIG RPT: S9 OAKLAND IA For SALE - DENTRON GLA 1000 AMP Includes: MANUAL PWR CORD AND BOX - WORKS BUT NEEDS NEW TUBES $225 + SHIPPING 712-482-6863   ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:24:37 AM KJ5SK --- JOHN --- SIG RPT: S9 SAN MARCUS TX For SALE - RADIO SHACK HTX202 - 2 MTR HANDHELD WITH 30 WATT MIRAGE AMP - COMES WITH MANUAL BATTERY PACK AND CHARGER $150 512-396-0603   ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:28:31 AM W0UKJ --- RAY --- SIG RPT: S5 For SALE - YAESU R-1000 DIGITAL READOUT YC-601 314-428-1963   ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:30:54 AM WV4R --- MURPHY --- SIG RPT: S9 PARIS TX Looking for - ROHN 20 OR 25G USED TOWER - WILL COME AND PICKUP - DECENT CONDX PLEASE 903-249-2013  Just a few at: htt://www.oldrigs.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------   9:32:42 AM N5ROB --- JOHN --- SIG RPT: 20 OVER S9 For SALE - AMERITRON 811H NICE SHAPE $550 DENTRON CLIPPERTON L AMP LOOKS AND WRKS GRT $550 979-567-9236 Article: 101607 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Charles" Subject: Need 6JB6 info Message-ID: <55SDf.15483$eY5.4805@bignews7.bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:10:45 -0600 Does anyone know the settings on a Hickok Model 800 to test a 6JB6? Thanks Article: 101608 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "YT" References: Subject: Re: Just a few Nakked Radios Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:13:58 GMT OK but whats the dope with the R-7000? "WD Ø HCO" wrote in message news:C0053F06.6BEC%wd0hco@ev1.net... > > > http://www.oldrigs.com > > This weeks nakked radios.... > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > 9:15:08 AM > > N5SRN --- MIKE --- SIG RPT: 20 OVER S9 > > COLD SPRINGS TX > > For SALE - DENTRON MT-2000A ANT TUNER GOOD CONDX $280 > > 713-409-6020 - E-Mail Good on QRZ.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > 9:18:32 AM > > KC0QDG --- PHIL --- SIG RPT: S9 > > OAKLAND IA > > For SALE - DENTRON GLA 1000 AMP Includes: MANUAL PWR CORD AND BOX - WORKS > BUT NEEDS NEW TUBES $225 + SHIPPING > > 712-482-6863 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > 9:24:37 AM > > KJ5SK --- JOHN --- SIG RPT: S9 > > SAN MARCUS TX > > For SALE - RADIO SHACK HTX202 - 2 MTR HANDHELD WITH 30 WATT MIRAGE AMP - > COMES WITH MANUAL BATTERY PACK AND CHARGER $150 > > 512-396-0603 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > 9:28:31 AM > > W0UKJ --- RAY --- SIG RPT: S5 > > > > For SALE - YAESU R-1000 > > DIGITAL READOUT YC-601 > > 314-428-1963 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > 9:30:54 AM > > WV4R --- MURPHY --- SIG RPT: S9 > > PARIS TX > > Looking for - ROHN 20 OR 25G USED TOWER - WILL COME AND PICKUP - DECENT > CONDX PLEASE > > 903-249-2013 > > Just a few at: > > htt://www.oldrigs.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > 9:32:42 AM > > N5ROB --- JOHN --- SIG RPT: 20 OVER S9 > > > > For SALE - AMERITRON 811H NICE SHAPE $550 > > DENTRON CLIPPERTON L AMP LOOKS AND WRKS GRT $550 > > 979-567-9236 > > Article: 101609 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Brian Hill" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: <8oTDf.8$dG6.3@fe02.lga> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:36:19 -0600 wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > 41 Regards B.H. Article: 101610 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Need 6JB6 info Date: 31 Jan 2006 20:06:43 -0500 Message-ID: References: <55SDf.15483$eY5.4805@bignews7.bellsouth.net> In article <55SDf.15483$eY5.4805@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, Charles wrote: >Does anyone know the settings on a Hickok Model 800 to test a 6JB6? Thanks That's a 9QL pinout. Same pinout as the 6JE6, 6JF6, 6JU6, 6KM6, 6LQ6, 6LZ6, 6ME6 tubes. If you have any of these listed on the chart, set the switches up the same way. I _think_ the bias setting should be the same. So get a known-good 6JB6, put it in, and adjust the shunt until the meter reads good. Now try your unknown tubes in there. Don't trust this sort of back of the hand estimate for exact transconductance values, but for a rough go/no go, you should at least be able to cull out the tubes that have substantially lower transconductance due to low emission, shorts, or badly damaged elements. God, how I hate sweep tubes... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Article: 101611 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Jim, KK1W" Subject: FA: Parts, orange drops, variac, Simpson meter Message-ID: <69UDf.2162$tK2.114@fe05.lga> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:28:34 -0500 Hi, A bunch of assorted parts, chokes, orange drops, a variac and a Simpson audio voltmeter. Visit ebay: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZkk1w2000QQhtZ-1 Thanks for looking! '73... Jim, KK1W Article: 101612 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: HFguy Subject: Re: Wanted SX-100 Parts References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 03:21:06 GMT Do you have a front panel for an SX-100? Thanks Bob wrote: > I've got an SX-100 main tuning knob. contact me. > eh54 at sbcglobal dot net > "gwf545" wrote in message > news:gwf545.21vk7u@news.radiobanter.com... Article: 101613 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Phil Witt Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <104d3$43dfa0c7$97d56b99$6970@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:35:38 -0600 On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:38:52 -0500, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: >68, first licensed in 1956. Me, too, both. Article: 101614 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Joe" References: Subject: Re: Nice D-104 (Black) Message-ID: <3sWDf.3885$UY3.1258@trndny05> Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:05:19 GMT You can wire these anyway you want, (well at least old school hams did) That mic's been sold. Yes Jack That clocks been going since 1975, with perhaps a 4 year break I had to bring the anode up to around 220 volts a couple years ago with a simple voltage doubler mod. It also has a smaller Sperry display on the seconds the original went completely dead Sperry SP-352's are a hard $$$ find in 2006 -Joe "STEVE TROOK" wrote in message news:SLiDf.1498$uD5.669@fe12.lga... > what is it wired for??? I am interested. Article: 101615 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: " Ron in Radio Heaven" References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138765947.895777.126970@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How old are you? Message-ID: <%_WDf.52927$Kp.38997@southeast.rr.com> Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:42:35 GMT Harold, you're repeating yourself.... Ron Article: 101616 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Francesco Sartorello" References: Subject: ARR7 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:50:31 +0100 Message-ID: <43e0684f$0$27300$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> Hello, WTB an Halli (or other manufacturer) ARR7 receiver, even non-working, but good cosmetics. Will pay Paypal and have the item shipped USPS Airmail to Italy. Francesco Article: 101617 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Carter, K8VT" Subject: Re: Looking for a Hallicrafters SX-38/In florida References: Message-ID: <501Ef.21444$Jd.16783@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:33:21 GMT COLIN LAMB wrote: > > They are a classic radio, so enjoy it. It's also an AC-DC radio with one side of the line grounded to the chassis and it has a metal cabinet--a killer. So enjoy it CAREFULLY! Article: 101618 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: SeaView-USA@webtv.net (Captain Crane) Subject: Double Super Hetrodyne what does this do in a CB Radio ? Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 04:22:03 -0800 Message-ID: <20812-43E0A7EB-453@storefull-3332.bay.webtv.net> Hi, Does anyone know What Double Super Hetrodyne does in a CB radio. I have a GE 40 channel cb and it has Double Super Hetrodyne. Brian - Las Vegas Article: 101619 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Lynn Coffelt" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:25:20 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? This one is older than you, sonny! First two receivers built in 1941 (neither of which worked as "liquid solder" didn't seem to be a very good conductor). We used condensers, and resistor color code was "body, end, dot". After long struggle to reach 13wpm with a stick, got class "B" license in 1948. Class "A" not until 1950. Old (73) Chief Lynn Article: 101620 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Lynn Coffelt" Subject: test... don't bother reading Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:39:22 -0800 Message-ID: Two posts didn't make it through...... just testing Article: 101621 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: "Lynn Coffelt" Subject: Re: How old are you? Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 22:16:36 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? This one is older than you, sonny! First two receivers built in 1941 (neither of which worked as "liquid solder" didn't seem to be a very good conductor). We used condensers, and resistor color code was "body, end, dot". After long struggle to reach 13wpm with a stick, got class "B" license in 1948. Class "A" not until 1950. Old (73) Chief Lynn Article: 101622 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors Subject: Re: Double Super Hetrodyne what does this do in a CB Radio ? From: k5dh@raytheon.com (-=H=-) References: <20812-43E0A7EB-453@storefull-3332.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 13:55:59 GMT Brian, Without going into the technical aspects, I'll simply say that a double-conversion superheterodyne receiver offers improved sensitivity and selectivity over a single-conversion superhet. In the early days of CB (ie, the 1960s), the majority of CB sets used a single-conversion receiver, while some of the high- end models used double-conversion. As CB became more populer in the late 1960s and more stations came on the air, it became necessary to improve receiver selectivity to reduce the problem of "bleedover" from adjacent channels. With that in mind, the majority of CB manufacturers began using double superhets for even their "cheap" radios, and from then on it became standard practice. If you would like to learn about the technical reasons for all of this, pay a visit to your public library and look for an ARRL Radio Amateur's Handbook, and read up on receiver theory and design. 73, Dean K5DH In article <20812-43E0A7EB-453@storefull-3332.bay.webtv.net>, SeaView-USA@webtv.net says... > >Hi, Does anyone know What Double Super Hetrodyne does in a CB radio. >I have a GE 40 channel cb and it has Double Super Hetrodyne. >Brian - Las Vegas > Article: 101623 of rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors From: Steve Reinhardt Subject: Re: How old are you? References: <1138669094.511626.286550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:28:36 -0500 nc183d@aol.com wrote: > Just a question that has been rattling around in the gourd. What age > group are B/A enthusiast-type folks here on the Net? I know we have the > folks from when they (the B/A's) were the most active (and I'm talking > SX11 here), but I wonder if there's a large following of Boomers that > picked up on it too. I only say this because I don't see as many > 30's-40's-50's people at the Hamfests and other gatherings as I see my > elders (Gentlemen, all). So the question bubbles up outta the tar? How > old are the folks on rec.radio.amateur.boatanchor? > rgds, Mark S. > First licensed in 1969, WN2KXP. Got my Advanced class next year and became WB2KXP. Foolishly let that lapse in 1980, and retook all the tests last year for my Extra, AB1EN. Didn't love the call, so upgraded to the new vanity this month. I'm 50, and now have two TR-3's to babysit...