20070830.ba v04_n084.bam.20070830 >From ???@??? Thu Aug 30 19:12:14 2007 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:10:41 CDT From: Old Tube Radios To: Old Tube Radios Subject: BOATANCHORS digest 4084 Message-Id: <20070831001042.C436347017F@srvr1.theporch.com> BOATANCHORS Digest 4084 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) NC-300 mute question by "James C. Garland" <4cx250b@muohio.edu> 2) Re: NC-300 mute question by Bob Roehrig 3) Re: NC-300 mute question by Garey Barrell 4) Re: BOATANCHORS digest 4083-^AH^ dead horse, transfer functions, et al by "David M. Upton" 5) Dead horse phoenix by "Arden Allen" 6) Re: NC-300 mute question by "Ken" 7) Re: For Sale - McElroy MT-35 transmitter by "Marty Reynolds' debris field" 8) USN heavyweight receivers AN/FRR-24 and AN/FRR-37 by "Nick England" 9) Re: Dead horse phoenix by spr@earthlink.net 10) Re: Dead horse phoenix by "Arden Allen" 11) Northern Electric Variable master Oscillator by "Meir WF2U" 12) Re: Dead horse phoenix by "David M. Upton" 13) Re: Dead horse phoenix by Scott Robinson 14) KSM Testing on RTTY by Richard Dillman 15) Visual Signalling by Jerry Proc 16) Re: Visual Signalling by Richard Dillman 17) Need Info: R-892/URR-44 by Al Klase ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "James C. Garland" <4cx250b@muohio.edu> To: Old Tube Radios Subject: NC-300 mute question Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:15:18 -0600 Message-ID: <010801c7e9e2$7225d070$01e83586@Garland> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0109_01C7E9B0.278B6070" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C7E9B0.278B6070 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gang, A friend of mine just acquired an NC-300 and is muting it with a -22V power supply, controlled by a relay. I haven't had one of these receivers for years, but I've got to think there's an easier way to mute the receiver. Does anyone know If one can mute the radio by just closing or opening a pair of rear panel contacts? Tnx, Jim W9ZR ********************** Jim Garland W8ZR Santa Fe, NM www.w8zr.net ********************* ------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C7E9B0.278B6070 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * * This post contains a forbidden message format * * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * * If your postings display this message your mail program * * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ------=_NextPart_000_0109_01C7E9B0.278B6070-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:23:09 -0500 (CDT) From: Bob Roehrig To: Old Tube Radios Cc: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: NC-300 mute question Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, James C. Garland wrote: > A friend of mine just acquired an NC-300 and is muting it with a -22V power > supply, controlled by a relay. I haven't had one of these receivers for > years, but I've got to think there's an easier way to mute the receiver. > Does anyone know If one can mute the radio by just closing or opening a pair > of rear panel contacts? I am not familiar with that set but a favorite method I use is to lift the grounded end of the RF gain control off of ground for stand-by. This is better than opening the HV that a lot of sets did. Bob Roehrig Aurora University Telecom dept. broehrig@aurora.edu K9EUI W9ZGP WD2XSH/19 630-844-4898 fax 630-844-4222 "Nostalgia is a thing of the past" ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46D4D8B4.5040707@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 22:23:48 -0400 From: Garey Barrell MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: NC-300 mute question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim - There's a three terminal board on the back of the receiver. STDBY - GND - MUTE. If the front panel switch is set to XMT, the receiver will be in standby until the STDBY and GND terminals are shorted. The MUTE side cuts off only the AF output stage and is used for full break-in on CW. -22VDC applied to MUTE in transmit cuts off the audio immediately, and will follow at a fairly fast CW speed. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 4-B & C-Line Service Supplement CDs James C. Garland wrote: > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * > * This post contains a forbidden message format * > * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * > * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * > * If your postings display this message your mail program * > * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46D4EC65.2090703@wb1cmg.mv.com> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:47:49 -0400 From: "David M. Upton" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: BOATANCHORS digest 4083-^AH^ dead horse, transfer functions, et al Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am going to jump in here to say that I agree with T. Rauch's analysis of the situation in any RF power amplifier or small signal amplifier. The linearity of the transfer function in relation to the desired power output determines the odd order in-band distortion. In other words, with a given degree of non-linearity, the distortion is largely fore-ordained at a given RF input level. There are some variations seen in the measured IMD due to load impedance and bias conditions. IMD products can be plotted as a function of these parameters and there are "sweet spots" for any one type of distortion but no general minimization is that apparent. A null for 5th order might be found,as an example, but it would hardly coincide with that for 3rd or 7th order just as best gain and lowest noise rarely-if ever!- coincide. The only other possibility is use a more inherently linear tube. Interesting that linearity for triodes and screen grid tubes derives from drastically different characteristics when inspected on a set of I-V curves. There was a point made about adequate decoupling that is quite valid. A cross-modulation can result if the nominally cold voltages can vary appreciably about the operating point bias at the rate of the modulation's amplitude components. So it is not just sufficient to prevent RF rate variations in bias lines but also audio/video rates too. This is true for both small-signal and high power RF amplifiers. Degeneration of modulating signals due to poor decoupling techniques can cast a perfectly good amplifier in a very unfavorable light. This issue is also a major shortcoming of many commercial/amateur designs as well as any amplifier intended for ATV or wideband use. By the way: Clarke & Hess's book on Non-linear analysis in Communications circuits really is a very good reference for understanding these real problems. David, WB1CMG Mont Vernon, NH 03057 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001701c7e9fd$40aa5190$f19e480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Dead horse phoenix Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 22:27:06 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > [David Upton] I am going to jump in here to say........ Like a great river overflowing its banks this discusion has flowed into several perspectives that I think is becoming confusing to the casual observer. You can talk about transfer functions and distortion products until the cows drown but ignoring the effect of filters used to overcoming the deficiencies of less than perfect amplifying devices produces the chaos a recieving RF amplifier with no bandpass filtering from DC to daylight would produce. I cannot present a mathematical analysis of a properly designed system composed of imperfect devices that in combination produce acceptable results. Radios work poorly, better or pretty damn good because of how well the combining of circuit elements is done. With that in mind I suggest we confine our stumping to the kind of circuits our vintage strectcher cases employ to produce their debatable results. An example I would like to cite is the two RF stage front end my Hammarlund SP600 employs. One can expect one RF amplifier will produce acceptable noise performance but why are two RF stages necessary? I'll suggest the reason is narrower RF bandpass and greater stop band rejection produces a quieter front end due to less energy piling into the mixer. On the other hand is my Drake 2C a better performer with just one RF stage? Hmmmmmm.... Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000001c7ea33$39cb3980$020fa8c0@ken> From: "Ken" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: NC-300 mute question Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 04:52:02 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Jim & Gang, For the best, and I do mean BEST, full break-in system, incorporate the system given in QST August 1967 "Hints & Kinks". I have used it for decades! The smoothest operation possible. FWIW. Ken N5CM From: "James C. Garland" <4cx250b@muohio.edu> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:15 PM Subject: NC-300 mute question> Gang, > > A friend of mine just acquired an NC-300 and is muting it with a -22V power > supply, controlled by a relay. I haven't had one of these receivers for > years, but I've got to think there's an easier way to mute the receiver. > Does anyone know If one can mute the radio by just closing or opening a pair > of rear panel contacts? > > Jim W9ZR -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 416 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2932.66.56.28.127.1188384755.squirrel@fracas.netboobie.org> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 06:52:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: For Sale - McElroy MT-35 transmitter From: "Marty Reynolds' debris field" To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Art I excerpted what u wrote: > > I'm posting this info for a friend, who is not a member of the list. > > He is selling a very rare McElroy MT-35 transmitter, made in 1945. Yes - > Ted McElroy, | asking $975 | > a few minor changes - > started manufacture of the transmitter in 1946. This was the birth of the > first post-war World Radio Labs transmitter - the Globe Trotter. > > How do I know all of this history? Well - I found one of these rigs in > 2005, and it's now a very important part of my Boatanchor collection. | | > I've > done extensive research on the history, including a telephone conversation > with Leo Meyerson to confirm the story. To the best of my knowledge, > there > are four of these transmitters in existance. Maybe one of the four lives near Augusta, Ga. Or maybe there's now 5. Remarkable in that it's made around BC-610 tuning units Congrats on ur 'rarie' Marty the 'rm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:39:57 -0400 From: "Nick England" Subject: USN heavyweight receivers AN/FRR-24 and AN/FRR-37 To: Old Tube Radios Message-id: <014301c7ea52$dab60bd0$2f0212ac@Heathkit2> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I am assembling one of these rack-mount HF diversity receivers made by National in the early 50's. http://www.virhistory.com/ham/frr24.htm The FRR-24 has 3 receivers in 3 racks, plus diversity and RTTY units in a fourth rack. I am guessing that the FRR-37 is a 3-rack, 2-receiver version but that is just an educated guess at this point. The FRR-37 shares most FRR-24 rack-mount modules with just a few slightly different and labeled as xxxx/FRR-37. NJ7P's database says the FRR-10 is somehow related but I know absolutely nothing about it at this point. If you have an FRR-37 or FRR-10 manual or a listing of military gear that has anything at all about the FRR-37 or FRR-10 please let me know. I already have an FRR-24 manual so have got module schematics, alignment info, etc. - but I am really curious about the configurations of the FRR-37 and FRR-10. Ditto the FRR-24A if there is such a thing. If anyone has info on Navy contract numbers and can supply a date or other info on NObsr-57388 for the AN/FRR-37 I'd really appreciate it. If you have any pieces of one of these monsters or know someone who might, please let me know. I'd also be interested in contacting anyone who saw them in operation. many thanks - 73 & Have Fun, Nick KD4CPL Chapel Hill NC nick@3rdtech.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <28248007.1188412414710.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:33:34 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: spr@earthlink.net To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: Dead horse phoenix Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, I think the main virtue of two RF amplifiers is to improve image rejection in single conversion 455 KHz IF receivers operated above 10 MHz. Thus the Drake, with its 5 MHZ (more or less)IF needs only one RF amp to get up to 30 MHz input frequency, but my single conversion 455 KHZ IF SX-28, SX-42, and Scott Philharmonic all have two RF stages. Regards, Scott -----Original Message----- >From: Arden Allen >Sent: Aug 28, 2007 10:27 PM >To: Old Tube Radios >Subject: Dead horse phoenix > >> [David Upton] I am going to jump in here to say........ > >Like a great river overflowing its banks this discusion has flowed into >several perspectives that I think is becoming confusing to the casual >observer. You can talk about transfer functions and distortion products >until the cows drown but ignoring the effect of filters used to overcoming >the deficiencies of less than perfect amplifying devices produces the chaos >a recieving RF amplifier with no bandpass filtering from DC to daylight >would produce. I cannot present a mathematical analysis of a properly >designed system composed of imperfect devices that in combination produce >acceptable results. Radios work poorly, better or pretty damn good because >of how well the combining of circuit elements is done. With that in mind I >suggest we confine our stumping to the kind of circuits our vintage >strectcher cases employ to produce their debatable results. > >An example I >would like to cite is the two RF stage front end my Hammarlund SP600 >employs. One can >expect one RF amplifier will produce acceptable noise performance but why >are two RF stages necessary? I'll suggest the reason is narrower RF >bandpass and greater stop band rejection produces a quieter front end due to >less energy piling into the mixer. On the other hand is my Drake 2C a >better performer with just one RF stage? Hmmmmmm.... > >Arden Allen >KB6NAX > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001501c7ea73$e43b2b10$949f480c@KB6NAX> From: "Arden Allen" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: Dead horse phoenix Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:36:19 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Scott replies: > I think the main virtue of two RF amplifiers is to improve image rejection in single conversion 455 KHz IF receivers operated above 10 MHz. Thus the Drake, with its 5 MHZ (more or less)IF needs only one RF amp to get up to 30 MHz input frequency, but my single conversion 455 KHZ IF SX-28, SX-42, and Scott Philharmonic all have two RF stages. Good point. The SP600 is dual converstion on the upper bands with a 1st IF of about 3.5MHz. Perhaps two RF stages are required for acceptable image rejection up to 54MHz. I assume noise performance is fair for the 6BA6, 6BA6, 6BE6 front end. Also, AVC is excellent. I once plugged a 6BZ6 into the 1st RF amp socket (cathode and suppressor tied together at socket). S meter calibration was way off due to sharper cutoff. S/N improved 6dB, not worth the tube change. Arden Allen KB6NAX ------------------------------ From: "Meir WF2U" To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Northern Electric Variable master Oscillator Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:38:46 -0400 Message-ID: <009b01c7eaae$eb172480$0300a8c0@MBDCONSULTING.LOCAL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, I'm looking for documentation for the Northern Electric Variable Master Oscillator. The name explains it all - it covers from 2 MHz to 32 MHz. It's a big 19 inch panel rack mount unit. Thanks, 73, Meir WF2U Landrum, SC No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 4:29 PM ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46D635E1.8020505@wb1cmg.mv.com> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:13:37 -0400 From: "David M. Upton" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios CC: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: Dead horse phoenix Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If the critical parameters of a receiving system's components are known such as noise figure, 1 dB compression input or output, signal levels, modulation acceptance bandwidth, desired signal-to-noise ratio, and stage gains, a very accurate analysis may be made of the receiver's performance using a spreadsheet such as Excel. It is even possible with the aid of spur prediction charts of mixers (or weakly non-linear amplifiers) and filter frequency response characteristics to predict where the junk falls and how successfully it can be reduced. It is more difficult to achieve levels of comparable precision in the prediction of parameters in DSP receivers but the recent offerings on the market are getting quite good at it. The two RF stage observation has a simple answer-Because that is what National used in the HRO! The two tube RF stages hearken to an era when noise limited receivers were considered good, the RF stage was tuned but forced to operate over a wide range perhaps with a bandspread and thus suffer wide variations in Q and efficiency, and gain above 14 MHz was darned hard to get and harder to keep! By Goodman, W1DX, called attention to these shortcomings in his famous article,"What's wrong with our present Receivers?" in 1957 QST. The Drake 1-A and the Collins 75A4 were already out by this time and showed that specialized circuits optimized for just the amateur frequency range in question offered tremendous performance advantages and ease of operation. More gain was available from tuned circuits operating at a narrow frequency range without the wide variations in Q seen by the HRO-type designs (including the Super-Pros here!). Goodman's article also emphasized the importance of gain limiting and overload immunity and reintroduced and stressed the emphasis of adding maximal selectivity at either the antenna or the first mixer. The above had just become practical at common IFs through either mechanical or crystal filtering or the Drake approach of low frequency carefully engineered tuned circuits with shaped responses. It is interesting that these truths have recently been rediscovered AGAIN in the current "roofing filter" craze in the multi-kilobuck rigs. An example of what was probably a good "minimalist" design was published by W5DF in CQ at about that time. Although scoffed at by the "ham" of that day as just a beginner's rig, it offered what was probably very good performance and very little complexity by following the principles elucidated above. The Mosley CM-1 has some ancestry there, I think. Either of these rigs would probably be a very comfortable workable receiver for use today if executed properly. An HRO may be fun to operate for a while as is a Super-Pro but the wide bandpass, noise, ringing on CW in the single filter, poor image rejection and overall sensitivity above 14 MHz, poor AVC and overload characteristics as well as overall relatively poor sideband performance numbered their days. David, WB1CMG Mont Vernon, NH 03057 Arden Allen wrote: >> [David Upton] I am going to jump in here to say........ > > Like a great river overflowing its banks this discusion has flowed into > several perspectives that I think is becoming confusing to the casual > observer. You can talk about transfer functions and distortion products > until the cows drown but ignoring the effect of filters used to overcoming > the deficiencies of less than perfect amplifying devices produces the chaos > a recieving RF amplifier with no bandpass filtering from DC to daylight > would produce. I cannot present a mathematical analysis of a properly > designed system composed of imperfect devices that in combination produce > acceptable results. Radios work poorly, better or pretty damn good because > of how well the combining of circuit elements is done. With that in mind I > suggest we confine our stumping to the kind of circuits our vintage > strectcher cases employ to produce their debatable results. > > An example I > would like to cite is the two RF stage front end my Hammarlund SP600 > employs. One can > expect one RF amplifier will produce acceptable noise performance but why > are two RF stages necessary? I'll suggest the reason is narrower RF > bandpass and greater stop band rejection produces a quieter front end due to > less energy piling into the mixer. On the other hand is my Drake 2C a > better performer with just one RF stage? Hmmmmmm.... > > Arden Allen > KB6NAX > > > ------------------------------ Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:58:41 -0700 To: Old Tube Radios From: Scott Robinson Subject: Re: Dead horse phoenix Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" >David Upton wrote: > >The two RF stage observation has a simple answer-Because that is >what National used in the HRO! The two tube RF stages hearken to an >era when noise limited receivers were considered good, the RF stage >was tuned but forced to operate over a wide range perhaps with a >bandspread and thus suffer wide variations in Q and efficiency, and >gain above 14 MHz was darned hard to get and harder to keep! By >Goodman, W1DX, called attention to these shortcomings in his famous >article,"What's wrong with our present Receivers?" in 1957 QST. The >Drake 1-A and the Collins 75A4 were already out by this time and >showed that specialized circuits optimized for just the amateur >frequency range in question offered tremendous performance >advantages and ease of operation. and Scott Robinson remarks: Well, your argument about limited tuning range for RF amps is plausible, but does not apply to either a Drake R-4A or 4B or a Heath SB-300 or 310. In all these very good designs, the RF amp is tuned by a separate knob from the local oscillator, and the RF section covers a rather wide range. It is certainly true that by separately tuning the RF amp, you eliminate tracking error and can probably get better sensitivity for this reason. Did the HRO really influence the very post-war Halli SX-42, or did they just want better image rejection? Regards, Scott ------------------------------ Message-ID: <25253879.1188499465885.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:44:25 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: Richard Dillman To: Old Tube Radios Subject: KSM Testing on RTTY Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Once again this Saturday the KSM Transmitter Department plans to exercise the 12Mc RTTY transmitter beginning at about 2000Z and ending at about 2300Z. Press and weather will be broadcast in Baudot and FEC modes. The Baudot transmission will be 170cps shift, 45.45 baud. The frequency is 12631.0kc. The tubes currently in the transmitter limit power output to 2.5kW. Once these are replaced a power output of 4 to 5kW will be used. The antenna is a H over 2. The transmitter for our 8Mc RTTY frequency is undergoing restoration by the Transmitter Department. Once this transmitter operational both 8Mc and 12Mc will be active each Saturday with press and weather information of interest to the maritime community. The 8Mc frequency is 8433.0kc. A double extended Zepp will be used on this frequency. KSM will be active on Morse as usual on: 426 500 4350.5 6474.0 8438.3 12993.0 16914.0 K6KPH will guard 7050kc and 14050kc for signal reports, NTS traffic and general calls. Since the above frequencies are in a scanner along with the ship calling frequencies, the best procedure to use when calling K6KPH is the same as that for commercial operations: Keep sending "K6KPH" on the above frequencies (within the limits of FCC identification requirements of course). When your call is heard K6KPH will send "DE" after which you can send your call sign. Sometimes things get busy at the station so I apologize in advance if your call is not immediately answered. VY 73, Richard Dillman Chief Operator, MRHS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:18:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Jerry Proc Subject: Visual Signalling To: Old Tube Radios MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <141763.4513.qm@web90603.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello Gang, For anyone who is interested, I have created a short document on Visual Signalling (in the RCN). I have also included some contrasts with the USN. http://www.jproc.ca/rrp/visual.html -- Regards, Jerry Proc E-mail: jerry7proc@yahoo.com Get news delivered with the All new Yahoo! Mail. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page. Start today at http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca ------------------------------ Message-ID: <14425030.1188512152220.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:15:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Dillman To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Re: Visual Signalling Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >For anyone who is interested, I have created a short >document on Visual Signalling (in the RCN). I have >also included some contrasts with the USN. Thanks for the post, Jerry. I remain in awe of the work you have done on HAIDA. I had the honor and great pleasure of using the blinker lamp on SS LANE VICTORY/KECW when I was R/O for one of their cruises. One of the Military Madio Collector Group is an enthusiast for blinker lamp signaling so I was indoctrinated in the correct procedure. Plus a member of the original Armed Guard was aboard so I got instruction from him too. As we left port I communicated with the shore station he set up. My message was: AIR RAID PEARL HARBOR THIS IS NO DRILL If anyone is interested, photos of the trip including two of me at the signal lamp (and one of the member of the Armed Guard) are available at: http://www.radiomarine.org/LaneVictory/ By the way, I have an Aldis lamp like the one in Jerry's Web page and a US one too available if anyone wants to brush up on their skills. Regards, RD ================================= Richard Dillman, W6AWO Maritime Radio Historical Society http://www.radiomarine.org Collector of Harleys, Willys and Radios over 100lbs. ================================= ------------------------------ Message-ID: <46D75C7A.3030801@ar88.net> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:10:34 -0400 From: Al Klase MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Old Tube Radios Subject: Need Info: R-892/URR-44 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------080702040207070807020903" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080702040207070807020903 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Heavy Metal Types, Does anyone have anything on subject radio beyond: R-892/URR-44 Receiver, 0.54-19mHz, AM, tubes, 117VAC 60Hz, 70lbs Regards, Al -- Al Klase - N3FRQ Flemington, NJ http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/ --------------080702040207070807020903 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- * * This post contains a forbidden message format * * (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) * * Mail Lists at theporch.com only accept PLAIN TEXT * * If your postings display this message your mail program * * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --------------080702040207070807020903-- ------------------------------ End of BOATANCHORS Digest 4084 ******************************