Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31   Report Post  
Old June 3rd 05, 09:04 PM
dxAce
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Lucky wrote:

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
I had one of those. It did have quite a bit of RF gain, but the I.F. strip
did not have the gain that the Plessey SL6700 that is used in the HF-150
does. They are not the same receiver, performance wise. If you can find one
in the 125 dollar range, it isn't a bad deal.

Pete

"Lucky" wrote in message
...

"John S." wrote in message
ups.com...
Which radio...haven't heard that term.


OK

I'm interested in the old Lowe SRX-100 also known as the AKD Target HF3
and now the Nasa Target HF3/p or Nav-fax 200. Check on the very bottom
specs under "demodulator: I'm going to buy one. They look cool and seem
to have the same Lowe slower rate, faster rate knob. Simple receiver but
I seem to like it from what I've read about them. Now this company makes
a Nasa Target HF5E that I can only find in Germany. It's supposed to be
comparable with the Lowe 150.

http://www.pyacht.net/cgi-local/Soft....htm?E+scstore

Lucky




Pete,

I ordered one yesterday and found a dealer in this country who has them.
Wasn't easy for sure but I did it. They are much cheaper here then in the UK
for sure. Like 1/2 the price. I should be getting it hopefully today or
tomorrow!
I asked around and one supplier tracked the radio down for me. It's renamed
again in the U.S. Can't wait to fool around with it.


I sure hope it has no dents or scratches. Also hope they don't mistakenly ship it to Japan.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


  #32   Report Post  
Old June 3rd 05, 11:50 PM
rkhalona
 
Posts: n/a
Default

But it seems you are mixing apples and oranges.

Not really, because the ability to select sidebands while in sync mode
is a
big plus in mitigating against ACI. Of course, one can do the same
with just SSB,
but going through the trouble of having a sync detector and not being
able
to select sidebands seems perverse nowadays.

Sync detection means a locally generated "carrier" is present, so
if the signal fades the lack of a strong carrier is not a factor.
It does nothing to prevent fading (which I bring up because someone
recently said something along those lines here) it merely helps when
the signal fades.

There is so much loose talk about this, but I think the above is a good
way of putting
it. First of all, how could one *prevent* fading if the channel is
fixed? Sync does not prevent fading,
but as long as the detector is able to reasonably track the carrier
phase in the fading medium, it will
provide better performance than an envelope (amplitude) detector, so in
this sense sync
detection does mitigate against fading.

Selectable sideband really has nothing to do with synchronous
detection, other than that using the phasing method it's relatively
cheap to implement compared to an expensive IF filter.

True, this is why I think it's perverse when most of the expense is
already in
designing a PLL-type sync not to go the extra step in being able to
select sidebands.
It's a question of implementation.

I'm not even sure where we've veered off to. I thought
the previous comment was something like synchronous detection
wasn't all that important. I'd say that's true, given that
people lived without it till it became a feature in relatively
recent years. Someone listening to broadcast radio (am or
shortwave) that are relatively strong may be the ones to
benefit the most, because you can get deep fades where
the sidebands are still nice and strong. Signals
that you have to strain to hear, it's far less likely to
be useful, because they are already below a minimum strength.
You'd want to pull in other techniques at that point, and that
includes the narrow IF filter that has good slopes.

The opposite is true. When you have very high SNR conditions,
an envelope detector performs almost as well as a sync detector, but it
is
in the low-to-medium SNR region where you will see the performance
improvement, especially in terms of signal intelligibility. This can
be verified
by anyone with a sync detector radio. Try listening to a strong signal
in the AM band with and without sync: there is almost no perceived
change in
signal quality. Try the same on shortwave, you'll see more of an
improvement in sync mode.

RK

  #33   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 01:35 AM
Michael Black
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Mark Zenier ) writes:
In article ,
Pete KE9OA wrote:

"John S." wrote in message
roups.com...


Which radio...haven't heard that term.


I believe that Kiwa detector that went on eBay recently was of this design.


A guy I know who knows Craig a lot better than I do said that it used some
chip designed for VCRs. (My wild ass guess would be a Philips video IF
and detector chip with the synchro-phase circuit in it. TDA2540, TDA2541).

Mark Zenier Washington State resident


Are we talking what's no called "quasi-synchronous"?

Decades ago, Motorola had the MC1330 which was a mixer and a limiter
in one package, and intended as a quasi-synchronous detector in tv
sets.

I suspect if driven properly, the MC1350 IF amplifier would do it, since
the stage that is voltage controlled is just a "Gilbert Cell Mixer".

When the MC1496 Mixer (a "Gilbert Cell" long before the term was applied)
came out in the early seventies, there was an article in Ham Radio magazine
about it, I think by Roy Hejhall, and one of the examples was as a
"quasi-synchronous" detector, though I'm not sure if it explained it
as such or just as a fancy AM detector. Didn't even need a limiter, if
you fed a strong enough signal into it. The datasheet or application note
for the MC1496 includes the circuit.

Of course, there have also been examples of them based on FM detectors.
Many of those in ICs used a scheme that included a balanced mixer, and
of course it had the limiter, so all you had to do was hook it up.

Michael

  #34   Report Post  
Old June 4th 05, 04:31 AM
Pete KE9OA
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It should be a fun radio. I did like mine. Let the folks on the Yahoo group
know about it..........I think Dave Z. would be interested.

Pete

"Lucky" wrote in message
...

"Pete KE9OA" wrote in message
...
I had one of those. It did have quite a bit of RF gain, but the I.F. strip
did not have the gain that the Plessey SL6700 that is used in the HF-150
does. They are not the same receiver, performance wise. If you can find
one in the 125 dollar range, it isn't a bad deal.

Pete

"Lucky" wrote in message
...

"John S." wrote in message
ups.com...
Which radio...haven't heard that term.


OK

I'm interested in the old Lowe SRX-100 also known as the AKD Target HF3
and now the Nasa Target HF3/p or Nav-fax 200. Check on the very bottom
specs under "demodulator: I'm going to buy one. They look cool and seem
to have the same Lowe slower rate, faster rate knob. Simple receiver but
I seem to like it from what I've read about them. Now this company makes
a Nasa Target HF5E that I can only find in Germany. It's supposed to be
comparable with the Lowe 150.

http://www.pyacht.net/cgi-local/Soft....htm?E+scstore

Lucky




Pete,

I ordered one yesterday and found a dealer in this country who has them.
Wasn't easy for sure but I did it. They are much cheaper here then in the
UK for sure. Like 1/2 the price. I should be getting it hopefully today or
tomorrow!
I asked around and one supplier tracked the radio down for me. It's
renamed again in the U.S. Can't wait to fool around with it.
Have a good day.

Lucky



  #35   Report Post  
Old June 6th 05, 12:16 AM
Tebojockey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 04:27:06 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
Tebojockey wrote:

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 02:56:59 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article .com,
"rkhalona" wrote:

I've been a SWLer for at least 20 years, have a Ph.D. in EE, have
20+ years of experience in the telecomm industry (uwave, sats,
cellular, UWB...) and have taught grad/undergrad comm courses at
various U.S. universities.

I agree with another poster that the SW8/R8B sync. detectors are
among the best ever incorporated into SWL gear. My previous
comment about sync. doesn't mean that one cannot achieve similar
signall quality without it (e.g., using PBT, but how many
portables or low-cost tabletops have PBT these days?), but the
convenience of being able to select sidebands in sync mode is a
big plus.

This news group has more than it's share of Ph.D.'s and double E's
it seems.

Where do you think the future of telecom is going? Is it going to be
mostly fiber-optic or do you think RF for the last mile to the home
or business?

Do you think Ethernet is winning over ATM?


Ermmmm...ATM (asynchronous transfer mode) is a 53-byte packet
protocol that travels OVER ethernet (a method of transferring data
over coax cable - and wire pairs.). See IEEE standard 802.3.
Ethernet is the most widely installed local area network technology.
The most commonly installed Ethernet systems are called 10BASE-T,
providing transmission speeds up to 10 Mbps. Fast Ethernet LANs,
100BASE-T, provide transmission speeds up to 100 Mbps.


I suppose ATM could be stuffed into a ethernet frame but I have not
heard of it. In the telecom world it's ATM over SONET that terminates
at my DSL modem. The DSL modem is used as a bridge. Between my DSL
modem to the computer it's ethernet so I can use the usual routers and
or hubs.

ATM is a dedicated-connection switching technology that organizes
digital data into 53-byte cell units and transmits them over a
physical medium using digital signal technology. Individually, a cell
is processed asynchronously relative to other related cells and is
queued before being multiplexed over the transmission path. Because
ATM is designed to be easily implemented by hardware (rather than
software), faster processing and switching speeds are possible. The
prespecified bit rates are either 155.520 Mbps or 622.080 Mbps.
Speeds on ATM networks can reach 10 Gbps.


It can go over any of the SONET rates.

Maybe I should have been more specific. The question is whether
ethernet will take over the local metro area from ATM over SONET. I
expect that ATM over SONET will be maintained at higher levels in the
network.



R, but good discussion tho!

Regards,

Al in CNMI

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


  #36   Report Post  
Old June 6th 05, 06:17 AM
Telamon
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Tebojockey wrote:

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 04:27:06 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article ,
Tebojockey wrote:

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 02:56:59 GMT, Telamon
wrote:

In article .com,
"rkhalona" wrote:

I've been a SWLer for at least 20 years, have a Ph.D. in EE, have
20+ years of experience in the telecomm industry (uwave, sats,
cellular, UWB...) and have taught grad/undergrad comm courses at
various U.S. universities.

I agree with another poster that the SW8/R8B sync. detectors are
among the best ever incorporated into SWL gear. My previous
comment about sync. doesn't mean that one cannot achieve similar
signall quality without it (e.g., using PBT, but how many
portables or low-cost tabletops have PBT these days?), but the
convenience of being able to select sidebands in sync mode is a
big plus.

This news group has more than it's share of Ph.D.'s and double E's
it seems.

Where do you think the future of telecom is going? Is it going to be
mostly fiber-optic or do you think RF for the last mile to the home
or business?

Do you think Ethernet is winning over ATM?

Ermmmm...ATM (asynchronous transfer mode) is a 53-byte packet
protocol that travels OVER ethernet (a method of transferring data
over coax cable - and wire pairs.). See IEEE standard 802.3.
Ethernet is the most widely installed local area network technology.
The most commonly installed Ethernet systems are called 10BASE-T,
providing transmission speeds up to 10 Mbps. Fast Ethernet LANs,
100BASE-T, provide transmission speeds up to 100 Mbps.


I suppose ATM could be stuffed into a ethernet frame but I have not
heard of it. In the telecom world it's ATM over SONET that terminates
at my DSL modem. The DSL modem is used as a bridge. Between my DSL
modem to the computer it's ethernet so I can use the usual routers and
or hubs.

ATM is a dedicated-connection switching technology that organizes
digital data into 53-byte cell units and transmits them over a
physical medium using digital signal technology. Individually, a cell
is processed asynchronously relative to other related cells and is
queued before being multiplexed over the transmission path. Because
ATM is designed to be easily implemented by hardware (rather than
software), faster processing and switching speeds are possible. The
prespecified bit rates are either 155.520 Mbps or 622.080 Mbps.
Speeds on ATM networks can reach 10 Gbps.


It can go over any of the SONET rates.

Maybe I should have been more specific. The question is whether
ethernet will take over the local metro area from ATM over SONET. I
expect that ATM over SONET will be maintained at higher levels in the
network.



R, but good discussion tho!


To bad the Ph.D. never came back to answer my question.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #37   Report Post  
Old June 6th 05, 07:08 PM
rkhalona
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Telamon asked:

Where do you think the future of telecom is going? Is it going to be
mostly fiber-optic or do you think RF for the last mile to the home or
business?

Do you think Ethernet is winning over ATM?

Anyone who claims to know the answer to your first question will either
become a millionaire quickly or will be surprised by the changes.
There's a war
going on over the last mile, as you know. Right now cable/DSL are
predominant, at least in the U.S.,
but wireless technologies will eventually push through and will be
strong competitors
in this market. Regarding the last question, there is a strong push
for VoIP (voice over
Internet Protocol). Most of wireless traffic is still voice and All-IP
system architectures
(as opposed to dual circuit switched/packet switched) are the way of
the future, but there are
important Quality of Service (QoS) issues to be solved regarding voice
over IP (esp.
end-to-end delay). We should know more definitively in the near
future.

RK

  #38   Report Post  
Old June 7th 05, 05:07 AM
Telamon
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com,
"rkhalona" wrote:

Telamon asked:

Where do you think the future of telecom is going? Is it going to
be mostly fiber-optic or do you think RF for the last mile to the
home or business?

Do you think Ethernet is winning over ATM?

Anyone who claims to know the answer to your first question will
either become a millionaire quickly or will be surprised by the
changes. There's a war going on over the last mile, as you know.
Right now cable/DSL are predominant, at least in the U.S., but
wireless technologies will eventually push through and will be strong
competitors in this market. Regarding the last question, there is a
strong push for VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol). Most of
wireless traffic is still voice and All-IP system architectures (as
opposed to dual circuit switched/packet switched) are the way of the
future, but there are important Quality of Service (QoS) issues to be
solved regarding voice over IP (esp. end-to-end delay). We should
know more definitively in the near future.


Good answer. I used to think it was just a battle between ATM and
ethernet over wire, then fiber to the home started looking more
promising and now an RF link could end up dominating.

I think BPL broadband over power lines is a real loser but some people
are pursuing that for the "last Mile" or metro area coverage.

Here is a page to keep track of that:
http://www.plexeon.com/

Yeah, quality of service is likely going to go down in the process. That
going to happen if voice traffic uses computer technology like ethernet
instead of the telecom framing technology with all its redundancy, error
correction and intelligent switching not to mention dedicated circuits
or at least time slots in the frames until a call is ended.

Makes me wonder how those voice over IP companies like Lingo or Vonage
are doing these days?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #39   Report Post  
Old June 10th 05, 03:56 AM
Telamon
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article

,

Telamon wrote:

In article .com,
"rkhalona" wrote:

Telamon asked:

Where do you think the future of telecom is going? Is it going to
be mostly fiber-optic or do you think RF for the last mile to the
home or business?

Do you think Ethernet is winning over ATM?

Anyone who claims to know the answer to your first question will
either become a millionaire quickly or will be surprised by the
changes. There's a war going on over the last mile, as you know.
Right now cable/DSL are predominant, at least in the U.S., but
wireless technologies will eventually push through and will be strong
competitors in this market. Regarding the last question, there is a
strong push for VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol). Most of
wireless traffic is still voice and All-IP system architectures (as
opposed to dual circuit switched/packet switched) are the way of the
future, but there are important Quality of Service (QoS) issues to be
solved regarding voice over IP (esp. end-to-end delay). We should
know more definitively in the near future.


Good answer. I used to think it was just a battle between ATM and
ethernet over wire, then fiber to the home started looking more
promising and now an RF link could end up dominating.

I think BPL broadband over power lines is a real loser but some people
are pursuing that for the "last Mile" or metro area coverage.

Here is a page to keep track of that:
http://www.plexeon.com/

Yeah, quality of service is likely going to go down in the process. That
going to happen if voice traffic uses computer technology like ethernet
instead of the telecom framing technology with all its redundancy, error
correction and intelligent switching not to mention dedicated circuits
or at least time slots in the frames until a call is ended.

Makes me wonder how those voice over IP companies like Lingo or Vonage
are doing these days?


Looks like Ethernet over SONET is becoming more popular theses days.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: Rare Kiwa MAP with Synchronous AM Detection - 1 Day Left Guy Atkins Shortwave 3 May 22nd 05 08:52 PM
FA: Rare Kiwa MAP with Synchronous AM Detection - 1 Day Left Guy Atkins Swap 3 May 22nd 05 08:52 PM
Kiwa MAP for Auction - Rare Synchronous Detection Accessory with Filters, Speaker, and More Guy Atkins Shortwave 0 May 13th 05 06:13 PM
simple synchronous detector? Pete Beals Homebrew 21 March 6th 04 03:18 PM
Reciprocating vs Synchronous Detector? Michael Black Homebrew 23 July 18th 03 05:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017