RadioBanter - View Single Post

September 26th 04, 11:56 AM

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message news:
...

All it took for a ham to stay inside the subbands was a frequency standard
of
known accuracy. This could take the form of an accurately-calibrated
receiver,
transmitter or transceiver, an external frequency meter (WW2 surplus BC-221
and
LM units were relatively inexpensive in the 1960s) or a 100 kHz oscillator
with
suitable dividers.

He's clueless.

Of course. What else is new?

As usual. I could comfortably transmit CW within 200Hz
of any band edge or subband edge with my Collins 75A4 and know I was
"legal".

Sure - mentioned earlier in the post.

I simply tweaked the 100Khz xtal oscillator to get it dead
on against WWV on several freqs and took it from there. The
out-of-the-box Collins PTO and linear dial with it's adjustable cursor
*is* a frequency meter and it's far more accurate than any of W2
surplus units. Not to mention being much more convenient to use.

Point is, even those who couldn't afford Drake or Collins could get almost as
close to a band or subband edge - using '50s technology.

So Len's claim of needing "modern frequency synthesizers" is utterly bogus.
Also his claim that it was "all about staking territory" or some such nonsense.
False. Without any facts to back it up.

It's clear that he doesn't really understand what amateur HF operation is/was
like at all, nor amateur radio economics, nor even what really happened
historically.

He wasn't alone. B&W came out with their 6100 transmitter and it was a flop.
The synthesizer feature in it was neat but nobody wanted to pay $700 for one
when they could have a Collins or Drake for the same or less.

Straight out of the 1950s ham catalogs bub . . all of it.

The A4 served me well into the early 1980s. The 75S-3B and Drake R4B
were just as accurate as the A4. I didn't own or need a synthesized
xcvr "to stay within the bands" until I bought a used Icom 2M mobile
FM rig around 1988.

Yup.

And the only reason that thing was synthesized is that it was cheaper than
buying lots of xtals.

My 1976 vintage HW-2036 was Heath's synthesizer replacement for the HW-202,
which used crystals.

Dredge up some of the results of the 1950s FMTs to really drive the
point home.

Back about 1979 I had a BC-348 and BC-221 in good shape. Just for the heck of
it I I tried 'em out in the FMT. Error on each band was better than your 200
Hz.

73 de Jim, N2EY