In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
PAMNO
(always write even when wrong) writes:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Whatever you say. You can imagine getting within 10 Hz of the
correct frequency with the '50s designs all you want...but that
won't make it happen.

What?? Where, exactly, has anybody claimed 10Hz frequency resolution
with '50s analog radios?

Nobody has, it's just a diversion away from the original nonsense about
hams needing rigs with synthesizers.

Big surprise huh? NOT!

Not at all.

Check out the Product Reports on the SG2020, K2 and K1. Guess which has the
"dirtiest" synhthesizer, as judged by the transmitted noise away from the
carrier? Guess which is the cleanest?

Creative PLL and DDS subsystems of today, designed by others,
make it possible for anyone to select 10 Hz increments on any
HF band (30,000 frequencies within 300 KHz) with crystal-
controlled accuracy.

Irrelevant to 99% of amateur HF operations. With a very few special
exceptions
(like 60m) we're not required by law to be on any specific freq on HF.

Right, but sometimes inband operational requirements dictate that we
get dead on some freq or another. Within reason of course. Spots
pouncing, etc.

Of course - within reason. 100 Hz is usually plenty close enough. And that sort
of stuff is perhaps 1% of HF ham radio.

We *are*
required, and have long been required, to be within the band or subband.
Len can't seem to grasp that concept.

He understands the law but he doesn't understand how we meet it's
req'mts so he bafflegabs over the horizon on the subject often wrong
all the way.

I think he resents our freedom.

In fact, in almost all HF ham operations, good operators decide their QRG
based
on non-interference, not any specific channel or spot frequency.

Analog VFOs are continuously variable. Making it possible for anyone
to select an *infinite* number of "increments" within a 300Hz
bandwidth much less your coarse 300 Khz wide example. And they do it
without generating any phase noise or other forms of crud synthesizers
toss out.

You mean synthesizers aren't perfect in every way?

Remember the HRO-500?

You bet. Disaster box. W3WPG was both a beta and a production version
tester of the 500 and I twiddled bofum myself at his place in Chester.
Both sounded like a bag of radio canaries (species phaseum noisium
boids) and National forthwith went bust despite Hal's imploring them
not to put that POS on the market. .

the '500 was good for certain applications but not as a general purpose HF rx.
Not for what it cost, anyway.

But "synthesized?" No. Far from it. All heterodyning on the analog
level. Not a PLL, not a Fractional-N, not a DDS in any of them.

As if that was somehow important.

Or anywhere near even slightly relevant.

Those things were synthesizers - by definition.

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.

There are "experts" whose entire experience is leafing through
catalogs.

Well, I'm not one of 'em.

Neither is anybody else around here amongst us who "have been around"
. . .
The catalogs are good, however, for getting exact prices and such.

My FT-847, which is not much as ham xcvrs go, can be tuned in 1 Hz
increments vs. the "make it possible for anyone to select 10 Hz
increments" thingey you cite above.

That *is* a nice rig. Did a good job on FD.

Prolly not a good idea for me to loiter on this subject in this NG
James but much to my surprise yes that slick little rig has proven to
be a diamond in the rough. But to hell with it, I'll loiter anyway,
the bandwidth is free.

Radio story (diatribe):

When I went radio hunting a couple years ago I had a very specific set
of 'wants' centered around very high portability but also with the
ergonomnics and front-panel controlability of a full-size
competition-grade home station desktopper. A five pound underdash
Omni. With a full panel of KNOBS, not menus dammit!

(Reminds me of the time I participated in a brain-storming session
pulled together by some of the guys from the Boeing Helicopters power
transmission group. The chief Boeing gearbox wonk started the session
off with "OK gentlemen the mission here is to come up with a
transmission which is capable of transmitting an infinite number of
horsepower to the rotors, weighs nothing and does not require any
installation space.")

I put a bunch of effort into my quest for what amounted to my
particular vision of an ultimate 100W all modes Field Day xcvr. I
didn't care where it came from. Current catalog units new or used,
out-of-production types on the used gear market, etc. I paid a lot of
attention to the online users reviews and lab test reports of a bunch
of candidate rigs. It didn't take long for me to write off all of the
current crop of whizzy do-it-all underdash xcvrs because of their
absolutely lousy basic performance. Bottom-end BDRs, IMDs, fershtink
selectivities (ceramic filters . . . gimmee a break!) along with a
lack of open filter slots, menu-dipping galore. IC-706, FT-897, etc.
Toy radios for the no-clues, fuhgeddit, allum. But (almost) all of
those writeoffs do offer the ability to get on the VHF/UHF bands with
all modes, a capability I added to my "gotta-have" list. I just
*gotta* do some 6 & 2M cw & ssb.

Can't imagine how that sweet old thing from Smog Central came up with
his whacky comments about PCTAs not being into the VHF/UHF bands. He
needs his head bolts retorqued.

Did not take long for me to zero in on the FT-847 because it's the
only xcvr out there anywhere which meets all of my basic objectives.
Despite it's reputation for being a heap of compromises and having a
collection of goofy warts and quirks. I also discovered that most of
it's numerous warts can be fixed with a soldering iron. No-brainer
there if one isn't afraid to perform surgery on a new kilobuck+
radio's innards.

So I popped for one knowing full well that I'd bought something of a
Yaesu "'kit radio".

Out-of-the-box and tuning around the HF bands it was it was, shall we
say, pretty unimpressive. Dismal? Woulda turned you off five seconds
into a test listen. But I expected that. The killer mod was the
installation of the 400Hz and 2.1Khz 8-pole INRAD IF filters a few
weeks before you got your mitts on it during this past FD and
commented it's an acceptable if not a rather decent performer. Given
the fact that you ain't got much tolerance for lousy front ends, phase
noise, birdies, menus, crummy selectivity and such.

Homebrewing does spoil one that way...

I might even have the temerity to take it into the upcoming CQ WW CW
meatgrinder barefoot with a G5RV depending on how the plans work out
for a go at it with K3NL from his place. The K3NL "planning committee"
meets tomorrow at Casey's on Lansdowne Ave. Heh.

So you guys gonna do it or what?

The dollars I've invested to date my moded 847 are not trivial, I'm
already at a bit over $1,500 and climbing as I keep adding
"enhancements"to the thing . . . yeah, I know, I could have bought a
used FT-1000MP (Not a "Field"!) for those kind of bucks. But an MP is
not a pack 'n go rig like the 847 nor is it usable 30Mhz. so that was
the end of that. I'll pick up an MP later and have the best of both
worlds. I did draw some lines on the monies though. My original intent
was to spend around $800 for a used 847 which are everywhere in the
used market. The street price from HRO at the time was around $1,500.
No way! But I ran into a sale on new 847s for $1250 gulped hard, bit
the bullet and bought it. The two filters cost $155 each. Current HRO
price is $1,400 which I still wouldn't go for.

And if you sold it tomorrow, how much of that could you get back? I dare say it
was a good investment.

I rattle on too much as usual. My point is that if there's anybody out
there still awake and looking for a nice little portable xcvr which
covers 12 bands and does all modes much better than the really compact
(junkers) the 847 is coming up a good choice for this particular OF.

It's about 11 x 11 x 3.5 inches big and only weighs 16 pounds.

Light enough to cart around but heavy enough that ya don;t have to chase it
around the table.

http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/hamhf/1467.html

**This one is a gotta-do for any radio buyer**:

http://www.sherweng.com/presentation.html

Others:

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/135

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FT847/

http://www.supercontrol.de/cat/ft847faq/ft847faq.htm

Yep.

Did QST do a review yet?

You obviously need to spend
considerable time leafing thru the ham catalogs to get up to speed on
the equipment we use before you spout off and continue to goose up
your "coefficient of ignornace" on the subject of ham radio in general
and the equipment we use.

Don't hold yer breath...

Again. Gets boring.

Maybe that's the point.

Seems like.

Yep. You see any real projects from Len?

Me neither.

Then there are the few "drudges" (like myself) who've
gotten our hands dirty doing the design and testing of synthesizers.

Then there are drudges like me who have ham licenses and and put
technoligies to work on the airwaves whilst all you're allowed to do
is bafflegab about 'em with your keyboard.

And there are drudges who can design and build a rig from top to bottom,
power
supply to antenna, put it on the air and work the world with it on the ham
bands. Using a whole bunch of different modes and technologies.

Right!

Let's see, who here has done that.....

For which we
are called names and insulted here.

Writeoff . . .

Completely

73 de Jim, N2EY