On 16 Feb 2007 20:53:46 -0800, "
wrote:

On Feb 16, 5:27?pm, Leo wrote:
On 16 Feb 2007 16:22:45 -0800, "
wrote:
On Feb 16, 3:10?pm, Leo wrote:
On 14 Feb 2007 22:43:58 -0800, "
wrote:
From: Leo on Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:50:23 -0500
wrote:
On Feb 13, 7:15?pm, Leo wrote:
On 13 Feb 2007 16:43:31 -0800, wrote:
On Feb 13, 5:13?pm, Leo wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:12:59 -0500, Leo wrote:
On 8 Feb 2007 18:01:57 -0800, wrote:
snip

After seeing what a BC-221 can do when properly modified, I have no
doubt that Jim could have made a pretty nifty antenna switch out of
it!

Cranky aside,

Good place for him!

...I personally think that the BC-221 "Frequency
Meter" was over-praised. Yes, it has a VERY stable tunable
oscillator and the accompanying book of numbers allows one
to "read" (heterodyne, really) out to five places, maybe six.
But, it never "metered" anything. Still, it was better than
nothing back in WW2 times.

Interesting point - I've wondered myself why it was called a
'frequency meter' when it did not actually meter anything.....why not
a 'frequency standard', or a 'frequency calibrator'?

snip

LA

73, Leo