On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 11:36:21 +0000, Kafkaësque
wrote:

Just to add, I wasn't condoning the use of such radios on 6.5 or 27MHz.
However, there's no point in denying that it happened.

I should probably mot mention this, but since the company has been
defunct for about 20 years, I think it's safe to leak a few stories.

I used to work for a US marine radio manufacturer. We have various
marine operator licenses and ham radio operator licenses. We had STA
(special temporary authority) licenses and an FCC first class
radiotelephone license (now known as a GROL). The problem was that
few of the licenses were issued to the company. Most were all held by
individuals. As employees came and went, so did the licence. The
final inspection and compliance certificate included my FCC first
class license number, which was used for many years after I had left
the company, because nobody found it necessary to order a new rubber
stamp.

One of the radios I worked on was a 2-30 Mhz marine SSB transceiver.
While the output lopass filter limited the operating frequency range
to the normal marine bands, it was easy enough to build a filter that
would work on CB frequencies. This was used for occasional air checks
as the commercial HF radiotelephone operators did not appreciate our
interruptions asking for air checks. So, we got our signal and
modulation reports from a variety of local CB'ers. CB was also useful
for testing how our receiver responded to off frequency, over
modulated, and problematic transmitters.

Some of our dealers were also buying replacement 150w PEP power
amplifiers and repackaging them as CB linears. All I knew was that my
power amp had an apparently high failure rate and that dealers claimed
that they fixed the blown amps themselves (to avoid returning the
original amp). Eventually, someone returned one of these linears to
the factory for repair and the secret was out. We put an end to that
nonsense rather quickly.

Later, I worked for a company making radios for the electric utility
industry. I soon discovered that I was the only engineer with an FCC
license. When we submitted paperwork for type certification, all that
was necessary was for one responsible and licensed individual to sign
on the dotted line. That was me. I also worked for other companies
with similar licensing arrangements.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 09:36:12 +0000, Kafkaësque
wrote:

On 12/02/2014 00:32, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:12:14 -0000, "gareth"
wrote:

With the onset of automatic ATUs, is the the final technical
skill that disambiguates the radio amateur from the CBer
being lost?

However, you are correct that the ATU is a dying art. I've been
zapped by the high voltages produced by antenna tuners often enough to
suspect that dying might be involved in the tuning process. If it's
not science, it must be art.

Art - most definitely.

Science = Does the necessary calculations. Understands how it works.
Art = Cut and try. Tune for maximum smoke. No test equipment.

But where's the "technical skill" in adjusting a
pi network of two capacitors and one inductor?

The technical skill is hidden in the initial decision to *NOT* use an
overpriced antenna tuner in order to match a narrow band antenna over
a narrow frequency range. Additional skill is required at the front
end to *NOT* select a random length antenna, that is likely to be
difficult to match and not have any gain. Of course, some technical
skill will be required in order to build, measure, and verify the
performance of the matching network.

CBers may not need to worry about ATUs, but many are quite capable of
using the pi networks on the PAs of their valved rigs which have been
re-crystalled for 6.5 and/or 27 MHz.

Extra technical credit for electing not to use an ATU or a Pi section
network in order to match a 50 ohm transmitter to a 50 ohm antenna.
The technical skill is not in the construction or testing. It's in
the decision as to whether a tuner is needed. In most cases for CB,
neither an ATU or a Pi section is inappropriate.

I could argue that technical expertise in an obsolete technology, such
as tubes (valves) might contribute to the premature death of the art
of antenna matching, but I don't want to start yet another endless
non-technical discussion.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:12:14 -0000, "gareth"
wrote:

With the onset of automatic ATUs, is the the final technical
skill that disambiguates the radio amateur from the CBer
being lost?

I'll assume that's a serious question, not another CB versus ham flame
bait. What problem are you trying to solve?


It is not a question of baiting, but of a serious concern, that amateur
radio / ham radio
is a technical pursuit and is slowly frittering away such that many radio
amateurs are
indistinguishable from CBers.

From an interest in my teenage years, it was that technical momentum that
led me to
a career in electronics and subsequently software engineering. Amateur radio
has technical privileges that may be legislated out of existence should the
various
misgovernments of the world perceive that there is no need for us to able to
create our own gear when so much is available off-the-shelf, and it is
off-the-shelf
operating that is the mark of the CBer.

"gareth" wrote in message
...

snipped

It is not a question of baiting, but of a serious concern, that amateur
radio / ham radio
is a technical pursuit and is slowly frittering away such that many radio
amateurs are
indistinguishable from CBers.

I'm with you.

I know electronics well -- ET School in the Navy + 20 years; FCC First
Class Commercial in 1982 with no study; another 25 years working in the
field; a B.S. in 1989. I passed all my ham exams on the first shot, Extra
with no study. I love this stuff and I'm grateful to have a gift for it.
It was a great career.

I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale and it makes me sad to see that
the population at the other end of the scale is growing. We have one local
ham who just kept taking the exams until he eventually passed them. He's
nominally an Extra but knows NOTHING about electronics and cares not to
learn. It's sad to see.

"Sal"
(KD6VKW)

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...

Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a 72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

"W5DXP" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...
Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a
72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?

An interesting poser. I do remember in my final year at Uni in 1972
touching on delay lines fabricated from L & C, ubt have not
encountered the phenomenon for the past 42 years.

"W5DXP" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...

Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a
72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

While I had the First Class license ( passed it when I was 22 on the first
try for it and the Second Class) in 1972, all I care about the progagation
delay on the whip is will it take power from the transmitter and radiate it.
hihi..
I seem to remember some discussion about that from a while back.

Even back in 1972 they must have been almost giving away the Comercial
license for me to have passed it and to this day I have never seen a TV
transmitter.
Only looked at a 1 KW AM station from outside the cabinet a couple of times.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:05:49 -0800 (PST), W5DXP
wrote:

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...

Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a 72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?

Not big enough.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/Large_antenna_loading_coil.jpg
Hmmm... might not fit on my Subaru.

Good question. I seem to recall that you went though this exercise
about two years ago:
http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?336568-Delay-through-a-large-air-core-loading-coil
I don't have any better answers than the bad guesses offered. Did you
ever reach a conclusion or a consensus?

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"W5DXP" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...

Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a
72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I think it works fine and lasts a long time. (I can't claim I've made it
all the way to the far end of that scale.)

"Sal"

"W5DXP" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:21:49 PM UTC-6, Sal wrote:
I'm at one end of the ham-knowledge scale ...

Sal, what is your technical opinion about the propagation delay through a
72uH 75m mobile Texas Bugcatcher loading coil?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

It's fine with me. I bet that coil works okay and will last a long time.
(I apparently haven't made it far enough along that scale.)

73,
"Sal"
(arrogance now in check, at least for the moment)