| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
The ATU, a dying art?
With the onset of automatic ATUs, is the the final technical
skill that disambiguates the radio amateur from the CBer being lost? |
The ATU, a dying art?
No! There is still Morse Code using a key! I consider it
a technical skill. Irv VE6BP "gareth" wrote in message ... With the onset of automatic ATUs, is the the final technical skill that disambiguates the radio amateur from the CBer being lost? |
The ATU, a dying art?
Well. I did make my own mechanical bug key a couple of years ago.
"Irv Finkleman" wrote in message ... No! There is still Morse Code using a key! I consider it a technical skill. Irv VE6BP "gareth" wrote in message ... With the onset of automatic ATUs, is the the final technical skill that disambiguates the radio amateur from the CBer being lost? |
The ATU, a dying art?
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... Far be it from me to suggest that the manual ATU is best suited to those with ape like arms and brains who can reach more distant feed points. Why must you always introduce an element of childish and venomous abuse? |
The ATU, a dying art?
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... Each to his own in the balance between operating vs building etc., after all it seems some who support the latter over the former never finish projects. Another post ... another snide comment |
The ATU, a dying art?
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? The legal CB band is roughly 400 KHz wide. There's no need for an automatic antenna tuna to match an antenna with such a narrow operating frequency range. The matching is either built into the antenna, preset in an external box, or just ignored by tolerating the mismatch. Tune or match it once, and forget it. However, HF ham radio uses frequencies with many octaves of frequency range. Building a single 50 ohm antenna to cover all that is rather difficult. Therefore, one uses an antenna tuner (automatic or manual). 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. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
The ATU, a dying art?
On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 2:12:14 PM UTC-6, 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've never seen a case where the use of an automatic antenna tuner drained antenna related knowledge from the operators brain pan. |
The ATU, a dying art?
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. But where's the "technical skill" in adjusting a pi network of two capacitors and one inductor? 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. |
The ATU, a dying art?
Kafkaësque wrote:
On 12/02/2014 00:32, Jeff Liebermann 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. But where's the "technical skill" in adjusting a pi network of two capacitors and one inductor? 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. If memory serves, the legendary FT101 even included 27MHz coverage. It was certainly reported to be used by more CBers than licensed amateurs. As you suggest, CBers may have been able to compensate for the antenna impedance over their limited bandwidth by using the Pi network. Which demonstrates that some amateurs are put in the shade in technical skill by CBers. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"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. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... If memory serves, the legendary FT101 even included 27MHz coverage. It was certainly reported to be used by more CBers than licensed amateurs. As you suggest, CBers may have been able to compensate for the antenna impedance over their limited bandwidth by using the Pi network. Which demonstrates that some amateurs are put in the shade in technical skill by CBers. Once again that is a an interjection of childish venom by you; I had been using valve PA stages for 24 years before I picked up in 1995 a museum piece of an FT101e that was in such pristine condition that I elected to wait until the full manual was availble to me before using it on transmit. I did use it on receive, and fitted the narrow CW filter to it. However, with the passage of time, when I set out as an independent contractor, I needed to make room for my business interests, and a number of stalled projects were offered for sale. Now, when you sell a TX, you would be expected to be honest about its capabilities, but as I had not used it on transmit I could not vouch for its capabilities so I said why in the notice for sale, as I was brought up to be decent and honest, I could not have offered it otherwise. (You can be confident thus, that should you purchase anything from me, that you'll get an honest appraisal about it) For some reason, Brian, and I regrettably have to say that it seems to arise from an infantile spite, you time and again make sneers about it. That sale was 16 years ago. Grow up. man! -----ooooo----- From: Gareth Alun Evans Subject: Grand End-Of-Season Sale!! Date: 1997/12/22 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 309386492 Distribution: world X-NNTP-Posting-Host: cemetery.demon.co.uk [158.152.37.12] Organization: Humanity MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur The following are available, no reasonable offer refused! All will be skipped if no takers, (but I ain't prepared to give to you for nothing!) 1. "Radio & TV Servicing", Original two volumes, 6 volume set, isolated ones up till 1973, 18 volumes altogether. 2. FT101E, pristine condition, CW filter. (Purchased Longleat '95, never used on TX by me 'cos critical tuning-up pages missing from manual!) 3. R1475 WW2 Naval Rx. plus power supply. 4. Original Amstrad 1512 PC (BW, 2 floppy) + DMP3000 printer + original software disks plus manuals. (This one FREE to good home). 5. Two Field Telephones Type "L" + large drum of cable, believed to be in excess of 200 yards and in one length, altho' never examined by me. 6. RA17 7. B&W Portable TV 8. 2 foot high pile of Wireless World (recent years) 9. 2 foot high pile of Practical Wireless (recent years) 10. Icom IC2E hand portable for 2m. 11. Box of 10 assorted Bakelite ex-eqpt meter movements. 12. Crystal Set, with Genuine BBC stamp. 13. Bound editions of pre 1920 "Electrical Review" 14. Pye "Wessie", originally intended for packet use. 15. Valve portable radio. 16. R210 radio (had mains transformer fitted internally by previous owner). 17. Collection of computer memorabilia; Paper Tape punch, "LEO" core store, Apple II with two disk drives, Nascom, Dragon, BBC, Spectrum, Oric, ZX81 plus RAM pack (but no elastic band!) 18. One Field Telephone type "F". 19. Beta-Max vcr (historical, dinosaur, non-working) 20. Eddystone 840C 21. 227G, Early synthesized 2m mobile. 22. CB converted to 10metre FM. 23. Rabbit cordless phone (needs new nicads) 72's de Gareth G4SDW (nee G8DXY) GQRP 3339 |
The ATU, a dying art?
|
The ATU, a dying art? plus FAQ
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
... As a result, the art of matching antennas has become de-skilled, and we no longer need to have any idea whatsoever about 'how things work'. Is this a 'good thing'? No, which is my point exactly. An interest in how things work is the inexorable basis of amateur radio. Here is my take on a FAQ which opines just that ... -----ooooo----- Q. What is Ham Radio? A. Ham Radio is a technical pursuit for those who are interested in the science of radio wave propagation and who are also interested in the way that their radios function. It has a long-standing tradition of providing a source of engineers who are born naturals. Ham Radio awakens in its aficionados a whole-life fascination with all things technical and gives an all-abiding curiosity to improve one's scientific knowledge. It's a great swimming pool, please dive in! This excitement causes a wish to share the experience with ones fellow man, and shows itself in the gentlemanly traditions of Ham Radio. Radio Hams are in a unique privileged position in that they can construct and operate their own equipment! No-one else has this privilege. Users, such as broadcasters, the po lice and armed farces, CBers and mobile phone users have to purchase ready-made gear. Manufacturers are not licensed to operate their gear. Radio Hams are qualified to design, build and then operate their own pieces of equipment. They do this with gusto, and also repair and modify their own equipment. This is a privilege well worth the effort to gain, and one to be jealously guarded. The excitement that drives a Radio Ham starts with relatively simple technologies at first, perhaps making his own Wimshurst machine and primary cells. Small pieces of test equipment follow, possibly multimeters and signal generators. Then comes receivers and transmitters. It is with the latter that communication with like-minded technically motivated people takes off. The scope for technical development grows with the years and now encompasses DSP and DDS. There is also a great deal of excitement in the areas of computer programming to be learnt and applied. The technical excitement motivates Radio Hams to compete with each other to determine who has designed and manufactured the best-quality station. This competitiveness is found in DXing, competitions and fox-hunts. -----ooooo---- However, beware! A Ham Radio licence is such a desirable thing to have that there are large numbers of people who wish to be thought of as Radio Hams when, in fact, they are nothing of the kind! Usually such people are a variation of the CB Radio hobbyist; they buy their radios off the shelf and send them back to be repaired; they are not interested in technical discussion and sneer at those who are; they have no idea how their radios work inside and have no wish to find out; they are free with rather silly personal insults. -----ooooo----- One infallible way to disambiguate the CB Radio Hobbyist from the _REAL_ Radio Ham is to solicit their view of the difference between CB Radio and Ham Radio. A Radio Ham will perceive Ham Radio to be a technical pursuit and will perceive CB Radio to be a social communications facility no different in essence to a land-line telephone or a GSM mobile in the hands of a 6-year-old. Thus a Radio Ham could also use a CB set safe in the knowledge that such use says no more about him than having a land-line telephone, whilst continuing to regard Ham Radio as a separate technical pursuit. A CB Radio hobbyist, on the other hand, sees no difference between Ham Radio and CB Radio. To him, they are sisters-under-the-skin. Wrongly, the CB Radio Hobbyist then tries to classify himself as the equal of the Radio Ham when, in fact, he is nothing of the kind. Ham Radio is not CB Radio and has no common ground with it! Ham Radio is _THE_ technical pursuit for gentlemen; CB Radio is the name for the operating hobby for those who buy their rigs and equipment off the shelf. -----ooooo----- If you are the sort of person who is motivated by a technical interest in how things work; if you took apart malfunctioning clocks, toasters and the like and put them right despite never having seen them working, then a Ham Radio licence is your traditional route! There has never been a shortage of such people, and those who gravitate towards such an interest have always been welcomed into our shacks and their interests fostered. There is not today, nor has there ever been, a need to go out and encourage and press children, children who have never expressed an interest in Ham Radio, to come into our shacks. Such an activity should cause eyebrows to be raised - what normal well-adjusted adults seek the social acquaintance of children?! -----ooooo----- Please remember that this FAQ is a _POSITIVE EXHORTATION_ to you to exert yourselves to join our fraternity! |
The ATU, a dying art?
On 12/02/2014 09:58, Brian Reay wrote:
Kafkaësque wrote: On 12/02/2014 00:32, Jeff Liebermann 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. But where's the "technical skill" in adjusting a pi network of two capacitors and one inductor? 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. If memory serves, the legendary FT101 even included 27MHz coverage. It was certainly reported to be used by more CBers than licensed amateurs. 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. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message
... yes you are baiting as you are the master baiter. serious question though. why would an amateur use a limited tx unit they have built themselves with a limited frequency range and possibly not harmonically sound against a stable fully featured commercial unit from the big 3 or others ? you listen about on hf and very few if any use a homebrew transmitter--fact. your argument falls apart evans. you just use the term cber as a derogatory swipe against those that have a foundation or intermediate licence. you are a blight on the hobby and should remove yourself now. I'm not sure that I used the description in the FAQ, although I certainly did proscribe their use of gratuitous abuse, but there is a class known as a, "CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur", exemplified by the material quoted above. Being a CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur is usually indicated by a complete lack of understanding of what amateur radio is all about, also as exemplified by the material quoted above. The possession of Foundation* and Intermediate** licences when held by grown -ups for more than the few weeks it would take a _GENUINE_ enthusiast to progress to the next level by his inherent technical interest and self-education is a guaranteed indication of a CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur * Targetted at 5-year-olds, AKA A Fools' Licence when held by grown men ** Targetted at 10-year-olds, AKA An Idiots'' Licence when held by grown men |
The ATU, a dying art?
On 12/02/14 11:36, Kafkaësque wrote:
On 12/02/2014 09:58, Brian Reay wrote: Kafkaësque wrote: On 12/02/2014 00:32, Jeff Liebermann 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. But where's the "technical skill" in adjusting a pi network of two capacitors and one inductor? 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. If memory serves, the legendary FT101 even included 27MHz coverage. It was certainly reported to be used by more CBers than licensed amateurs. 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. Indeed. I'm not sure why Yaesu included 27MHz, perhaps it is legal somewhere for such kit to be used on 27MHz. As for 6.5MHz, I thought that was, originally at least, mainly ex military kit. I see the usual suspects have started to ruin the thread, as they always do. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... I see the usual suspects have started to ruin the thread, as they always do. Another venomous sneer, for was it not me to whom you disparagingly refer as one of "The Usual Suspects" who initiated the thread? For myself, I see that the KkGk trio have started to ruin the thread, as they always do. |
The ATU, a dying art?
On 12/02/14 13:01, Fred Roberts wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:18:41 +0000, Brian Reay wrote: Indeed. I'm not sure why Yaesu included 27MHz, perhaps it is legal somewhere for such kit to be used on 27MHz. Did they not have an "aux" position on the bandswitch allowing 27Mhz to be selected when the appropriate crystals were installed? Looking at a manual, readily available, there is a position marked 11 on the band switch at approx 11 o'clock. The other positions I can read are 15 for 15m etc. So. 11 would be 11m or 27MHz, There are special positions for WWV reference etc. It is a while since I used a FT101 so I needed refer to a manual to check but I was sure of the 27MHz position as it seemed "odd" and stuck in my mind. |
The ATU, a dying art? plus FAQ
On 12/02/2014 12:54, Jeff wrote:
Manufacturers are not licensed to operate their gear. Radio Hams are qualified to design, build and then Wrong again Gareth!!! Manufacturers certainly can be licensed to operate their own gear!! Correct - I have a test and development licence permitting 25W EIRP SSB on the following frequencies: 2806, 5750, 7556, 9071, 10438, 11117, 16014, 18990, 20990, 24135, 26218 and 27045kHz. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... Looking at a manual, readily available Another venomous sneer, OM. In 1997, in the days of trunk call dial-up, I did not spend any time on the Internet other than to quickly dial in to Demon, download the latest Usenet postings (KA9Q?) and read off-line. FTP searching was right out on cost grounds. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message ... for a start evans there are no classes in amateur radio only 3 grades of licence. dress it up whatever way you want your snide comments are clear and who they are directed to. if we use your argument that applies to amateurs self-building their own tx and maintaining them why on earth would you purchase a Yaesu ft-101 radio ? can you please explain that to everyone. why would a technical genius like yourself buy an off-the-shelf radio. it goes against everything you exhort you two-faced *******. With regard to my concern expressed about the gratuitous abuse originating from, and lack of technical acumen apparent in, the CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur, the childish outburst quoted above illustrates my point very well. |
The ATU, a dying art? plus FAQ
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
... On 12/02/14 12:54, Jeff wrote: Manufacturers certainly can be licensed to operate their own gear!! I have operated many times under a G9 callsign, and there are other ways as well. Indeed Jeff. Plus it depends on where the manufacturer is located. UK rules do not apply in Japan for example. At times I wonder if some people are remotely familiar with licence terms, conditions and limitations. Setting aside the habitual venom from the latter poster quoted above, it is equivocation to claim that testing manufactured goods is on a par with operating. |
The ATU, a dying art? plus FAQ
On 12/02/2014 14:44, gareth wrote:
"Brian Reay" wrote in message ... On 12/02/14 12:54, Jeff wrote: Manufacturers certainly can be licensed to operate their own gear!! I have operated many times under a G9 callsign, and there are other ways as well. Indeed Jeff. Plus it depends on where the manufacturer is located. UK rules do not apply in Japan for example. At times I wonder if some people are remotely familiar with licence terms, conditions and limitations. Setting aside the habitual venom from the latter poster quoted above, it is equivocation to claim that testing manufactured goods is on a par with operating. Who claimed that it was? OFCOM's "Non-Operational Licence" is precisely what it says on the tin. Non-Operational. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message
... ah the master-baiter becomes evasive. what is wrong...have you been outed as the cber who buys his radios off the shelf, a radio that apparently tx's on 11m as well. shame on you evans. With regard to my concern expressed about the gratuitous abuse originating from, and lack of technical acumen apparent in, the CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur, the childish outburst quoted above illustrates my point very well. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message
... there are large numbers of people who wish to be thought of as Radio Hams when, in fact, they are nothing of the kind! Usually such people are a variation of the CB Radio hobbyist; they buy their radios off the shelf. please explain your OFF-THE-SHELF purchase. If you wish to engage me in conversation, then please start by reposting each article of yours over the last month that has contained abusive remarks directed at me, and retract and apologise for such remarks. Really, it ought to be every such post since the year dot, but just the last months' worth will be enough to prove a change of your heart from being a CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur to someone who respects the gentlemanly traditions of amateur radio. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"gareth" wrote in message
... "Brian Reay" wrote in message ... If memory serves, the legendary FT101 even included 27MHz coverage. It was certainly reported to be used by more CBers than licensed amateurs. As you suggest, CBers may have been able to compensate for the antenna impedance over their limited bandwidth by using the Pi network. Which demonstrates that some amateurs are put in the shade in technical skill by CBers. Once again that is a an interjection of childish venom by you; I had been using valve PA stages for 24 years before I picked up in 1995 a museum piece of an FT101e Correction ... 25 years |
The ATU, a dying art?
"arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message
... On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:10:04 PM UTC, gareth wrote: "arthur c. grindhouse" wrote in message ... there are large numbers of people who wish to be thought of as Radio Hams when, in fact, they are nothing of the kind! Usually such people are a variation of the CB Radio hobbyist; they buy their radios off the shelf. please explain your OFF-THE-SHELF purchase. If you wish to engage me in conversation, then please start by reposting each article of yours over the last month that has contained abusive remarks directed at me, and retract and apologise for such remarks. Really, it ought to be every such post since the year dot, but just the last months' worth will be enough to prove a change of your heart from being a CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur to someone who respects the gentlemanly traditions of amateur radio. ha ha ha, ok please yourself and duck the question. so the gentlemanly traditions and technical pursuit involves buying an off the shelf radio. thank you for clearing that up as i seem to recall someone posting that a CBer-masquerading-as-a-radio-amateur would only do such a thing. I am not ducking the question but before I answer it, I seek some reassurance from you that you are going to behave in the manner that is expected from a grown-up in an international debating forum. You seem to be ducking such a reassurance. |
The ATU, a dying art?
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 |
The ATU, a dying art?
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 |
The ATU, a dying art?
"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) |
The ATU, a dying art?
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 |
The ATU, a dying art?
"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. |
The ATU, a dying art?
"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 |
The ATU, a dying art?
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 |
The ATU, a dying art?
"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" |
The ATU, a dying art?
wrote in message ... On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 2:12:14 PM UTC-6, 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've never seen a case where the use of an automatic antenna tuner drained antenna related knowledge from the operators brain pan. I use a tuner with my 40m dipole to operate on two additional bands, 75 and 160. On a suburban lot, I have no practical way to install full-size antennas for those bands, so I "make do." My three tuners are all tools, of a sort. I have a Black and Decker adjustable wrench which can be opened and closed electrically, in addition to having the usual thumbwheel. I don't believe motor operation necessarily diminishes the wrench or the user. "Sal" |
The ATU, a dying art?
"gareth" wrote in message
... I am not ducking the question but before I answer it, I seek some reassurance from you that you are going to behave in the manner that is expected from a grown-up in an international debating forum. You seem to be ducking such a reassurance. Hullo? Connelly? |
The ATU, a dying art?
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 5:21:37 AM UTC-6, Ian Jackson wrote:
The advent of remote tuners has been a godsend, as it obviates the need to devise cunning methods of performing the remote adjustments. However, I'm sure that there are now some amateurs who have the attitude "If I sling a random length of wire in the air, and stick an auto-tuner on it, it'll work just fine". As a result, the art of matching antennas has become de-skilled, and we no longer need to have any idea whatsoever about 'how things work'. Is this a 'good thing'? -- Ian I'm not really seeing it as some mass problem. Most of the people I know that decided to use an ATU did so because of some specific reason. Not because they can't match an antenna to a feed line. Myself, I find the whole topic as kind of silly. And to drag the poor CBer's into it, even more silly. I've never used an ATU. Ever. Nada. Zip. So what.. Does that mean I'm extra gifted when it comes to matching antennas to feed lines? If you all want to believe so, be my guests.. :/ I do own and use some manual tuners, but none of my everyday antennas require them. They are used more for special setups, portable, etc. |
The ATU, a dying art?
wrote in message
... Myself, I find the whole topic as kind of silly. And to drag the poor CBer's into it, even more silly. The topic is a very serious one, the decline of amateur radio to become indistinghuishable from CB radio, save for a few extra bands, etc, and the arrival on the scene of auto tuners in danger of being one of the last nails in the coffin. |
The ATU, a dying art?
On Thursday, February 13, 2014 4:29:12 AM UTC-6, gareth wrote:
wrote in message ... Myself, I find the whole topic as kind of silly. And to drag the poor CBer's into it, even more silly. The topic is a very serious one, the decline of amateur radio to become indistinghuishable from CB radio, save for a few extra bands, etc, and the arrival on the scene of auto tuners in danger of being one of the last nails in the coffin. Says who? You? Auto tuners have been around for years and years, and have nothing to do with the state of Amateur Radio. Amateur Radio is declining because is a lack of overall interest, and the use of the internet for instant global communications. Among other things.. But trust me, ATU's have nothing to do with it. :| |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:56 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com