RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Boatanchors (https://www.radiobanter.com/boatanchors/)
-   -   Boatanchor Transmitter... Good for Novice? (https://www.radiobanter.com/boatanchors/4967-boatanchor-transmitter-good-novice.html)

geojunkie December 15th 03 04:40 PM

Boatanchor Transmitter... Good for Novice?
 
I began collecting and restoring vintage tube gear about a year ago. I
started with some test equipment and radios (from 30s AM, to 60s FM
stereo), then did a couple of B&W TVs.

Most recently, I got a Hallicrafters SX-71 recapped and aligned
(thanks to some good advice from here). I have been having a lot of
fun with this, for the first time experiencing the HAM bands by using
the BFO to listen to SSB. Of course it also does CW really well,
although I don't know the code. Sunday afternoon I happened across
some really high quality sounding AM HAM transmissions from some kind
of club... I think it was using vintage gear. All this using a 10ft
piece of wire for the antenna... and I have no idea how much better
this can get.

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan

- - Bill - - December 15th 03 05:07 PM

geojunkie wrote:

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan


I've owned both a HT-32 (B-model) and an HT-37 although it was years
ago. I think they are both good rigs and if one was wanting a vintage
xmtr neither would be a bad choice.
Problem with many old xmtrs is that the audio bandwidth tends to be
wider than some people like and there will always be some tinny,
over-compressed rice box user to point that out to you on the band.
The other problem with the filters is that often they have drifted off
their centre/skirt freqs making 'by-the-book' alignment difficult.
I'm not going to categorically toss the HT-anything into being a problem
but its something often encountered with many vintage SSB rigs.
HT-37s go for dirt cheap these days and for the money its not a bad
choice when it comes to bang for the buck. Plus its a neat looking rig!

-Bill


Tim Wescott December 15th 03 06:41 PM

I was licenced in 1988, and got on the air with a SB-102. Since then I've
used a Galaxy V with much success. I haven't made a single HF contact that
didn't go through more tubes (on my side) than transistors (the Galaxy has a
transistorized audio chain). I think that a tube transmitter would be a
fine thing for a novice, as long as you're comfortable with it and take the
responsibility to make sure that it works right.

I _would_ hesitate to run SSB unless I had the provisions to check it
thoroughly. According to the ARRL you really need a spectrum analyzer and
they may be right, but the Handbooks from the 50s and 60s have directions on
checking SSB linearity using an O-scope.

"geojunkie" wrote in message
om...

-- snip --

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan




Scottm December 15th 03 07:07 PM


"- - Bill - -" exray@coquidotnet wrote in message
...
geojunkie wrote:

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan


I've owned both a HT-32 (B-model) and an HT-37 although it was years
ago. I think they are both good rigs and if one was wanting a vintage
xmtr neither would be a bad choice.
Problem with many old xmtrs is that the audio bandwidth tends to be
wider than some people like and there will always be some tinny,
over-compressed rice box user to point that out to you on the band.
The other problem with the filters is that often they have drifted off
their centre/skirt freqs making 'by-the-book' alignment difficult.
I'm not going to categorically toss the HT-anything into being a problem
but its something often encountered with many vintage SSB rigs.
HT-37s go for dirt cheap these days and for the money its not a bad
choice when it comes to bang for the buck. Plus its a neat looking rig!

-Bill



Bill makes some very good points. Here are a few more to consider.

Using a separate transmitter and receiver, particularly when they weren't
specifically designed to directly interface with each other, may make it
harder to initiate or maintain a QSO. They have to be zero-beated and if
the radios drift at all you may end up spending more time chasing your tail
than rag-chewing. For a beginner, it may get very frustrating.

Some of the parts, particularly the mechanical filters, can be hard to find.
If the filters have detuned, as Bill eludes to in his posting, you'll suffer
mild to excessive reduction in transmit audio quality. I have no experience
with the HTs when it comes to filters, but have replaced several in the
Collins S lines. Sometimes you can buy them for cheap, sometimes not. I
always sweep mine before installation to avoid a lot of work for nothing.

One other poster asked a similar question a few months ago. I pointed out
that the operator needs to be prepared to retune the rig when making
significant changes in frequency. This can get more complicated and time
consuming if you use a non resonant antenna and tuner as you have to tune
the radio first into a dummy load, then tune the antenna tuner. Yes, it can
be done. I do it all the time and I love my boat anchors (all ten of them).
But it can be a hindrance to enjoyment for some people, especially new
operators.

Good luck with your decision and license quest, and hope to hear you on the
air soon

73,
Scott, WN1B




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Mike Knudsen December 15th 03 08:12 PM

In article , "Scottm"
writes:

Some of the parts, particularly the mechanical filters, can be hard to find.
If the filters have detuned, as Bill eludes to in his posting, you'll suffer
mild to excessive reduction in transmit audio quality. I have no experience
with the HTs when it comes to filters, but have replaced several in the
Collins S lines.


Wow, I hadn't realized that mech filters (and maybe even xtal lattices?) can go
sour with age.

Presumably this would happen in receivers as well -- now maybe I know why some
of my BA RX sound better on SSB than others? Though all are more than
acceptable.

Given a transceiver, where the same filters are used in tx and rx, if most
received SSB signals sound good, cna you assume the tx side is good also? Not
counting problems in the diver and final, of course.

I have only one Collins set, a KWM-2, which makes any SSB signal sound
terrific. I've had goon on-air reports from it, so I guess its filter is
hanging in there.
73, Mike K.

Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.

Edward Knobloch December 15th 03 08:47 PM

geojunkie wrote:

snip. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.


The HT-32A or B is a nice transmitter, but a beginner may have some
trouble setting the mic gain correctly. There is no
Automatic Level Control (ALC), so it is possible to hit
the finals too hard on voice peaks, causing splatter
up and down the band. The key is to take it very easy
on the audio gain. Asking someone for an audio check is practically
a waste of time: most fellows can't widen up their receivers
enough to be able to give you a useful report.

73,
Ed Knobloch K4PF


Scottm December 15th 03 09:53 PM


"Mike Knudsen" wrote in message
...
In article , "Scottm"


writes:
Wow, I hadn't realized that mech filters (and maybe even xtal lattices?)

can go
sour with age.


I'm wouldn't say its with age, specifically, but use and mositure migration
appear to be the culprit. I've opened bad ones up and found breaks in the
tiny spot welds that attach the wire to the disks. I assume that either a
good solid jolt (read UPS drop test) or the constant minute vibrations the
filter experiences could do this. I have also opened them up to find
moisture migration that has curroded or rusted the wire and disks. Any
change in the spacings of the disks will dramatically change the filter's
charactoristics.


Presumably this would happen in receivers as well -- now maybe I know why

some
of my BA RX sound better on SSB than others? Though all are more than
acceptable.


Given a transceiver, where the same filters are used in tx and rx, if most
received SSB signals sound good, cna you assume the tx side is good also?

Not
counting problems in the diver and final, of course.


Yes. But sometimes it really hindges on the ear of the critic as well as the
mic response. You can lose a couple hundred cycles on receive and still
think that it sounds OK. You can lose a couple hundred cycles on TX and it
will still transmit but not sound nearly as good as it should. This is
particularly true with the S lines that use a 2.1 KC filter. You lose 200
cycles on the lower side and now your bandwidth is only 1.9 KC and sounds
very tinny. Conversely, however, the opposite sideband sounds great because
it has widened its passband. Also, when you transmit you are being compared
against every other transmitter. When you receive, everyone is going to
sound equally broad or narrow to you unless you compare it directly to
another receiver.

One final point, shifting of the 455 IF crystals can cause a similar result.
If they drift off frequency, they will shift the IF. If they shift the
lower too low or the upper too high it will cut part of the response the
same way that a change in the filter will.

I have only one Collins set, a KWM-2, which makes any SSB signal sound
terrific. I've had goon on-air reports from it, so I guess its filter is
hanging in there.


The KWM-2 is a great radio. I have a RE 2A and love it.

73, Mike K.

Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Sparks December 15th 03 11:42 PM

The HT-37 is not a filter type rig but a phasing type. Regards Sparks

N2EY December 15th 03 11:57 PM

(geojunkie) wrote in message . com...

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.


Dan,

A lot depends upon what you intend to do with vintage gear.

First, be aware that most vintage gear takes a bit of skill and
understanding to tune up and use. It's not foolproof, particularly
transmitters! So you may want to start with something small and simple
first.

If your interest is primarily SSB, be aware that it takes some real
skill to zero beat "separates" on that mode. That's one reason why
transceivers became so popular 40 years ago (the other was cost) -
once tuned in on receive, the transmitter is automatically tuned
properly for transmit. You may decide that a vintage SSB transceiver,
or "matched pair" transmitter-receiver set, are more to your liking if
you want to operate SSB with vintage gear.

CW (Morse Code) and AM present different requirements. Many vintage
rigs that cannot do SSB, or cannot do it well, will do an excellent
job on CW or AM.

Good luck!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dbowey December 16th 03 01:08 AM

Tim posted:
I _would_ hesitate to run SSB unless I had the provisions to check it
thoroughly. According to the ARRL you really need a spectrum analyzer and
they may be right, but the Handbooks from the 50s and 60s have directions
on
checking SSB linearity using an O-scope.


I was licensed in 53 and there was a long time that I built most of my
equipment, as many did. Innovation was required when it came to testing; some
of us couldn't afford even a scope. And there weren't any spectrum analyzers.
The ARRL is full of itself today, in more ways than I hate to see. They AREN'T
correct about needing a spectrum analyzer

A scope is an excellent way to check a SSB signal for linearity and to assure
you aren't over-modulating. If you don't have one, but have a reasonably good
receiver, use it to listen to what a test signal sounds like. Use it with the
antenna terminals shorted, and RF gain reduced so the receiver is not
overloaded.

In the late 50s I owned an HT32B, a great rig. It was easy to use and never
gave me any trouble. I recommend it, but also recommend against buying an HT37
if you aren't comfortable about working on a phasing transmitter. They are
more difficult to align without good test equipment, but it can be done if you
have a good, selective, receiver. I built a Central Electonics 10B phasing
exciter (5 Watts as I recall) and aligned it with my SX100. While I was out in
the Aleutian Islands, I often ran it barefoot and got great reports from all
over the US.

Don't be afraid of a boatanchor that is in good working condition.

By the way, the SX-101 is better than the SX100 in my opinion. The HT32B would
be a great match for it.

Good luck

Don

December 16th 03 04:52 AM

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:40:21 UTC, (geojunkie) wrote:

I began collecting and restoring vintage tube gear about a year ago. I
started with some test equipment and radios (from 30s AM, to 60s FM
stereo), then did a couple of B&W TVs.

Most recently, I got a Hallicrafters SX-71 recapped and aligned
(thanks to some good advice from here). I have been having a lot of
fun with this, for the first time experiencing the HAM bands by using
the BFO to listen to SSB. Of course it also does CW really well,
although I don't know the code. Sunday afternoon I happened across
some really high quality sounding AM HAM transmissions from some kind
of club... I think it was using vintage gear. All this using a 10ft
piece of wire for the antenna... and I have no idea how much better
this can get.

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan


Please see my boatanchor page at
www.kiyoinc.com/heathstuff.html

I discuss the pros and cons of running boatanchors.

The HT-32 and SX-101A is a classic combination. I used an HT-37
and a SX-101A for about 5 years in the 1960s.

Two cautions. Use CAIG de-ox-id on the switch contacts and the
pots. You will have to replace caps and possibly some resistors
unless this was already done. You already did the SX-71 so you
know the drill.

Once you do that, those radios are just as good as the newest,
digital radios (as long as you understand their limitations.)

With a vintage radio, you have 5 kHz frequency readout, not .01
kHz. Of course SSB signals are 2-3 kHz wide and moving around so
how do you measure that to .01, .1, or even 1 kHz????

The VFO is "about" 1 kHz/hour stable. Some may be better but I
wouldn't expect much better than that given the age of the
components.

The transmitters did not have modern features such as QSK or ALC (or
compressors). Keep the audio gain down. On an HT-32 or HT-37,
talk the meter to maybe 30% of max power. Max power being what
you loaded the transmitter to. If you can see 240 mills when you
tune for max power out, talk it to only 80 mills.

The SX-101A receiver have a front end that you cannot overload and
an audio amp that the "Glass audio" folks can appreciate.

Boat anchor transmitters had tuned outputs, load 'n dip. These did
not need antenna tuners because the output load controls did the
matching.

As for the antenna, if you put up a 40 meter dipole, you will
hear stations boom in, about 3-5 S-units better than that 10 foot
piece of wire.




- - Bill - - December 16th 03 05:40 AM

No Spam (ckh) wrote:

The transmitters did not have modern features such as QSK or ALC (or
compressors). Keep the audio gain down. On an HT-32 or HT-37,
talk the meter to maybe 30% of max power. Max power being what
you loaded the transmitter to. If you can see 240 mills when you
tune for max power out, talk it to only 80 mills.


Thats probably the most valuable thing to recognize whether it be a BA
xmtr or the latest thing from Japan.

Many guys want to see the meter 'hang' up there with audio like it did
in "TUNE" or in CW. If it does, you can count on a sloppy SSB audio signal.

You don't really need a scope or analyzer for this since the mfr has
already designed the rig for you. I don't know how to describe it any
better other than saying that when you pass the ideal operating point,
the output (or plate) meter will not be as "peppy" with normal speech
when you pass the sweet spot for drive. Forget how high the meter
'peaks' because every meter is damped differently.
I guess if you have the right voice for the long "Hooooola" down pat you
can push the limit. Then back off 10%.
:-)

-Bill



..

The SX-101A receiver have a front end that you cannot overload and
an audio amp that the "Glass audio" folks can appreciate.

Boat anchor transmitters had tuned outputs, load 'n dip. These did
not need antenna tuners because the output load controls did the
matching.

As for the antenna, if you put up a 40 meter dipole, you will
hear stations boom in, about 3-5 S-units better than that 10 foot
piece of wire.





Wayne December 16th 03 02:25 PM

Dan,

Your story sounds very familiar to me - I was born in '55 too, got my
licence in 2002, passed my Morse test in 2003 and went on the air with
tube equipment! It's a lot more work than using one of the 'plug &
play, all-in-one-box' modern rigs, but the nostalgia of the tube stuff
got me too.

Do go and get your licence - it is not as difficult as you may think.
Morse Code testing is probably on the way out, but will be around for
a while yet - there are programs that you can buy on the Internet
which will get you up to 5 WPM speed in a few weeks, with around an
hour a day practice (Code Quick is a good one - check the Net for it
and others...). If there is a ham radio club near you, find out when
they meet and drop in - they will be glad to help out!

A few suggestions, based on my experience with this stuff:

1. BE CAREFUL! Tube transmitters use MUCH higher voltages and
currents than you will find in your tube receiver (800 volts or more
is not uncommon) - these voltage levels ARE LETHAL! Power off and
discharge the power supply filter caps before poking around in there,
and use extreme caution if you operate it on the bench without its
cover on! Keep one hand in your pocket whever working on the live
chassis. Voltage levels such as these demand the utmost respect! I
have been an Electronics Tech for over 25 years, and would not be
writing this to you today if I hadn't followed these rules when
working on high voltage equipment.....BE CAREFUL!

2. Seriously consider an SSB / CW set. Not many folks run the old AM
stuff anymore, and you will seriously limit your potential of making
phone contacts on the bands should you choose to go the AM route.
Plus, SSB is much more efficient than AM - a 50W PEP SSB signal is
approximately equivalent in effect to that produced by a 400W AM
transmitter (9dB gain), as no wasted power is being used to transmit a
carrier or a redundant sideband!

3. I would recommend one of the Heathkit transceivers or transmitter /
receiver pairs (specifically, their SB- or HW- series...) - they were
designed to be worked on by the end user. Their manuals contain a
wealth of information for the restorer as well - complete functional
descriptions of each circuit, parts list, assembly and schematic
diagrams, full alignment instructions that don't require a shop full
of test equipment to do (a cheap old Vacuum Tube Voltmeter with an RF
Probe and an RF Signal Generator will do it!), voltage and
troubleshooting charts - if and when you run in to a tough problem,
this data will be invaluable. Plus, the many folks who still run tube
Heath rigs tend to be quite knowledgable about them - there are
Heathkit Internet mail lists that you can subscribe to which will put
you in touch with folks who have the parts and info that you may need.

4. Find a set that is in 'working' condition. Some parts (power
transformers, tank coils, etc.) are not easy to find these days, are
are expensive when you do. Do not operate an old set for any length
of time until you have restored it, though - a shorted filter cap can
take out a power tranny pretty fast! And make sure that it is as
original as possible - no extra holes drilled in it, etc., that might
indicate that it belonged to someone who messed with its internal
wiring......

5. Expect that any old tube transmitter will require a fair amount of
work before it is ready to go on the air. All of the electrolytic
caps, all of the paper caps (if any - depends on the age of the rig),
and a fair number of the old carbon resistors (they drift in value,
especially the high-value ones) will require replacement. Tube
transmitters run pretty hot, and are harder on their parts than the
average receiver. In addition, hams are famous for adding -um-
"modifications" to their gear - you may find yourself removing some of
these and restoring the circuitry to its original configuration. In
any event, expect to put a considerable number of hours in to the
restoration! Fun hours, but hours nevertheless.

6. When you are done, pat yourself on the back! The feeling of
accomplishment that you will get from your first contact with your
'new' tube rig defies description....you'll see!

Good luck - and see you on the air!

73, Wayne

On 15 Dec 2003 08:40:21 -0800, (geojunkie) wrote:

I began collecting and restoring vintage tube gear about a year ago. I
started with some test equipment and radios (from 30s AM, to 60s FM
stereo), then did a couple of B&W TVs.

Most recently, I got a Hallicrafters SX-71 recapped and aligned
(thanks to some good advice from here). I have been having a lot of
fun with this, for the first time experiencing the HAM bands by using
the BFO to listen to SSB. Of course it also does CW really well,
although I don't know the code. Sunday afternoon I happened across
some really high quality sounding AM HAM transmissions from some kind
of club... I think it was using vintage gear. All this using a 10ft
piece of wire for the antenna... and I have no idea how much better
this can get.

Anyway, I am now thinking about getting a license. I would prefer to
stay vintage tube based. Even though I was born in 55, I just can't
get excited about digital gear, and enjoy having to do most of the
thinking. My question is whether a vintage tranmitter, such as an HT32
would be appropriate for a novice HAM? I actually have an SX-101a
(from ebay) on the way and I think they would make a great pair.

Dan



Mike Knudsen December 17th 03 05:53 AM

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

First, be aware that most vintage gear takes a bit of skill and
understanding to tune up and use. It's not foolproof, particularly
transmitters! So you may want to start with something small and simple
first.


I'd recommend the National NCX-3 for an easy to use tube SSB xcver. Simple to
tune up and operate. But it omits some of the old bands (as well as the new
ones) and is strictly for SSB. 73, Mike K.



Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.

Roger Halstead December 17th 03 08:50 AM

On 17 Dec 2003 05:53:31 GMT, r (Mike Knudsen)
wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

First, be aware that most vintage gear takes a bit of skill and
understanding to tune up and use. It's not foolproof, particularly
transmitters! So you may want to start with something small and simple
first.


I'd recommend the National NCX-3 for an easy to use tube SSB xcver. Simple to
tune up and operate. But it omits some of the old bands (as well as the new
ones) and is strictly for SSB. 73, Mike K.


Every thing is relative.
When I was a Novice this stuff was state of the art, but we had to use
crystal control for the transmitter. I used a Viking Ranger with a
S40-B with a Heathkit Q-multiplier on CW.
Then graduated to an RME 6900. I even used the Ranger (with the VFO)
once I made General. FRom there the next transmitter was an HT-37
while I was still using the RME-6900 receiver.

So, I never thought it took much skill to run one when I was a Novice,
but then again, I hadn't been running solid state, no tune rigs for
years as I have now.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Return address modified due to dumb virus checkers
..



Oscar loves trash, but hates Spam! Delete him to reply to me.




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com