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 |
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 |
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 |
"- - 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! =----- |
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. |
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 |
"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! =----- |
The HT-37 is not a filter type rig but a phasing type. Regards Sparks
|
|
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 |
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. |
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. |
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 |
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com