On Oct 29, 1:42 am, geek wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:10:27 +0000, John Tartar wrote:
The deadline for the ARRL homebrew challenge has passed and I hear that the
ARRL received 4 entries, all NO computer radios. NONE were in the computer
assisted category. Publication is scheduled for Feb 2008 QST

A Yahoo group was started to discuss developments.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRLHBC/

Some of the entrants have posting info about their entries there.

Four entries? This does not bode well for the hobby :-(

It's astonishing that anyone was able to meet the requirements: A $50
HF CW and voice transceiver meeting FCC spectral requirements. That's
astonishing.

I mean, 40 years ago some of were cobbling together crystal-controlled
CW transmitters for $10 or $15 plus a lot of raiding of old TV's and
radios for tubes, transformers, etc. The fact that the same inflation-
adjusted amount of money allows something that is way superior
functionally with modern stuff is good news!

IMHO, building at least some of your own stuff should be a prerequisite
for the license.

Maybe, but requiring someone to build a multimode HF transceiver from
scratch would have been even more onerous 40 years ago than it is
today. Some folks will complain about the cost of a rig (and in fact
these complaints were the impetus behind the homebrew challenge), but
with used, all-band, multimode HF rigs available for just a few
hundred dollars I don't see how cost can matter much.

There was a really funny letter that QST published over the summer,
saying "there's no way to do anything on HF without a $6000 radio and
multiple towers filled with beam arrays anymore". My response: I
turned on my old Heath HW-16 (paid $50 for it a few months before) and
worked a dozen European/Eurasian countries and Senegal without even
trying. It's like some are setting the bar way too high or way too
low, when really it's about having fun.

Tim.

Well $50 is definitely Do-Able, for a SSB/CW radio.
There's a picture of one on the front page of the yahoo group.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRLHBC/

The fact that the are only 4 entries is a little disappointing,
especially since none were Software Defined Radios.
However, the task is difficult, and the prize was only a token $100.
I know of a few hams who started designs but didn't finish in time.

I've looked at the Picastar group, and that's real homebrew, they want
you to iron Xerox paper onto blank PCB stock to make your SMT boards. So
it's $300 in material, and probably 300 hours of your time. But saving
money is not the normal reason for homebrewing these days. For $300 you
could buy a decent used 160-10M HF radio on EBay.

The first radio I built (in the 60's) was a simple 1 tube crystal
controlled transmitter featured in an Electronics magazine that you could
build for $7. Adjusting for inflation, $7 is about equal to $50 today.
And for $50 you get much mo a VFO, digital readout, TX&RX, CW&SSB.

I think the point of the $50 HF radio, is to attract VHF only hams to try
HF. What's the statistic? 75% of all hams never operate on HF? The new
no-code license should let these Tech class hams get a general pretty
easily.



On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:10:27 +0000, John Tartar wrote:

The deadline for the ARRL homebrew challenge has passed and I hear
that the
ARRL received 4 entries, all NO computer radios. NONE were in the
computer
assisted category. Publication is scheduled for Feb 2008 QST

It's the $50 limit! Thats way too low under $100 then it's doable.

A Yahoo group was started to discuss developments.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRLHBC/

Some of the entrants have posting info about their entries there.

Four entries? This does not bode well for the hobby :-(

No it may speak badly for the challenge. I've built a lot of SSB
VHF radios and $50 is a tight budget even with a large junkbox
assist.

IMHO, building at least some of your own stuff should be a prerequisite
for the license.

I do but, I am in a minority.

Allison


Tim Shoppa wrote in
s.com:

On Oct 29, 1:42 am, geek wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:10:27 +0000, John Tartar wrote:
The deadline for the ARRL homebrew challenge has passed and I hear
that the ARRL received 4 entries, all NO computer radios. NONE
were in the computer assisted category. Publication is scheduled
for Feb 2008 QST

A Yahoo group was started to discuss developments.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRLHBC/

Some of the entrants have posting info about their entries there.

Four entries? This does not bode well for the hobby :-(

It's astonishing that anyone was able to meet the requirements: A $50
HF CW and voice transceiver meeting FCC spectral requirements. That's
astonishing.

I mean, 40 years ago some of were cobbling together crystal-controlled
CW transmitters for $10 or $15 plus a lot of raiding of old TV's and
radios for tubes, transformers, etc. The fact that the same inflation-
adjusted amount of money allows something that is way superior
functionally with modern stuff is good news!

IMHO, building at least some of your own stuff should be a
prerequisite for the license.

Maybe, but requiring someone to build a multimode HF transceiver from
scratch would have been even more onerous 40 years ago than it is
today. Some folks will complain about the cost of a rig (and in fact
these complaints were the impetus behind the homebrew challenge), but
with used, all-band, multimode HF rigs available for just a few
hundred dollars I don't see how cost can matter much.

There was a really funny letter that QST published over the summer,
saying "there's no way to do anything on HF without a $6000 radio and
multiple towers filled with beam arrays anymore". My response: I
turned on my old Heath HW-16 (paid $50 for it a few months before) and
worked a dozen European/Eurasian countries and Senegal without even
trying. It's like some are setting the bar way too high or way too
low, when really it's about having fun.

Tim.

On 2007-10-29, John Tartar wrote:
Well $50 is definitely Do-Able, for a SSB/CW radio.

If you were mass-producing a kit, it should be easy. The challenge (back
when I read it) made it sound like it had to be buildable with printed
instructions and $50. If you have to buy everything in single unit
quantities and make your own PCB (or build ugly/Manhattan, a challenge
that would seem more formidable than $50 to many new hams) then it's
hard to squeeze everything in. How many tinkerers have any idea how
much it would really cost to build one of their creations? They probably
built most of it from the junkbox.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD

http://www.ben.com/