Intermediate Licence project
 

I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

I hope to build one for use on the HF bands.

Many Thanks for your help

M3GBQ

"S C" wrote in message ...
I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

I hope to build one for use on the HF bands.

Many Thanks for your help

M3GBQ

Lots of designs around, try this one:

http://www.alg.demon.co.uk/radio/qrp/port_atu.htm

You may find the study material you can download from my website useful when
working for you 2E.

Good luck with your studies & 73


--
Brian Reay
www.g8osn.org.uk
www.amateurradiotraining.org.uk
FP#898

"M3"? You'd be better off to post your question in uk.rec.radio.cb.

This is a NG for Radio Hams, of which company you are not a member.

"S C" wrote in message ...
I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

I hope to build one for use on the HF bands.

Many Thanks for your help

M3GBQ

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
"M3"? You'd be better off to post your question in uk.rec.radio.cb.

This is a NG for Radio Hams, of which company you are not a member.

"S C" wrote in message

WOW! What a stupid response Bean. I hope you respond in like vein when
actually speaking to real live people, so they will have an opportunity to
knock you on your ass which you so obviously deserve.

W4ZCB

I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.
============================
On the assumption that you would use this equipment once you have upgraded
to the Intermediate Licence ,the ATU's power rating is to be in excess of 50
Watts . Perhaps you can state to which type of feeder the AMU (Antenna
Matching Unit) is to be connected ; a coax feeder or a balanced feeder.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

take neigh notice yon M3.
These bitter old porkers, there only jealous of your youth.

They were all unlicensed CB'ers once, they just won't admit it. Airy still
has plenty of CB buddies. He soon shuts up when you remind him of his 4x4
driving country side wreaking mates...

"S C" wrote in message ...
I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

The simplest ATU is an L-match. Comprises a coil and a capacitor. Explain
that it is useful for matching high-impedence end fed wires approx half
wavelength long to 50 ohm and you should pass.

On the SWR meter, the cheapest way you can build something that does a
similar job is to build a resistive bridge (check if this is acceptable
first). This requires a meter movement a diode or two and a handful of
resistors and capacitors. There is no coil winding or toroids. The big
benefit of this is that you can tune up without putting a signal to air as
you would with an SWR bridge. They are also excellent for low power
transmitters as they are more sensitive than many SWR meters (particularly
on the lower HF range).

73, Peter VK3YE

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:17:01 GMT, "Harold E. Johnson"
wrote:


"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
"M3"? You'd be better off to post your question in uk.rec.radio.cb.

This is a NG for Radio Hams, of which company you are not a member.

"S C" wrote in message

WOW! What a stupid response Bean. I hope you respond in like vein when
actually speaking to real live people, so they will have an opportunity to
knock you on your ass which you so obviously deserve.

W4ZCB


So Airy R Bean finally infested this newsgroup as well !
I only see his posts if they are quoted in others, since most of us on
the uk.radio.amateur newsgroup killfiled him long ago.

Just ignore him. He is really Gareth Alun Evans of Chippenham England.
His callsign is G4SDW and you can find his address in the Callbook if
you'd like to send him a greetings card.

Now that will bring a torrent of abuse from him ... just wait and see!

Peter, G3PHO

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:26:04 +0100, wrote:

They were all unlicensed CB'ers once, they just won't admit it.


Oh no they were not!

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
It is not a stupid response at all. Far from it; it is a response that
stands for the maintenance of standards in Ham Radio. The M3/CB
Fools' Licence here in Britland is an advanced CB licence, but it
is not a Ham Radio licence by any stretch of the imagination.


Rubbish. I know several M3's, some of whom I have met on air (CW, that is).
Proficient and courteous ops. Some of them are enthusiastic homebrewers,
whose technical knowledge surely exceeds many, if not most, "full" license
holders. To date, every M3 I have met is on his way to the full license.
Several have got theirs since I first knew them.

I suspect that the majority of "full" license holders, "real" amateurs you
would call them, buy their black box straight after the license arrives and
never heat up a soldering iron. So what? If they're interested in ATV, CW,
SSB, VHF, UHF, digital modes, homebrewing, DX'ing, whatever - who cares? The
aspect is wide enough to cater for everyone's interest! Have your own
interest and enjoy the hobby, without needing to mock others who enjoy it in
their own way.

For myself, I have never operated a black box rig. Every single QSO I have
ever had was on my all-homebrew station, see
http://www.hanssummers.com/radio/g0upl/qsl/index.htm. But I still don't care
who else does what - they ham their way and I ham mine - I know how I enjoy
the hobby and I get on with it. When I CQ anyone is welcome - any speed,
country, AND license class! I can't believe that there are those who'll hear
an M3 and refuse to answer their call. Is that what amateur radio stands
for?

May I also assure non-UK readers that Mr Bean's opinions and attitudes are
not representative of UK amateurs in general. Mr Bean does seem an
appropriate nickname however.

72/3 de Hans G0UPL
http://www.HansSummers.com

"Peter Parker" wrote in message
...

"S C" wrote in message ...
I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

The simplest ATU is an L-match. Comprises a coil and a capacitor.
Explain
that it is useful for matching high-impedence end fed wires approx half
wavelength long to 50 ohm and you should pass.


Yes - have a look at my version
http://www.hanssummers.com/radio/atu/atu.htm. I included a 50-ohm 10 Watt
dummy load and forward/reverse power meter. It doesn't read SWR directly, if
you really want to know the SWR then you measure the forward power and the
reverse (reflected) power and put them in the SWR formula.

In practice, 99% of the time you don't care about SWR, you just tune for
minimum reflected power. Operation is very easy - when switched to reflected
power, tune the capacitor to get minimum indicated reflected power. Then try
different L settings by switching the coil tap, and see which setting allows
the reflected power minimum to be deepest. I have a 1W full-scale-deflection
setting for the fine tuning. Then switch to forward power and away you go.

No need to know the actual SWR in practice; the only time I have bothered to
calculate it is when I want to tell people how close to 1:1 I can tune my
various incarnations of longwire antennas. Random length, not cut to any
particular band. Including the bent indoor attic "short"wire I had my first
QSO's on. So far I am very content with my ATU, I have been QRV on 80, 40
and 30m and always found it works well.

73 Hans G0UPL
http://www.HansSummers.com

Many thanks to those of you that have thus far provided me with advice and
guidance it is all very much appreciated.

To those persons who appear somewhat offended by the presence of an M3
licence holder - Your comments have been noted and promptly disregarded.

Without the supply of new interested individuals this hobby would eventually
cease to exist.

Finally, I would be grateful if anyone could provide me with smoe advice in
relation to CW. E.g. Methods available to improve the transmission and
understanding CW messages.

Many Thanks once again.


"S C" wrote in message ...
I would be grateful if anyone could suggest or provide me with a circuit
diagram for a Homebrew ATU with SWR meter or circuit diagrans for these
seperately.

I hope to build one for use on the HF bands.

Many Thanks for your help

M3GBQ

"Hans Summers" wrote:
No need to know the actual SWR in practice;

I didn't even have an SWR meter for the first 10 years or so of my ham career.
With the link coupled rigs I just shoved the link coil in until the correct
plate current was reached (after dipping of course). Same with Pi Net, just
adjust for correct plate current. And the war surplus stuff, remember those
antenna current meters...

Come to think of it I think I was happier then, ignorance is bliss... ;)

You behave like a 5-year old

"Peter" wrote in message
...
So Airy R Bean finally infested this newsgroup as well !

Irrelevant - the M3/CB Fools' Licence is judged by the lowest
standard necessary to obtain one.

Starting from scratch, with a previous irrelevant interest, perhaps
needleworking, fishing or CB Radio, you can obtain an M3/CB
Fools' Licence within 2 days. There is no way that anyone in such
a category has picked up any technical nous to qualify them as a
Radio Ham. If there really are people such as you claim, and you have
not just invented them for the purpose of this discussion, then why haven't
they got a higher grade of licence?

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
It is not a stupid response at all. Far from it; it is a response that
stands for the maintenance of standards in Ham Radio. The M3/CB
Fools' Licence here in Britland is an advanced CB licence, but it
is not a Ham Radio licence by any stretch of the imagination.


Rubbish. I know several M3's, some of whom I have met on air (CW, that
is).
Proficient and courteous ops. Some of them are enthusiastic homebrewers,
whose technical knowledge surely exceeds many, if not most, "full" license
holders.

You would seem to be describing a CBers-Masquerading-As-Radio-Hams
and not actually _REAL_ Radio Hams.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
It is not a stupid response at all. Far from it; it is a response that
stands for the maintenance of standards in Ham Radio. The M3/CB
Fools' Licence here in Britland is an advanced CB licence, but it
is not a Ham Radio licence by any stretch of the imagination.
I suspect that the majority of "full" license holders, "real" amateurs you
would call them, buy their black box straight after the license arrives
and
never heat up a soldering iron.

I am not mocking anybody - your comment says more
about you, perhaps, than it does about me?

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
Have your own
interest and enjoy the hobby, without needing to mock others who enjoy it
in
their own way.

Argumentum Ad Populum.

That you choose finally to resort to rather silly and childish remarks
would seem to classify you as a CBer which would explain your
ranting.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
It is not a stupid response at all. Far from it; it is a response that
stands for the maintenance of standards in Ham Radio. The M3/CB
Fools' Licence here in Britland is an advanced CB licence, but it
is not a Ham Radio licence by any stretch of the imagination.
May I also assure non-UK readers that Mr Bean's opinions and attitudes are
not representative of UK amateurs in general. Mr Bean does seem an
appropriate nickname however.
72/3 de Hans G0UPL

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
It is not a stupid response at all. Far from it; it is a response that
stands for the maintenance of standards in Ham Radio. The M3/CB
Fools' Licence here in Britland is an advanced CB licence, but it
is not a Ham Radio licence by any stretch of the imagination.


Rubbish. I know several M3's, some of whom I have met on air (CW, that
is).
Proficient and courteous ops. Some of them are enthusiastic homebrewers,
whose technical knowledge surely exceeds many, if not most, "full" license
holders. To date, every M3 I have met is on his way to the full license.
Several have got theirs since I first knew them.


Hans, ask Airy (sorry Gareth) how long he held his licence before getting
to hold a G4.............

Even better, how long it took to learn about fitting
PL259s....................... (about 30 years).


Then try: Fixing a FT101 , repairing a TS830, FT221R,
.........................................

"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
Irrelevant - the M3/CB Fools' Licence is judged by the lowest
standard necessary to obtain one.

Starting from scratch, with a previous irrelevant interest, perhaps
needleworking, fishing or CB Radio, you can obtain an M3/CB
Fools' Licence within 2 days. There is no way that anyone in such
a category has picked up any technical nous to qualify them as a
Radio Ham. If there really are people such as you claim, and you have
not just invented them for the purpose of this discussion, then why
haven't
they got a higher grade of licence?


But they have Gareth. Remember your 'friend' the M0 you thought was still a
M3? You know, the one you tried to show how to fit a PL259. Only thing is,
you couldn't fit it yourself. Could you.

He must still be laughing.....................we are.

"S C" wrote in message ...

Finally, I would be grateful if anyone could provide me with smoe advice
in
relation to CW. E.g. Methods available to improve the transmission and
understanding CW messages.

This depends on operator sending and receiving ability. But also important
is quality of transmitted note, absence of clicks, slow speed if signals are
weak, repetition of important information if signals are weak, use of IF and
audio bandpass and notch filters.

73, Peter

Airy R. Bean wrote:
I am not mocking anybody - your comment says more
about you, perhaps, than it does about me?

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
Have your own
interest and enjoy the hobby, without needing to mock others who enjoy it
in
their own way.

Welcome to my killfile. You, unlike Hans, have nothing to say, and you
insist on saying it over and over at extreme length. I can think of
nothing, including amateur radio, Usenet, and the human race, to which
you are an ornament, and anything to which you are compared will be
insulted.

--
Mike Andrews

Tired old sysadmin

If there really are people such as you claim, and you have
not just invented them for the purpose of this discussion, then why
haven't
they got a higher grade of licence?

I don't think you read my posting properly. I already told you, "every M3 I
have met is on his way to the full license. Several have got theirs since I
first knew them". Just one example immediately springs to mind without me
even having to look up callsigns in my log: Ken M3NPD now M0RZZ.

I can imagine why many people wanting a full license might want to get an
intermediate license first, so they could get on air whilst working for the
full license. Seems to me to be quite a sensible approach. Others might
become M3 because the full license seems daunting. When they get on air
perhaps they'd be enthused enough to upgrade their license.

You would seem to be describing a CBers-Masquerading-As-
-Radio-Hams and not actually _REAL_ Radio Hams.

This comment shows you're not really thinking logically about all this, even
if it is your genuinely held opinion. By your statement you're saying a full
license holder can still be a Masquerading CB'er, because he isn't very
involved technically. Conversely you would then have to concede that a
technically able M3 was a real ham not a CB'er, regardless of his license
class. I think you need to decide whether your sweeping generalisations are
to define criteria based on license class, or on technical ability.

I am not mocking anybody - your comment says more
about you, perhaps, than it does about me?

Belittle would have perhaps been a better word. You are attempting to
belittle others more worthy of the amatuer license than you are, and in the
process you are demonstrating considerable expertise in self-belittlement...

73

Hans

CB'er Masquerading as Radio Ham, a.k.a. G0UPL (who has never owned or
operated a commercial rig, and in gradually making my way higher in
frequency from my start on 80m, is still some 17MHz short of the CB band...)

Your Childish Broadcast (CB) below serves to classify you.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct, traditions
which are sadly lost on you.

"Mike Andrews" wrote in message
...
Welcome to my killfile. You, unlike Hans, have nothing to say, and you
insist on saying it over and over at extreme length. I can think of
nothing, including amateur radio, Usenet, and the human race, to which
you are an ornament, and anything to which you are compared will be
insulted.

But the M3 licence is no more a stepping stone to _REAL_ Ham
Radio than are other pursuits such as Needleworking and football
supporting.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
If there really are people such as you claim, and you have
not just invented them for the purpose of this discussion, then why
haven't
they got a higher grade of licence?
I don't think you read my posting properly. I already told you, "every M3
I
have met is on his way to the full license. Several have got theirs since
I
first knew them". Just one example immediately springs to mind without me
even having to look up callsigns in my log: Ken M3NPD now M0RZZ.
I can imagine why many people wanting a full license might want to get an
intermediate license first, so they could get on air whilst working for
the
full license. Seems to me to be quite a sensible approach. Others might
become M3 because the full license seems daunting. When they get on air
perhaps they'd be enthused enough to upgrade their license.

If you want to be thought of as a CBer, then make personal
comments as you do below.

I do not have to, and neither do I, concede what you suggest. The
M3/CB Fools' Licence is judged by the entry standard, which
is no technical standard whatsoever. The few examples that
you _CLAIM_ do not change the essence of the M3/CB Licensee
class which is a Mongolian horde of non-technical turnip-brains,
who are the death of _REAL_ Ham Radio.

I am not making any sweeping generalisations, I am quoting facts.

Indeed, if you wish to be respected as a debating respondent, then
you would do well to avoid the rather silly and childish asides
that you are increasingly using, childish asides that are usually the
mark of a failing debater.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
You would seem to be describing a CBers-Masquerading-As-
-Radio-Hams and not actually _REAL_ Radio Hams.

This comment shows you're not really thinking logically about all this,
even
if it is your genuinely held opinion. By your statement you're saying a
full
license holder can still be a Masquerading CB'er, because he isn't very
involved technically. Conversely you would then have to concede that a
technically able M3 was a real ham not a CB'er, regardless of his license
class. I think you need to decide whether your sweeping generalisations
are
to define criteria based on license class, or on technical ability.

I am neither mocking nor belittling - your comment says more
about you, perhaps, than it does about me?

Once again you are resorting to a rather silly and childish line
in personal remarks, remarks which would tend to classify you as a CBer,
because Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct which
are sadly lost on you. Because of your emotive and immature stance
it is unlikely that anyone reading this NG would mistake you
for a Radio Ham.

It is not a question of belittlement nor of mocking, merely one
of taxonomy.

I welcome and encourage everybody, irrespective of their background
to become technically interested and thus become suitable candidates
for _REAL_ Ham Radio. Those that do not become technically
motivated simply are not _REAL_ Radio Hams. They are something
else, probably CBers. Those whose pursuit is football supporting and
nothing else are clearly not Radio Hams, but it not a matter of mocking
nor is a matter of belittling to classify them as non-Hams.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
I am not mocking anybody - your comment says more
about you, perhaps, than it does about me?
Belittle would have perhaps been a better word. You are attempting to
belittle others more worthy of the amatuer license than you are, and in
the
process you are demonstrating considerable expertise in
self-belittlement...

I do humbly apologise, I am clearly in desperate need of a good period of
solitary monastic study alone with my Oxford dictionary. I appear to have
completely misunderstood the meaning of such words as mocking, belittling or
taxonomy.

Any M3'ers listening... please be advised that:

You are all CB Fools
You are a Mongolian horde of non-technical turnip-brains
You are the death of real ham radio
You are comparable to needleworkers and football supporters

Gareth G4SDW, in the best traditions of gentlemanly amateur radio conduct,
has spoken. Of course, he is not mocking you, nor belittling you. How could
you ever think such a thing? On the contrary, he is welcoming and
encouraging you enthusiastic newcomers into the world of amateur radio.

73

Hans G0UPL

Childish failed debater, emotive and immature CB'er masquerading as radio
ham.
a.k.a. G0UPL.
Pass the morse key





"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
...
If you want to be thought of as a CBer, then make personal
comments as you do below.

I do not have to, and neither do I, concede what you suggest. The
M3/CB Fools' Licence is judged by the entry standard, which
is no technical standard whatsoever. The few examples that
you _CLAIM_ do not change the essence of the M3/CB Licensee
class which is a Mongolian horde of non-technical turnip-brains,
who are the death of _REAL_ Ham Radio.

I am not making any sweeping generalisations, I am quoting facts.

Indeed, if you wish to be respected as a debating respondent, then
you would do well to avoid the rather silly and childish asides
that you are increasingly using, childish asides that are usually the
mark of a failing debater.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
You would seem to be describing a CBers-Masquerading-As-
-Radio-Hams and not actually _REAL_ Radio Hams.

This comment shows you're not really thinking logically about all this,
even
if it is your genuinely held opinion. By your statement you're saying a
full
license holder can still be a Masquerading CB'er, because he isn't very
involved technically. Conversely you would then have to concede that a
technically able M3 was a real ham not a CB'er, regardless of his
license
class. I think you need to decide whether your sweeping generalisations
are
to define criteria based on license class, or on technical ability.

Ham Radio has traditions of gentlemanly conduct,
traditions which are sadly lost on you.

The CB using 4 be 4 countryside path damaging foolish mates, you associate
with too I shouldn't wonder

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 08:49:40 +0100, "Hans Summers"
wrote:


I do humbly apologise, I am clearly in desperate need of a good period of
solitary monastic study alone with my Oxford dictionary. I appear to have
completely misunderstood the meaning of such words as mocking, belittling or
taxonomy.
Hans, thankyou for clarifying the situation so succinctly. I just knew
I must have got the wrong end of the stick over Gareths posts, both
here and on uk.radio.amateur :-)

Mike W, G8NXD aka M3MSM qthr

That doesn't seem at all logical for the persons that you
claimed to be so far in advance.

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
I can imagine why many people wanting a full license might want to get an
intermediate license first, so they could get on air whilst working for
the
full license

Let's take a parallel here - there are some doctors who are
absolute quacks and duffers despite their training. There are
several unqualified quacks, reflexologists, aromatherapists,
herbalists, folk mediciners, etc, who are actually quite interested in
how the human body works.Logically, from the argument that you
present below, you would be quite happy for any of these latter
unqualified but enthusiastic quacks to operate upon you?

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
This comment shows you're not really thinking logically about all this,
even
if it is your genuinely held opinion. By your statement you're saying a
full
license holder can still be a Masquerading CB'er, because he isn't very
involved technically. Conversely you would then have to concede that a
technically able M3 was a real ham not a CB'er, regardless of his license
class.

Well said, that man!

"Hans Summers" wrote in message
...
Any M3'ers listening... please be advised that:
You are all CB Fools
You are a Mongolian horde of non-technical turnip-brains
You are the death of real ham radio
You are comparable to needleworkers and football supporters

Starting from scratch, with a previous irrelevant interest, perhaps
needleworking, fishing or CB Radio, you can obtain an M3/CB
Fools' Licence within 2 days. There is no way that anyone in such
a category has picked up any technical nous to qualify them as a
Radio Ham. If there really are people such as you claim, and you have
not just invented them for the purpose of this discussion, then why
haven't
they got a higher grade of licence?
=========
The brief course leading to the Foundation Licence is meant to enable the
licensee to take part in amateur radio comms in a responsible way ,without
causing harmful interference ...full stop. It also means that he/she is not
fully qualified technically , which is not deemed necessary by the relevant
UK authorities.

While preparing for the next level ,the Intermediate Licence he/she is
increasing his/her technical knowledge and acquires electronic construction
capabilities. He/she also learns to calibrate equipment ,using relevant
instruments.

Finally while preparing for the Full Licence the licensee increases his/her
level of knowledge to comply with international standards set by ITU

This 3 tier system is similar to the US 'ladder climbing AR licensing system
' and is IMHO an excellent way to train radio hobbyists to the required
level and stimulate further personal development.
There is no justification to make any derogatory comments in respect of
Foundation Licence holders.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH