The correct size for homebrew equipment is the following:

1) The size that you feel most comfortable with. Many individuals do not
want to duplicate the ultra compact construction methods that electronics
corporations use. That is hard and tedious work, for sure, done by people
who are experts in that area. Those nifty little boxes that we buy began
life spread out and haywired together over a large table top. I have been
through that many times.

2) The goal that you have in building your own equipment. Many folks
consider their homebrew equipment as "test beds" for future experimentation,
refinement and possible redesign. I am one of those, and an example is on
QRZ.COM (W0IYH). If you build this gear as a very compact "ship in a bottle"
project you are pretty much "locked in" to whatever you come up with. Major
modifications become doubly major projects.

3) The average amateur, working in his basement (that's me) has a very
lengthy and arduous task to duplicate what a room full of engineers do for
a living. Not only that, those folks very often don't redesign everything
from scratch, they improve and redesign iteratively over several years,
building on what they have done on previous models.

4) Finally, there is a big difference between a) duplicating a published
design and b) struggling with your own (and possibly unique) design. In the
latter case we need hardware and software that are easily accessible.

The experimenter's code is "Nothing is permanent".

Bill W0IYH


"Airy R.Bean" wrote in message
...
Much of the negativity that the CBer-Masquerading-As-A-Radio-Ham
emits when it is suggested to him that he should build his own rig comes
from a complaint that it is not possible to miniaturise a rig to the sizes
that are available from the Nipland CB suppliers, mainly Yaesu and
Kenwood.

But, surely, the size of a rig is irrelevant to anyone interested in
technical
performance?

I wonder what size of rig is really acceptable to the _REAL_ Radio Ham
when
you consider that the RACAL RA17 was a large 19" rack model, and
when you take into consideration the footprint of desktop PC's that have
been welcomed so recently into a number of shacks?

How about a foot print of between 12" and 18" square, with a height of
about
3"?

That would make a rig about the same size as a DVD player, again, an item
of consumerist products that until recently was unknown but now is de
rigeur - again
pointing out the spurious argument put up against HB.

In a box 18" square by 3" tall, we'd have enough room to manoeuvre and to
experiment with circuit changes but without worrying that our Henley
"Solon"
soldering irons were going to melt a component other than the one we're
currently dealing with.