Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 7, 10:42�am, Art Clemons wrote:
�I suspect that there presently isn't a ham equivalent of a Lister engine and unless somebody builds one, there won't be. Take a look at www.elecraft.com particularly the K2 and K3 transceivers. Besides for ham radio, such rigs would need spare parts and some place to work on them. �A spare radio would still be a better choice than one that can be fixed in five hours when time is of concern. Of course! But the point is to be able to use what's available. Of course if you can find or design a kit that's functional, reliable and has easy to acquire spare parts, I'ld like to try building one. See the above reference. Thousands of Elecraft rigs have been built and used, with a minimum of tools and test equipment. One other point, making rigs simple often amounts to having to limit what frequencies are covered. �It doesn't do much good to have let's say an 80M cw rig if contacts are more likely on 40M, or that's where people can hear you. Of course. But there's also the opposite extreme, where it is expected that one rig will do everything. �The Icom MKIIG and Yaesu FT-857 are relatively small, relatively reliable, run on 12 volts and are relatively simple to operate. �I have a TS50 for HF, but it's getting really long in the tooth, not sure I'ld want it as my sole rig in an emergency. � All good rigs but how reliable are they really? And how fixable? One trend I see in Amateur Radio, which IMHO isn't a good one, is the idea that ham rigs are like consumer electronics, with a useful life of maybe a decade, and "no user-serviceable parts inside". For an emergency, I would prefer one of them especially if I had several. Having several of anything is good planning in an emergency. But it's also expensive! �Switching power supplies are relatively tolerant of voltage variations produced by generators so they could be used to power such rigs assuming you have fuel available for a genset. � IMHO a better option is rigs that can run from a variety of energy sources so that you aren't tied to a genset or auto electrical system. Finally, maybe we're both ignoring the possibility that the best approach would be complicated rigs that diagnosed their own problems and indicated which module to replace or repair. �Given a collection of the modules most likely to fail, that would be the real ideal choice. The problem is that the complexity required to do that can reduce the overall reliability... I know the following is a blue-sky fantasy, but here's what I'd like to see. In the world of PCs, there are lots of standards which have evolved over time and been adopted by many different manufacturers. The result is that you can assemble, upgrade or repair most PCs made in the past 15 years or so with just a screwdriver. Wouldn't it be great if ham rigs were built the same way? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:42:59 EST, Art Clemons
wrote: wrote: 4) The Lister is simple enough that a reasonably-knowledgeable non- professional can do whatever is needed to build and maintain a genset based on one. I think the same should be true of Amateur Radio rigs - maybe not all of them, but certainly at least some. While they may not be as fancy or "state of the art" as some, what matters is they work. There are presently a lot of radios that are relatively reliable even if fixing them might be beyond most hams. I've built Heathkits, simple cw transmitters and receivers and bluntly to fix most, I'ld need more test gear than is likely to be available on the spur of the moment. Yeah, I know how to use an antenna analyzer as a signal generator or as a relatively poor GDO, and I almost always have a 50 watt dummy load. I suspect that there presently isn't a ham equivalent of a Lister engine and unless somebody builds one, there won't be. Besides for ham radio, such rigs would need spare parts and some place to work on them. A spare radio would still be a better choice than one that can be fixed in five hours when time is of concern. Of course if you can find or design a kit that's functional, reliable and has easy to acquire spare parts, I'ld like to try building one. One other point, making rigs simple often amounts to having to limit what frequencies are covered. It doesn't do much good to have let's say an 80M cw rig if contacts are more likely on 40M, or that's where people can hear you. The Icom MKIIG and Yaesu FT-857 are relatively small, relatively reliable, run on 12 volts and are relatively simple to operate. I have a TS50 for HF, but it's getting really long in the tooth, not sure I'ld want it as my sole rig in an emergency. For an emergency, I would prefer one of them especially if I had several. Switching power supplies are relatively tolerant of voltage variations produced by generators so they could be used to power such rigs assuming you have fuel available for a genset. Finally, maybe we're both ignoring the possibility that the best approach would be complicated rigs that diagnosed their own problems and indicated which module to replace or repair. Given a collection of the modules most likely to fail, that would be the real ideal choice. Ditto. I've been licensed since 1958 and have gone through a boatload of rigs -- old, new, military surplus, homebrew, QRO, QRP. I lived in Bay St. Louis, MS, when Hurricane Katrina took out the town. My FT-857 with the ATAS-120 antenna mounted on the back of my truck provided the only commo in and out for about 12 hours until National Guard arrived. I'm not familiar with the ICOM or Kenwood equivalents but the FT-817 and -857 seem to me to be almost perfect emergency rigs: Cover 80-435, all modes; very complex rigs but can be set up for simple operation; reliable; very portable; low power requirements. In fact, with a battery and a solar charger, the FT-817 could operate indefinitely, as could any other similar rig with power throttled back to around 5 watts. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|