In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

snip

I can explain how they work in detail. I'll even draw you schematics
of the Southgate Type 7 from memory. (It ain't simple, either). Amazes
shack visitors of all ages and levels of technical ability.

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

Wonder if the K2 is still in the Himilayas? :-)

It was elsewhere at the time the picture was taken. You can see really good
pictures of the K2, K1 and KX1 at the Elecraft website

http://www.elecraft.com

Last time I looked, there was an interesting project under "Tech Notes" on that
site. An inventive amateur built an ITX-motherboard based computer into an EC2
enclosure, to match the K2.

Leo wrote in message . ..
On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

snip


I can explain how they work in detail. I'll even draw you schematics
of the Southgate Type 7 from memory. (It ain't simple, either). Amazes
shack visitors of all ages and levels of technical ability.

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

snip



73, Leo

Yikes!

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Collins amateur gear was much less expensive than commercial or
military equipment of the same vintage, and more suited to typical
amateur use. Most hams are not going to be using their equipment at
+85 C or -55 C.

Tsk. Not playing the heroic instant Emergency Communicator,
ready for every emergency when the commercial infrastructure fails?

Riiiight...all ham activity happens at "normal room temperature."

Hi hi.

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

It seems to bother our Leonard that you have an extensive QST library.

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

I think he means you, Jim. Our Leonard seems to be bothered that you
have the information contained in those magazines. It gives you unfair
advantage over him.

I have the QSTs, the whole run of CQ, nearly the whole runs of EI and
Pop'tronics, the whole run of the now-defunct Ham Radio and most of HRH.
Add to that a ten-year run of ER, five years worth of Radio Amatoori
(Finnish), about ten years worth of RadComm, some miscellaneous issues
of ham mags from Japan, Germany, Denmark, Italy and Russia, ten or so
years of Radio, loads of old Radio and Radiocraft mags.

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines. I'll lie in a rack cabinet as I'm sent
off to the amateur radio valhalla. A special A-1 Op Club honor guard
will be present. The ceremony will be performed by local members of the
Royal Order of Wouff Hong.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message

Wrong. Incorrect. Not true at all in the real world of HF radio.

Len has just demonstrated, once more, that he just doesn't get it.

You expected anything else??

"Real world of HF radio?" The one that goes from 3 MHz to 30 MHz?

Amateur activity is concerned only with a fraction of that.

That's right. That portion of the radio spectrum used by radio
amateurs.
That's the portion of the spectrum of concern to those in this
newsgroup.

Amateur licenses aren't legal for out-of-amateur band transmission
even if one has a four-on-the-floor extra license.

Right again. We all knew that. It hasn't bothered us in the least.

Has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which is HF amateur radio.

Spank.

Kellie has a spanking fetish?

The SUBJECT AT HAND is "US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???

Look at the subject line in the message header.

Try to get your subject threads in a row, ducks.

Wouldn't you just love to know the last date on which you commented on
the topic in that header? Shall I google it up for you?

As far as on-off keyed radiotelegraphy, your mention of "phase noise"
as being "crud" in synthesizer frequency control is akin to making
a big case for gold-plated music system speaker wires. :-)

Wrong again, Len.

What a goofball . . .

Where was all the noise about phase noise BEFORE the
cellular equipment expansion? There were oscillators around
then, even PLL frequency control systems.

You didn't read about it; therefore, it could not have taken place.
Izzat about it?

Phase noise was NOT an important buzzword then. Now it is,
coincidental with the cell phone equipment and component
makers using it in their advertisements.

Your facts are wrong.

Conclusion: Too many hams get their "technical expertise"
by memorizing advertisement copy instead of theory texts.

And if your facts are wrong, you end up with a wrong conclusion.


How many points did Len get with it in the last CQWW? Or even the last SS
or Field Day?

Or in RRAP.

Tsk. Jimmie and Kellie avoid answering or discussing. Misdirection
is all they can do...but that is traditional in Usenet since before it was
split from the ARPANET. Saw it then, still see it now...all the
self-professed "experts" making like renowned gurus, dissing and
cussing anyone who disagrees with their immortal words.

I dunno, Len...That sounds an awfully lot like you.


However, I HAVE had experience in civilian and military radio
communications, radionavigation equipment (TACAN, DME, VOR,
Localizer, Glideslope), IFF transponders, radars (search, weather,
target acquisition and tracking), earlier air-to-air missle systems
(principally the first Hughes Aircraft GARs 1 through 4), and the
strange McDonnel decoy drone that could imitate formations of
B-52s to Russky radar...using a TWT as a broadband mixer
covering many octaves.

You just had to get him started again, eh Brian?


Sweetums is a
perfect example of these windbags.

"Windbags?" :-)

That pretty well sums it up.


Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as
one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in
"Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate
legally. An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer
disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question.

No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd
think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response
would be wrong.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Who are "Jimmie and Davie"?

Perhaps Len meant "Jim, N2EY" and "Dave, K8MN". If so, then his use of
feminized diminutives for our names proves (paraphrasing Brian, N0IMD): "he
doesn't have the guts to spell our names right".

Tsk. I'm only copying the style of some PCTA extras in here.

Notably your mutual buddy, gunnery nurse yell-yell.

Isn't it time you slapped his wrist with wet noodles again?

Is this part of the civil discoarse lesson?

I have designed, built, and operated at three amateur radio HF transceivers.
First one was about 25 years ago. Before that, I was doing the same with
separate receivers and transmitters.

Right. JAMES was the designer of the mighty K2. Hi hi.

Len wrote here in January 2000 that he was going for Extra right out of the
box. He wasn't a ham then. Nor now.

Tsk. I didn't lie down on the floor of the Church of St. Hiram and
Take Vows For Life while forming a code key with my body. :-)

So no one can take your word on a thing unless you've done something
like that? :-) I'll try to remember that.


But as you say, Dave, an author is someone who writes. I am the author of
this post; therefore, I am an author. So are you.

Tsk. You post. Posts hold fences. You make fences to keep out
independent thought, limit those within to YOUR type of thinking.

Hang on, Len. I want to get all of this part of your civil discoarse
lesson for my notes.

The point is the same: Numerous authors here have proved Len's assertions
about subbands and synthesizers to be completely without basis in fact.

Tsk. That's not a post. Your judgement is a post hole.

I take it that you really can't defend your earlier statements. The end
result is that you're reduced to answering with the nonsense above.

The plain simple fact remains that Len has not had to deal with
subbands-by-license-class in amateur radio. Or any other amateur-radio
issues. His observations are those of a spectator only, not a participant.

Tsk. Jimmie want to dismiss the FCC because the FCC does not
require any commissioner or staff to hold amateur radio licenses?

There are some things you just don't get no matter how many times the
explanation is provided for you: The FCC staff gets paid to regulate
and administer amateur radio in the U.S. They aren't spectators. We
are participants. We're not spectators. You are neither a regulator
nor a participant. Have you grasped the concept?

Actually, I don't think Len invented *any* of the circuits or systems now used
in "modern ready-built radios". Not any radios I know of, anyway.

Tsk. Recycling old parts circa-1990 and using vacuum tubes is
hardly "invention." :-)

You walk a few steps and then you trip. It was written that YOU didn't
invent any of the circuits or systems used in "modern ready-built"
radios.
He didn't claim that he invented the recycling of parts and vacuum
tubes.
You really need to pay attention.

But, Jimmies qualification is the phrase "Not any radios I know of,
anyway." That imperious declaration infers he is judge, jury, and
supreme court of all "radio" that is meaningful anywhere, anytime.
:-)

I really have no trouble accepting that you believe that is what Jim's
phrase meant.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper
collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago.

Really? Did you do lots of contesting and DXing from ADA? Still have
the QSLs?

Tsk. Poor Davie doesn't understand that 24/7 REAL communications
in the military wasn't any "contest" and no "QSLs" were exchanged.

You can understand my confusion when you wrote about losing "interest in
DXing in 'radio sports' and the wallpaper collection of QSLs after
working at station ADA long ago". You made it sound as if you got a
belly full of those things at ADA.

Tsk. I admit to not understanding Davies' total confusion or lack
of understanding of the written word.

....at least as written by you.

Tsk, tsk. If Davie had actually worked in USAF communications
he would have KNOWN that military communications does not
engage in "radiosport contests" nor does it "QSL."

Tsk, tsk. I did actually work in USAF communications. Since you were
in the Army and since you wrote the confusing piece above, I thought
perhaps you Army types did things differently. Nothing I encountered in
Air Force communications caused me to lose interest in DXing, contesting
or QSLing.

24/7 radio communications on HF (or any other EM spectrum) is
professional-quality work for the military.

So the guys who work in stations which aren't open twenty-four hours per
day, seven days per week aren't doing professional quality work in the
military? If you worked in a station which was open around the clock and
you worked for eight to ten hours per day and got a day or two off from
time to time, was your work less than professional quality?

So am I to understand that you have
no actual experience in DXing, contesting or QSLing?

Define "DXing." If that means listening to radio broadcasting stations
in other parts of the world, yes, I have and continue to listen to them.

Nope, that isn't it.

If that means working distant HF stations on a two-way, full duplex
basis over 8000 miles away 24/7, yes, I have experience in that.

Nope, that isn't it.

If that means "only" having an amateur license and making out like
the world's greatest amateur (windbag), no, definitely no experience
in that.

Don't sell yourself short. All you need now is the amateur radio
license.

I fail to see what difference that makes. Why should we, as radio
amateurs, posting in an amateur radio newsgroup, be concerned about what
qualifications are required for other services? Is is your aspiration
to participate in other radio service? Please, go forth and do so.

Tsk. Why does Davie want to abrogate the First Amendment and
deny citizens the right to petition their government for change in
federal regulations?

Have you petitioned your government? Have you posted here? End of
story.


Don't you understand that neither FCC commissioners nor FCC
staff are NOT required to have amateur radio licenses...and they
regulate ALL U.S. amateur radio.

I seem to understand it far better than you do. They are paid to
administer amateur radio. We radio amateurs are participants. You are
not a paid administrator nor are you a participant. You are a
bystander.

Tsk. You should really drop the arrogant "show your papers!"
and elitist demand-by-intimidation-attempt that this newsgroup
"belongs only to already-licensed hams."

You have had no amateur radio license. You currently have no amateur
radio license. You've told us that you have no intention of obtaining
an amateur radio license in the future. You don't look good as a
potential licensee, Leonard.

YOU don't, nor ever have, regulated or controlled U.S. amateur
radio. You are only a participant.

Only? Without the participants, there'd be no amateur radio to
regulate.
The participants ARE amateur radio, "William".

You aren't gang boss, aren't
a government official, aren't even a 'hood chieftan. All you are
is a participant.

Let's see....I'm one of the items from your list. You are which one?

What is at stake is a possible restructuring of U.S. regulations
on amateur radio to eliminate or retain the morse code test for an
amateur license having below-30-MHz privileges.

Really? That'll effect you how?

YOUR ranting and raving is confined to nastygramming anyone
who wishes to eliminate that code test. It isn't "civil discourse"
much less discussion. YOUR ranting and raving is about
control over who can post and who cannot. Clue: This newsgroup
is unmoderated and open to anyone with Internet access.

You're still posting aren't you?

Try, oh TRY to get used to the fact that neither you nor Jimmie
are the Supreme Arbiter of Ham things. No one MUST do as you
say.

I'd think you'd want to remember those words of yours. You, especially
as one who has no stake in amateur radio, are not the Supreme Arbiter of
Ham things. Neither the regulators nor the participants in amateur
radio are compelled to do as you say.

There is still some freedom left in the world and considerable
independent thought.

Your thought is....well....really, really, really independent.


Your long tenure in hamdom does not give
you any "position" of control over others. Not here, not anywhere.

Thous sayest.

Try to adjust to that, big Arbiter. Bite me.

Is this more of the civil discoarse course (coarse)?

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

So...you hate the contest haters all on account of "phase noise?"

Tsk. You ought to get used to the fact that not everyone likes
contests for the simple reason that they are contests, organized
by contestant-wannabes so that they can Win and show off that
they are "better" than the non-contestants. :-)

How are you involved? Wanting to win at something and being competitive
are part of being human. Don't want to participate in an amateur radio
contest? Don't enter. Oh, that's right--you couldn't enter if you
wanted to.

One of the problems with older solidstate equipment is that much of it
used custom parts for which the only sources are the manufacturer (if
they still support the unit) or junker units. If there was a weak
spot, finding a junker with a usable part maybe hopeless. The Kenwood
TS-440s reputedly has this problem in its display.

So...you think vacuum tubes will be with you always? :-)

If he doesn't have enough, I'll give 'em to him. If I die first, I'll
will them to him. He can have enough to see him through his lifetime.
Does that suit your definition of "always"?

Of course...you can "recycle" them...somewhat after their useful
life...and "impress all who visit your shack."

Don't you ever try to impress folks who visit your shack, Len? You
know, take 'em in to view the R-70?

Dave K8MN

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Collins amateur gear was much less expensive than commercial or
military equipment of the same vintage, and more suited to typical
amateur use. Most hams are not going to be using their equipment at
+85 C or -55 C.

Tsk. Not playing the heroic instant Emergency Communicator,
ready for every emergency when the commercial infrastructure fails?

Riiiight...all ham activity happens at "normal room temperature."

Hi hi.

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.

Tsk. How could you stand it being that warm? :-)

Poor baby. Wear your long undies, did you?

Oh, that's right--you've never participated in
amateur radio emergency communications at all! Have you ever been
anyplace on this planet where the outdoor temperature sat at +85C?

...good question...

Try the inside of a vehicle when the outside air is 116 F (47 C) that
has been closed and sitting in the sun to add 40 C more to the
ambient.

Oh, I forgot...all ham "emergency operations" are done at Field
Day temperatures! [Field Day is an "emergency drill," right? :-) ]

There's also quite a bit of FM in use by hams on 10 meters. Plus FSK
is a form of FM...

"Real" hams use CW to DX on HF. Ho hum.

Ho humbug! You've little idea of what "real" hams do.

Let's take a look at those phrases:

Yes. Go over and over and over and over and over and over them
until you tire out the opposition to your golden words of truth and
beauty (which are never ever wrong). :-)

Let's at least go over them enough times that everyone except you
realizes your errors.

LHA: "All those subbands are simply for "staking out territory." "

That's my opinion and I'm holding to that.

You're simply wrong. Then again, you aren't a ham so perhaps you could
be excused for not knowing. Now that you've been advised, I'd expect
that you'd be sharp enough to keep from sticking with the same erroneous
view.

A person can hold any opinion they want. Len's stated opinion in this area is
not based on fact.

WRONG. INCORRECT. My opinions are based on FACTUAL
evidence of over a half century of observation.

If you don't like it, TS.

"Civil discourse" from Len...

If you don't like that remark, then more TS. I have a sharp TS punch
and will be glad to mark your TS card anytime.

Does that mean you'll cling to a position no matter how wrong you are?

Isn't that obvious?

Tsk. You guys are a couple of Clingons, bravely regressing to
early pioneer days when Kode was King...because that's all
any ham could come up with on a $100 "recycled parts" budget.

They were actually about creating an incentive to learn more theory
without losing access to a band or mode.

If that's your evaluation, then you are badly in need of something
to relieve your mental constipation.

No problem we can always treat ourselves to another dose of Dr. Len's
newsgroup salts.

Note that Len simply attacks an opposing opinion without any facts to
substantiate his attack.

WRONG. INCORRECT. My opinions are based on FACTUAL
evidence of over a half century of observation.

Since when is your religious BELIEF in the "need" of morse code
based on any "fact" of the year 2004?

Since when did you two Clingons become sole arbiter and judge of
what is "fact?"

LHA: "None of that elaborate U.S. subdivision would be possible
without the modern frequency synthesizers that were NOT developed for
amateur radio but adopted for that particular market."

That's a corollary to my subdivision opinion.

No, that's just you compounding your errors.

Again, if you don't like that opinion, TS for you. :-)

Why dontcha make us all use synthesizers? Did you read up on the phase
noise problem at any of those urls I provided?

I think Len would prefer that all of amateur radio be channelized.

WRONG. INCORRECT. My opinions are based on FACTUAL
evidence of over a half century of observation.

One of those observations is the NON-civil diss-cuss technique
of alleged mind-readers who imagine what I think. I've said
NOTHING about "channelizing" any ham band. But the FCC has
given U.S. hams five "channels" to play with.

Repeatedly proven to be incorrect, in error, and without any basis in
fact. Hams then and now are able to stay within their bands and
subbands without any need for "modern frequency synthesizers".

Oooooooo! "repeatedly 'proven' to be incorrect, in error and without
any basis in fact! Ooooooo. Tsk, tsk. :-)

An "Ooooooo" and a "Tsk, tsk" aren't much of a defense, are they?

Nope.

Defense? Hardly. Those are just little onomotopoetic phrases to
keep from breaking out in nursie yell-yells maniacal laughter at
the sobresides damning of NCTAs by you two Clingons. Hi hi )as
the emotionless hams do).

Geez, better get an Exorcist, you are going to proclaim me the
AntiChrist next. :-)

I'd expect the Antichrist to have his ducks in a row.

It is not clear to whom Len refers as "ivy-decorated in here". If he
is referring to me (Jim, N2EY), he's completely wrong, because I could
explain both PLL and DDS designs at length and in detail.

Riiiiight...you've got lots and lots of industry experience in that,
many products on the market...just like you were in the space
business so long that you could call others "wrong" about having
opinions opposite to your "expertise."

Whaddya know of Jim's industry experience, Leonard?

Neither HF rig in current use at N2EY is expensive or "ready built".
But they work, are on the air regularly, meet FCC regulations, and do
their jobs well.

I suppose next you have Proof of Performance papers, fully
notarized and witnessed, that they are ipsy-pipsy "within spec?"

Hams aren't required to have anything like that. If you don't like
it...

I can explain how they work in detail. I'll even draw you schematics
of the Southgate Type 7 from memory. (It ain't simple, either). Amazes
shack visitors of all ages and levels of technical ability.

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

The name "Southgate" has certainly appeared in ham literature.

Indeed.

Then it should be in the ARRL Museum, yes?

Famous "names" need enshrining in the lore and mythos of the
pioneer days in radio...

Just my particular brand of fun in ham radio.

Trying always to be the Superior in anything is fun for the ego-
driven. Lots of PCTA extras in here (practically all of them) get
their jollies that way.

Only you can read "just my way particular brand of fun in ham radio" and
take it as a statement of ego-driven superiority.

What's wrong with any of that?

Nothing "wrong" with that other than taking over the flow of debate
with your pet fun-and-games and promoting morse well over and
above any valid reasons for keeping the morse code test.

The Morse Code test was not mentioned at all, but Len cannot see any other
issue.

Hello? The message thread title is "US Lincensing Restructuring ???
When ???" At stake are some 18 petitions sitting at the FCC waiting
for someone there to put together an NPRM. Most of those petitions
involve the retention or elimination of the morse code test.

Jimmie and Davie (those 'sweethearts') feel that folks in here must
talk ONLY about the subjects THEY approve of?

...as compared to your attempting to take over the flow of debate with
your pet fun and games and promoting the abolition of morse code testing
in an endeaver in which you play no part?

But, you consider yourself Superior and therefore "must" triumph
in all things. :-)

Don't you mean "but you've proven me wrong and I just can't abide that"?

bingo!

Tsk...I've not "been proven wrong," just issued the usual baseless
non-facts by PCTA determined to damn every NCTA they can
find.

The K2 has a single-loop PLL LO that achieves very low phase noise by
an ingenious design. This design intentionally trades off some
accuracy and general coverage reception in order to improve phase
noise, simplicity and power consumption. Its performance against
"ready built" transceivers costing much more is well documented.

Jimmie has a K2. Naturally it is "superior" to all others.

That's funny, I didn't see that written. Do you suppose it is
ego-driven as well?

Not by my ego...

1. Jimmie "designs and builds his own equipment."

2. Jimmie has often praised the Elecraft K2 that he built.

Conclusion: Jimmie is claiming design of the K2...yet his
name is not at the Elecraft company.

That's all in Google and there more than once. Jimmie will deny
it but there it all is.

It wasn't designed by Len. I doubt very much he understands how it
works, nor could he explain it....;-)

Jimmie designed the K2? :-)

Do try and stay with the flow. He said it wasn't designed by you.

Which is to say, none of them are perfect!

Len's errors here prove he's not perfect either...

Heavens...Jimmie wants PERFECTION in all things!

Don't you strive for perfection, Leonard, or are you happy with slapdash
design?

Naturally, PCTA extras are "always perfect" in everything?

I'm sure it seems that way to a guy like yourself.

Of course they are. They will tell you right off... :-)

Actually, telling you off isn't at all unpleasant.

"It just seems to write itself!" :-)

The fact that we amateurs are actually designing, building and using
rigs on the air seems to bother Len no end. The fact that we are using
equipment, modes and technologies he has not personally blessed seems
to bother him even more.

Doesn't bother me a bit. :-)

Not much, it doesn't.

I've still "done" modes, modulations far more than is allowed in the
U.S. ham bands. [that even includes CW, heh heh heh]

I don't think Len has operated using Morse Code.

Quite true. Most manual scalpels are metal, the RF Cauteries
use continuous wave, no keying. Operations are done with both.
The most "operating" I've done is removal of splinters. I'm not
allowed to "operate" on anyone by law. Are you two Clingons?

The spliners resulted from normal wear and tear remodeling this
house, a mere four rooms worth, that including a center room
workshop with a bench 104 inches long with five 19" racks (also
hand built) above and below the bench. And I'm not a licensed
cabinetmaker and never had to use morse code once to do any
of that remodeling. :-)

Why are you always living in the past?

It's a bit irritating when everyone uses verbatim sales ad phrasing
and OTHERS reviews as Gospel as if they themselves have used
and operated all the equipment they mention.

Well, let's see...

I've operated equipment made by Collins (S-line), Drake (4 line and 2B),
Heath
(SB line and various HWs, including HW-101 and -16), EF Johnson (Adventurer,
Viking 2, Valiant), Kenwood (TS-520, TS-820, TS-450, TS-940) Yaesu (FT-101
and
others) Icom (IC-735, IC-751, and a bunch of others), Ten Tec (Argosy,
Corsair
2, Omni D and V)....

And a bunch of others I can't recall offhand.

You seem to recall that "Southgate Type 7" fondly. :-)

Recycled 30 to 40 year old technology, all tubes...

Not chewing up or spitting out anybody, Dave. Just pointing out a few
errors of Len's. He makes it easy, really.

Isn't it awful? There oughta be a law against anyone having opinions
opposing the PCTA extras!

Your opinions were stated as fact--and they were incorrect.

Recall the original claims that started all of this, and how Len keeps
trying to avoid admitting his mistakes:

"All those subbands are simply for "staking out territory." "

That's my opinion and I'm staying with it.

...and I'm sure it is based in experience and a great deal of solid
research *grin*

"I doubt that even the most ivy-decorated in here could explain how to
make a PLL subsystem that achieves 10 Hz resolution using 10 KHz
references for their PFD. I wouldn't even bother asking them if they
knew how a DDS works... :-)"

Tsk. When I preparing to buy my Icom R-70 at the Van Nuys, CA,
HRO, I asked three hams behind the counter how Icom achieved
10 Hz resolution using a 10 KHz reference to all the phase-frequency
detectors. None of the three knew. Two of those were extras.

Yeah, they're sales types. They aren't engineers.

I got a copy of the Icom User's Manual and figured it out myself.
Looked like it was worth the money. Went back later and bought
one. Cash. It's been working fine ever since.

So, would it have worked fine since if you'd used a credit card?

Len walked into a radio store once upon a time and the salespeople couldn't
explain some technical point to his satisfaction. Some of those salespeople
held the Extra class license. Len's conclusion is that people who hold an
Extra class license don't know how radios work.

Poor baby, still feel hurt at not being "respected" for that vaunted
extra class status?

I was NOT thinking what you imagined. I was thinking that a sales
outlet that didn't know about its product nor could offer to help
potential customers find out, wasn't a very good business. To this
day I won't look to HRO for "technical answers."

I'll have to go back to old checkbook transactions to find the
purchase date (one has to be EXACT for Jimmie da Perfectionist).
Needless to say, DDS frequency control subsystems weren't yet
in the offshore-designed-and-made ham transceivers. [this statement
ought to be good for another few weeks of Jimmie "proving me wrong
in all things" :-) ]

For a twenty-something-year-old design, it isn't bad. It does suffer
from the same thing which plagued many Icom transceivers of its day--the
front end folds up in the presence of nearby strong signals.

It also won't transmit....

Duhhhh...receivers aren't designed or manufactured to transmit.

That's what transmitters do. They transmit.

Have you got that straight yet?

Of course, what we see here is another classic case of Len's behavior that can
be summed up in one sentence: Do as Len says, not as Len does.

Yeah. I believe in freedom and liberty and less-restrictive government
regulations. Independence of thought allowed, not restricted, and
separation of church and state continued so as to separate the
Church of St. Hiram from the FCC.

Tsk. I know that isn't in your ethos or mythos since you two Clingons
demand that ALL follow your example, doing as you did.

Why are you two Clingons so anal-retentive on holding everyone to
outdated standards and practices?

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines. I'll lie in a rack cabinet as I'm sent
off to the amateur radio valhalla. A special A-1 Op Club honor guard
will be present. The ceremony will be performed by local members of the
Royal Order of Wouff Hong.

G'bye...have a nice afterlife... :-)

LHA/WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines. I'll lie in a rack cabinet as I'm sent
off to the amateur radio valhalla. A special A-1 Op Club honor guard
will be present. The ceremony will be performed by local members of the
Royal Order of Wouff Hong.

G'bye...have a nice afterlife... :-)

After you, Leonard, old chap. After you.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

What was his point, anyway? That 74192s aren't in current production?

I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

So...you hate the contest haters all on account of "phase noise?"

Not at all!

The effect was mentioned to demonstrate the impact of phase-noisy oscillators
in HF ham rigs. Those same hams might find the bands a lot less noisy with
different equipment, allowing contesters and noncontesters alike to enjoy the
same band.

Tsk. You ought to get used to the fact that not everyone likes
contests for the simple reason that they are contests, organized
by contestant-wannabes so that they can Win and show off that
they are "better" than the non-contestants. :-)

??

Not everyone likes sports, either. Particularly when the roads are clogged with
people going to and from the stadiums, TV programs are preempted for sports
coverage, etc.

Were the recent Olympics all about "contests for the simple reason that they
are contests, organized by contestant-wannabes so that they can Win and show
off that they are "better" than the non-contestants"?

Perhaps we should inform the IOC.

How are you involved? Wanting to win at something and being competitive
are part of being human. Don't want to participate in an amateur radio
contest? Don't enter. Oh, that's right--you couldn't enter if you
wanted to.

Len can enter any amateur radio contest he wants to. All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station. His
choice of home location may be more suited to listening to cbers on the nearby
freeway than to working the rest of the USA, however.

One of the problems with older solidstate equipment is that much of it
used custom parts for which the only sources are the manufacturer (if
they still support the unit) or junker units. If there was a weak
spot, finding a junker with a usable part maybe hopeless. The Kenwood
TS-440s reputedly has this problem in its display.

So...you think vacuum tubes will be with you always? :-)

If he doesn't have enough, I'll give 'em to him. If I die first, I'll
will them to him.

Thank you, Dave!

In fact, I've been reducing my tube and parts stock because I have far more
than enough. It would be wonderful if I could live long enough to wear them all
out!

The fact remains, however, that a lot of solidstate electronic devices
(including ham gear) were made with custom parts which can be difficult or
impossible to find, or even identify. End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old R-390A or
75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

Of course this is driven by a whole bunch of factors, ranging from increased
reliability (if it doersn't break you don't need to be able to fix it) to
length of production (the R-390A was manufactured for at least 30 years by a
number of companies, including a few made under a contract awarded to Helena
Rubenstein), to the fact that newer electronics are often not designed to be
fixable, and are meant for a limited design life - if it fails, you just get a
new one.

Of course there are exceptions, like Ten Tec's policy of board-swapping. And
there are specialists who can bring almost anything electronic back to life.

One of the design parameters of all my homebrew projects is that the result
must be serviceable with parts and tools on hand. Nothing is built with "one of
a kind" or rare parts, and nothing is pushed hard. Result is that I've had very
few problems.

He can have enough to see him through his lifetime.
Does that suit your definition of "always"?

I hope to outlive my supply...

Of course...you can "recycle" them...somewhat after their useful
life...and "impress all who visit your shack."

??

A recycled component is still in its useful life, because I'm getting use out
of it. Nothing in the Type 7 is "after its useful life".

And when a tube finally fails, its base is often useful as a connector or
plug-in coil form. Other defective components sometimes yield useful parts,
too. Nothing goes to waste at N2EY.

Don't you ever try to impress folks who visit your shack, Len?

What impresses folks most is that I can recall schematics and other info from
memory.

You
know, take 'em in to view the R-70?

He bought it for CASH, Dave ;-) Somehow, that is supposed to be significant.

I find it interesting, though, that Len does not tell us of *his* homebrew
radio projects. Frankly, I would have thought that he designed and built his
own receivers, rather than buying a ready-built imported unit like the R70. A
person doesn't need any knowledge or skill in radio-electronics to buy or use
one of those.

73 de Jim, N2EY

---

And while we're on the subject, how about these specs for a new receiver:

MDS -135dBm
AM Sensitivity -110dBm
Blocking Dynamic Range 5Khz 119dB, 20Khz 119dB
3rd Order dynamic Range 5Khz 87.7dB, 20Khz 95dB
Image rejection 152dB
IF Rejection 106dB

No, it's not the Southgate Type 7.

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as
one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in
"Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate
legally. An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer
disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question.

No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd
think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response
would be wrong.

No, he's right, Dave.

FCC specifically defines the term "operate an amateur radio station". It means
to be the control oeprator, responsible for rules compliance. By definition,
only a licensed ham can do that. Others "participate in amateur radio". Len
cannot legally operate an amateur radio station, according to FCC. Nor can
Michael Powell, for that matter.

But all that is besides the point. What matters most in amateur radio - or any
field of endeavor, really - is what is actually done, not what's theoretically
possible. That's the point of the story about my highschool friend who had lots
of great ideas (and lots of criticism) but no station of his own. The computer
folks have a word for it: Vaporware.

Who do you have more respect for, Dave:

The person with a modest amateur station who is actually on the air making QSOs

or

The person who talks endlessly about "state of the art", "better modes and
modulations", "the future of amateur radio", "progress", etc., etc., yet who
isn't on the ham bands at all?

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

Does it? I don't see that, Dave. He wrote that is was a "neat collection".

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Why should it? It's not stereo equipment. It's amateur radio equipment.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

It seems to bother our Leonard that you have an extensive QST library.

I don't see that at all, Dave.

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

I think he means you, Jim. Our Leonard seems to be bothered that you
have the information contained in those magazines. It gives you unfair
advantage over him.

??

The entire run of QST is available on CD-ROM, so the info is available to
anyone willing to spend the $$. (I spent a lot less on the paper mags, but they
take up more space and it's taken me decades to build up the collection).

I have the QSTs, the whole run of CQ, nearly the whole runs of EI and
Pop'tronics, the whole run of the now-defunct Ham Radio and most of HRH.
Add to that a ten-year run of ER, five years worth of Radio Amatoori
(Finnish), about ten years worth of RadComm, some miscellaneous issues
of ham mags from Japan, Germany, Denmark, Italy and Russia, ten or so
years of Radio, loads of old Radio and Radiocraft mags.

That's more extensive than my collection. But if you really want to see a radio
library, go to the AWA annex.

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines.

Please don't! Future generations will be deprived of those magazines if you
burn them. Much of my collection was saved from destruction by hams who would
not let them go to the dump or incinerator. Same for the parts.

I know an amateur (not me) who was *given* a near-complete collection of QST by
an elderly ham who knew he would soon be SK. He had saved every issue from the
post WW1 reawakening to the prsent day. He had many duplicates, too. It took 3
trips in a Citation to move them all.

I'll lie in a rack cabinet as I'm sent
off to the amateur radio valhalla. A special A-1 Op Club honor guard
will be present. The ceremony will be performed by local members of the
Royal Order of Wouff Hong.

Sounds good to me. I want bagpipes at mine. And selected readings from the Book
of Bokonon.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"happy, happy mud"

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...

switched to 10 Hz or 1 Hz. Its accuracy was dependent on how well you set
the
time base and presets. Could be used with almost any rig. Hooked it up to a
75S3

I'll bet I know where the S3 came from . . .

and got an A in the course.

Lab course at Penn?

Independent design project.

.._.


Made the circuit boards meself and all.

Lotta jollies there if yer into such things. I "burned" a number of
homebrewed circuit boards, late '60s? Something like that. Making PCBs
then was basically a drafting and photographic process which
"integrated"nicely into my darkroom "assets" so I went at it a few
times. Translate the circuit diagram in QST to a physical layout for
openers. Yeah, they can draw circuits which show conductors leaping
over other conductors without shorting them but that don't work on
single-sided boards dammit! Which all homebrewers could do then. Dunno
how you did yours but there were complete PCB "kits" available from
Kass and Radio Shack when I did mine.

They provided sheets of transfers with "donuts" for wire and component
connections and IC pinouts all of which were layed out on a
transparent film. Then ya *very carefully* connected all the dots with
thin tape to make the conductor traces. Tedious. Net result was a 1:1
photograhic negative of the circuit. From there it went into the
darkroom where the negative was positioned over a piece of sensitized
board stock and exposed, developed, neutralized and washed just like
all photos are developed even today. I did a few boards which I
sensitzed myself.

The rest was easy. Drill all the holes, trim the board to size and
stuff it with the components. Then go back and solder-patch all the
busted traces! Hee!

I guess I did ten boards all told. Three keyers, one a monster K3JH
developed which was first large-capacity memory keyer, several
stripline SWR bridges, a vacuum relay QSK TR switch, etc. I think I
showed you some of those "works of art" before I dumstered all that
old crap. I have a yen now to build a couple more widgets using
homebrewed PCBs but so far I have not been able to find the board
stock or chemicals in hobby quantities.


and you're done. Could go to 1 Hz if you were willing to have it update once
per second.

Neat! (no, I'm not willing to wait a second for the nummers to come up
. . ! )

The 74192 and other TTL family chips were hot stuff 30 years ago when
I was doing that project. You can still get pin-compatible parts
today.

I fed the aformentioned dumpster a *shoebox* full of those old 7400
series chips . . .


Wait a minnit, if there are sideband signals on the LO output the
inference seems to be that the carrier is being modulated.

That's exactly what's going on.

By something. What something?

All kinds of somethings. Here's just one:

In a PLL synthesizer, the VCO control voltage may wander a bit for a
variety of reasons. Say you have a design where a voltage swing of 5
volts causes the VCO to move 5 MHz. *Any* variation in that control
voltage, from *any* source, will cause the VCO frequency to wander a
bit. 1 millivolt variation gives a shift of 1000 Hz, 1 *microvolt* of
variation gives 1 Hz, etc. Remember that the control voltage is a DC
signal and the rest is obvious.

Not quite. I gotta chase down the links Dave supplied and keep
digging.

That's just one source of phase noise.

OK

That's why phase noise is important to hams.

Huh: I learned a bit from this post.

I hope so!

The upshot of all of it is that in real-world hamming, we often have
to deal with bands full of strong signals, yet we want to hear the
weak ones.

That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !


I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

"If ya can't take the heat go up the band!"

One can spend two lifetimes diddling frequency synthesizers and such
but if whatever freq pops out of his gem doesn't make it to the
airwaves via an engineered radiator and it's support structure one
might as well have been a lifeguard in the Mohave desert.

And THAT'S the game!

73 de Jim, N2EY


btw - the way I'd solve the problem would be to email you for the
solution.

.. . . boink . . POINT!

It's no big deal at all. As far as the "math" goes any kid who has a
decent grip on 9th grade alegebra can hoof thru it, this is not double
integral or tensor analysis country. All one needs to pull it together
is the material physical properties and the ability to jiggle a few
simple algebraic equations which are only a half-step beyond jiggling
Ohm's Law. All of it is readily available out on the Web and it can
all be done with a pencil and a calculator.

Typical materials info source:

http://www.matweb.com/SpecificMateri...&group=General

Here's a taste of the number-crunching:

http://hsc.csu.edu.au/engineering_st...ng_stress.html

For my own part I've gotten into semi-automating the whole process in
order to design widgets like tapered aluminum yagi elememts,
fiberglass quad (squalo?) spreaders, masts and towers. I run a LISP
rountine in Autocad to come up with the cross-sectional properties
then diddle the rest in Excel or Mathcad or a slick little $50
shareware program called "DTbeam" which is a finite elememt analysis
beam analyzer. The M.E.'s version of a Java-based Smith Chart solver.
Sort of.

http://www.dtware.com/

w3rv

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have
your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

Actually that would have to be metrology (the science of measurement) since
temperature is not limited to weather.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
.com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...

switched to 10 Hz or 1 Hz. Its accuracy was dependent on how well you
set
the
time base and presets. Could be used with almost any rig. Hooked it up
to a
75S3

I'll bet I know where the S3 came from . . .

and got an A in the course.

Lab course at Penn?

Independent design project.

._.


Made the circuit boards meself and all.

Lotta jollies there if yer into such things. I "burned" a number of
homebrewed circuit boards, late '60s? Something like that. Making PCBs
then was basically a drafting and photographic process which
"integrated"nicely into my darkroom "assets" so I went at it a few
times. Translate the circuit diagram in QST to a physical layout for
openers. Yeah, they can draw circuits which show conductors leaping
over other conductors without shorting them but that don't work on
single-sided boards dammit! Which all homebrewers could do then. Dunno
how you did yours but there were complete PCB "kits" available from
Kass and Radio Shack when I did mine.

They provided sheets of transfers with "donuts" for wire and component
connections and IC pinouts all of which were layed out on a
transparent film. Then ya *very carefully* connected all the dots with
thin tape to make the conductor traces. Tedious. Net result was a 1:1
photograhic negative of the circuit. From there it went into the
darkroom where the negative was positioned over a piece of sensitized
board stock and exposed, developed, neutralized and washed just like
all photos are developed even today. I did a few boards which I
sensitzed myself.

The rest was easy. Drill all the holes, trim the board to size and
stuff it with the components. Then go back and solder-patch all the
busted traces! Hee!

I guess I did ten boards all told. Three keyers, one a monster K3JH
developed which was first large-capacity memory keyer, several
stripline SWR bridges, a vacuum relay QSK TR switch, etc. I think I
showed you some of those "works of art" before I dumstered all that
old crap. I have a yen now to build a couple more widgets using
homebrewed PCBs but so far I have not been able to find the board
stock or chemicals in hobby quantities.

Go to FAR Circuits for a huge collection of PCBs available for
all those magazine article projects. Ready-made wiring. FAR
is run by a ham.

Don't keep old "crap." Save that to toss at NCTAs in newsgroups.


The 74192 and other TTL family chips were hot stuff 30 years ago when
I was doing that project. You can still get pin-compatible parts
today.

I fed the aformentioned dumpster a *shoebox* full of those old 7400
series chips . . .

Tsk. Well, if you don't know how to use them, toss 'em.

You are PCTA extra royalty. Save the TUBES, recycle 'em into
world-beating contest-quality radios to win all those accolades!


That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !

You "know" all about military communications? Of course you do.
You were of the royalty that was never IN.

You've never worn an AN/PRC-104 HF manpack raddio, have you?
Big, powerful 20 W out on HF, operational with U.S. land forces
now. Same RF power out as the SGC 2020 being made in Belleview,
WA, by the company started by Don Stoner and Pierre Goral (both
SK, sadly, long-time hams).

The full manual for the 2020 is on the SGC website in case you
wanted to find out what is done TODAY. I could tell you were to
get the four full government manuals for the PRC-104 free but you
will only tell me "where to go." :-)

The "4 KW" and (later) "40 KW" pushing from Tokyo to San Fran or
anywhere else in ACAN was for SIDEBAND. The 12 KHz first
variety of SSB carrying four voice-bandwidth circuits. If you wanted
24/7 communications on HF back a half century ago, you needed
power and antennas. You spit on that fact, relegating such "menial"
tasks to "drudges" while you brag about "eating at the captain's
table."


It's no big deal at all. As far as the "math" goes any kid who has a
decent grip on 9th grade alegebra can hoof thru it, this is not double
integral or tensor analysis country. All one needs to pull it together
is the material physical properties and the ability to jiggle a few
simple algebraic equations which are only a half-step beyond jiggling
Ohm's Law. All of it is readily available out on the Web and it can
all be done with a pencil and a calculator.

That's why Phil Smith came up with the Smith Chart back before
WW2. :-)

Not for designing antennas...for easing the work required by
Bell Telephone on long-distance transmission lines. Work that
required slide-rules and mechanical desk calculators (sometimes)
due to pocket calculators not being invented yet. :-)


For my own part I've gotten into semi-automating the whole process in
order to design widgets like tapered aluminum yagi elememts,
fiberglass quad (squalo?) spreaders, masts and towers. I run a LISP
rountine in Autocad to come up with the cross-sectional properties
then diddle the rest in Excel or Mathcad or a slick little $50
shareware program called "DTbeam" which is a finite elememt analysis
beam analyzer. The M.E.'s version of a Java-based Smith Chart solver.
Sort of.

Tsk. You should use Roy Lewallen's EZNEC. Roy is a long-time
ham. EZNEC is advertised in QST.

USN Postgraduate School folks came up with the Numerical
Electromagnetic Code (NEC) which is all free to anyone (no
copyright). Too bad the USN types at the "captain's table"
didn't mention that to you...

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than
the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

Does it? I don't see that, Dave. He wrote that is was a "neat collection".

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Why should it? It's not stereo equipment. It's amateur radio equipment.

Kluge City.

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as
one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in
"Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate
legally. An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer
disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question.

No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd
think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response
would be wrong.

No, he's right, Dave.

FCC specifically defines the term "operate an amateur radio station". It means
to be the control oeprator, responsible for rules compliance. By definition,
only a licensed ham can do that. Others "participate in amateur radio". Len
cannot legally operate an amateur radio station, according to FCC. Nor can
Michael Powell, for that matter.

Tsk, tsk. I CAN "legally" operate lots of OTHER radio service
radios...and radio amateur licensees can NOT do so... :-)

Mikey ("Mr. BPL") Powell and papa Colin both operated radios when
they were in the U.S. Army. Not amateur radios. Professional
soldier radios. [they are both former Army officers]

Sunnuvagun!

But all that is besides the point. What matters most in amateur radio - or any
field of endeavor, really - is what is actually done, not what's theoretically
possible. That's the point of the story about my highschool friend who had
lots
of great ideas (and lots of criticism) but no station of his own. The computer
folks have a word for it: Vaporware.

"Vaporware" is best suited for newsgroup commentary by self-
styled PCTA radio police describing their "reasons" for retention
of the morse code test. :-)

Who do you have more respect for, Dave:

Any PCTA who worships at the Church of St. Hiram.

The person who talks endlessly about "state of the art", "better modes and
modulations", "the future of amateur radio", "progress", etc., etc., yet who
isn't on the ham bands at all?

Tsk. Keep the faith, Jimmie, make that Living Museum of Archaic
Radiotelegraphy continue...hold everyone back in the tube era
with all those "recycled" parts.

Keep talking snarly at all those non-ham people who have actually
had an entire career in radio-electronics involved in the contstantly-
changing state of the electronics and radio arts...and succeeded.

Work that key and collect those points and QSLs, remake tube
bases into plug-in coil forms, memorize all those schematics to
be the Ninth Wonder of the Radio world to anyone visiting your
shack. Force everyone to learn telegraphy to play in your ham
sandbox on HF.

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

What was his point, anyway? That 74192s aren't in current production?

I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

So...you hate the contest haters all on account of "phase noise?"

Not at all!

The effect was mentioned to demonstrate the impact of phase-noisy oscillators
in HF ham rigs. Those same hams might find the bands a lot less noisy with
different equipment, allowing contesters and noncontesters alike to enjoy the
same band.

Where was all that talk about "phase noise" over a decade ago?

Hint: Cellular telephony had not the impact on electronics design
a decade and a half ago. "Phase noise" wasn't talked about much
back then. Some MUST have their buzzwords to sound "grown-up"
in hum raddio... :-)

There were contests a decade ago and farther back. Those that
don't have much to communicate can always have "contests" to
prove they are "somebody" through point scores. :-)

Especially good point scores through the efforts of "reducing
phase noise." :-)


Not everyone likes sports, either. Particularly when the roads are clogged
with
people going to and from the stadiums, TV programs are preempted for sports
coverage, etc.

So...all the citizenry must learn and test for morse code in order to
"enjoy sports?" :-)

My reply makes about as much sense as Jimmie's...:-)

Were the recent Olympics all about "contests for the simple reason that they
are contests, organized by contestant-wannabes so that they can Win and show
off that they are "better" than the non-contestants"?

Perhaps we should inform the IOC.

Let the IOC work out their present problems.

NOBODY has yet to petition the IOC for "radiosport." :-)


Len can enter any amateur radio contest he wants to.

Why should I?

Are your "roads so clogged with traffic" that you need to engage in
"radiosport" to enjoy yourself? :-)

All that's needed is for
him to obtain a valid amateur radio license, and an amateur radio station.

Why are you so focussed on all MUST have a ham license to
discuss anything in here? Are you finally starting to see that
your vapid arguments for the code test retention are that weak?

His choice of home location may be more suited to listening to cbers on the
nearby freeway than to working the rest of the USA, however.

Tsk. Bringing out the old bigoted remarks about CB, ey? :-)

More tsk. My choice of residence location is NOT primarily
motivated by any slavering desire to erect a radio station of
any kind. Residences are HOMES, a place of living.

I've lived ON a huge radio station long ago, one much bigger than
is possible in any residential area. Not my idea of living for the
rest of my life...but important back then. If you want to live ON
or IN a radio station, feel free to apply for a broadcasting license
and make sure the local ordinances allow living on business
premises.

For a small part of my life the radio station complex was built
ON an old airfield. Not even the old Press Wireless station
in Palos Verdes, CA, (the one bought by a ham) was that large.

So...you think vacuum tubes will be with you always? :-)

If he doesn't have enough, I'll give 'em to him. If I die first, I'll
will them to him.

Thank you, Dave!

In fact, I've been reducing my tube and parts stock because I have far more
than enough. It would be wonderful if I could live long enough to wear them
all out!

So...what marvelous improvements in the state of the art have you
conjured up with all those vacuum tubes?

I've heard that hams are supposed to keep up with the state of the
radio art...that was in the Amateur's Code way back (before the FCC
existed) and stuffed in to the 97.1 definitions by the FCC.

The fact remains, however, that a lot of solidstate electronic devices
(including ham gear) were made with custom parts which can be difficult or
impossible to find, or even identify.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Excuses, excuses. :-)

I can look in one of several distributor and retailer catalogs and get
tens of thousands of solid-state parts which can be bought for
very low cost. Look in Digi-Key's paper or on-line catalog...almost
overwhelming that quantity...and quality.

Problem is, you will NOT find many of the "traditional ham parts"
that were once on the market back in the 40s. You CAN get some
old style parts in niche resellers such as Ocean State Electronics
(specializing in sales to hobbyists...not all of whom are hams).

End result is "can't fix it because the
parts cannot be had". It is probably easier to restore a 40 year old R-390A
or 75S3 than a 20 year old R-70, if certain parts are needed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!

Riiiiight. Try to find a replacement for an R-390 power transformer...
or anything inside that PTO...even in 1980... :-)

The designer-manufacturers of electronics and radios "didn't" use
house numbers back in the 40s and 50s? It only happened when
solid-state era arrived? Tsk. Untrue.

TUBES need to be replaced because their operating life is short
compared to solid-state devices. That's why they were mounted in
sockets...so consumers (like hams) could remove them and "test
them in tube testers" such as what used to be in supermarkets
and drug stores. :-)

Of course this is driven by a whole bunch of factors, ranging from increased
reliability (if it doersn't break you don't need to be able to fix it) to
length of production (the R-390A was manufactured for at least 30 years by a
number of companies, including a few made under a contract awarded to Helena
Rubenstein), to the fact that newer electronics are often not designed to be
fixable, and are meant for a limited design life - if it fails, you just get
a new one.

Oh ho! Sound the Alarum, start the Hue and Cry, FACTUAL ERROR!

Helena Rubenstein (or whatever the cosmetic company was) NEVER
MADE any R-390s. According to legendary story, they thought to
expand their business horizon by going for a contract bid to the DoD
on building those (DoD owned all the plans and data, would supply
them). Once the executives saw what was involved and that they
were WAY out of their league trying to make those, they went out
and bought someone else's R-390s and stuck on their nameplate
identification in order to avoid contract fraud and other problems.
The cosmetics company didn't make any profit on that venture and
never tried it again.

Of course there are exceptions, like Ten Tec's policy of board-swapping. And
there are specialists who can bring almost anything electronic back to life.

You should open up a business with a name like "Lazarus Inc." or
whatever. Do it with tubes. You can memorize all the plans and
schematics, cut the paperwork enormously.

One of the design parameters of all my homebrew projects is that the result
must be serviceable with parts and tools on hand. Nothing is built with "one
of a kind" or rare parts, and nothing is pushed hard. Result is that I've had
very few problems.

Hnarf! :-)

He can have enough to see him through his lifetime.
Does that suit your definition of "always"?

I hope to outlive my supply...

Remember Jim Fixx... :-)

Of course...you can "recycle" them...somewhat after their useful
life...and "impress all who visit your shack."

??

A recycled component is still in its useful life, because I'm getting use out
of it. Nothing in the Type 7 is "after its useful life".

Wonderful. But...Kluge City stil looks the same with "remodeling"
from other kluge parts.

And when a tube finally fails, its base is often useful as a connector or
plug-in coil form. Other defective components sometimes yield useful parts,
too. Nothing goes to waste at N2EY.

Keep a hammer and anvil handy...flatten all those tin and aluminum
cans to use for chassis.

"Plug-in coil forms?" You have coils that burn out?

Don't you ever try to impress folks who visit your shack, Len?

What impresses folks most is that I can recall schematics and other info from
memory.

Wow! Like "so few" are able to do that? :-)

You know, take 'em in to view the R-70?

When it was new, the only one "taken in to see the R-70" was Al
Walston, W6MJN, when he was over to my house. We talked
over the design, features, etc., looked at the rather large schematic
supplied with the Manual, usual stuff. Wasn't to "show off."

He bought it for CASH, Dave ;-) Somehow, that is supposed to be significant.

I recycled some money. :-)

I find it interesting, though, that Len does not tell us of *his* homebrew
radio projects.

HAR! Not in THIS newsgroup full of PCTA extras! :-)

Frankly, I would have thought that he designed and built his
own receivers, rather than buying a ready-built imported unit like the R70.

Last vacuum tube receiver I DESIGNED and built was in 1964-1965.

HF. Wasn't for listening to on-off keyed radiotelegraphy! [horrors!]

Terrible thing! NOT A LICENSED AMATEUR DESIGNING AND
BUILDING AN HF RADIO! Call out the radio police!

It didn't use any "recycled parts."

A person doesn't need any knowledge or skill in radio-electronics to buy or
use
one of those.

Riiiiight...why "everyone knows all about" RIT and AGC time-constants
and stuff like that there...just ask any civilian customer at Best Buy
or Circuit City...they all KNOW everything about HF radio! :-)

"Common knowledge" in consumer electronics, right? :-)

And while we're on the subject, how about these specs for a new receiver:

MDS -135dBm
AM Sensitivity -110dBm
Blocking Dynamic Range 5Khz 119dB, 20Khz 119dB
3rd Order dynamic Range 5Khz 87.7dB, 20Khz 95dB
Image rejection 152dB
IF Rejection 106dB

No, it's not the Southgate Type 7.

"Sounds just like his 'high school friend'..." :-)

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"William" wrote in message
. com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have
your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

Actually that would have to be metrology (the science of measurement) since
temperature is not limited to weather.

Wow! A true thing by a morseperson! :-)

I've been testing electronics IN a -55 C environment. Involved in
metrology. Was cold. I didn't stay in the walk-in chamber for
any longer than necessary. :-)

Wasn't degreed or credentialed in metrology at the time. Nobody
else involved in that testing was degreed or credentialed in
metrology. NIST doesn't demand that, either!.

Sunnuvagun!

But...to be super-legal on ham HF one MUST be tested for
morsemanship. Ham radios won't work without that credential?

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Avery Fineman)(so desperate to get past spam filters
that he changes screen names)wrote in message
...
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In an ideal superheterodyne, all the oscillators would generate pure,
steady
injection signals. In reality, there is always some imperfections in those
oscillator signals. In modern frequency synthesizers, particularly PLL
types,
the imperfection takes the form of noise sidebands on the oscillator
signal.

Technically wrong. DDS is more susceptible to spur generation and
phase noise than Fractional-N and Fractional-N is more susceptible
to that than PLLs.

Tsk. You haven't spent much time with a spectrum analyzer...

Sure have. You can nitpick over the minor points but the main thing is
correct: Frequency synthesizers do not produce perfectly clean LO
signals, and that phase noise in the LO causes performance degradation
in HF ham gear.

Didn't that "phase noise" bother those recycled radios using
vacuum tubes? :-)

Or do you only recycle crystal sets?


Tsk. Simplistic untruth.

No, it's true. You just don't understand the point.

I should have included a clarifying phrase in the above, but I thought
the average technically knoweldgeable reader would understand the
point anyway.

Oh, my, aren't you royals Talking Down to the proletariat!

Difficult to discuss the subject of "US Licensing Restructuring"
in the presence of such nobility. :-)

The clarifying phrase is:

"Even with an ideal receiver front end"

meaning that even if IMD and IP3 aren't causing problems, phase noise
*alone* can cause the apparent noise floor to rise if there are strong
adjacent-channel signals.

Note how, in lab tests, there is sometimes the annotation "noise
limited" when certain tests are made. What do you think that term
means?

Heh heh heh...I'm sure you will eventually get around to showing
that...and that on-off keying telegraphy MUST be tested for in
order to operate in ham HF bands...with or without "recycled
parts" raddios.

So...was all this "phase noise" invisible way back in the
1990 time? It didn't exist? It only came up when a frequency
synthesizer was incorporated? :-)


R70s were made 1982-84 (approximately), so the design is at least 23
years old (1981). You frequenctly denigrate others as "behind the
times", yet the R70 is the newest/most modern piece of HF radio
equipment you mention owning. Just another example of "do as Len says,
not as Len does".

That little Icom R-70 still works fine, as advertised. I've got one.
You don't. :-)

The only thing I "recycled" was some paper to get one in working
order. :-)

"Phase noise" wasn't a big buzzword then. It has a three-loop
PLL in it plus a microcontroller. Sensitivity is still good and
comparable with any contemporary HF receiver.

Have you ever used the receiver he mentions?

R-390? Yes. R-391 (which he didn't mention)? Yes. R-388?
Yes. A Collins 74 or 75 something or other owned by Ed Dodds,
(W6AFU?) long ago. A KWM2? Yes.

I have an Icom R-70. You don't. :-)


No, completely relevant. One important measure of amateur equipment
quality is how it performs in actual on-air operation.

Duhhhhh. :-)


Who decides what is "real sport"? You're not the IOC. Or TAC ;-)

I thought YOU were one of the Ruling Elite on What Is What
in amateur radio? You and all the elite PCTA extras...


The term "road race" is not limited to motor vehicles. It's
understandable that you don't like sports.

Tsk. Your "sport" here is trying to establish a world-record in
sarcastic conclusion-jumping!

I like and used to enjoy (as a participant) certain sports such as
international football (you may know it as "soccer").

I've yet to get close to the concept of sitting around a shack
making as many contacts as possible in a given time as any
"sport." Neither is that activity "pioneering the ariwaves" nor
any sort of "training for emergencies" to reasonable-thinking
human beans.

Like chess or checkers or board games, radio contesting is
a GAME.

It is FAR from an ATHLETIC sport.


Not the same as being there. It seems you enjoy only second-hand
experiences.

Tsk. You've never been in the military, certainly not in military
radio communications, yet you consistently put down what I
experienced in military HF radio communications. You "know"
about it?


The above story is true. The ham involved (actually an ex-ham; he no
longer shows up in the database) behaved exactly as described. He
probably went on to a career in electronics in some capacity or other.
And as I said, most of his ideas were pretty good - he just never
carried them to completion or even to partial implementation. At least
he held a ham license for a while - you haven't even done that.

Heh heh heh...back to the "Sermon on the Antenna Mount" thing.

You still claim over-riding expertise in radio design from what?
Recycling parts in your shack? Building Elecraft kits? A double
degree way back when? RADIO INDUSTRY experience?

Yahhhh...to be "knowledgeable in radio" requires a radio amateur
license?!?!?

You *do* sound just like him, Len. Lots of words and lots of put-downs
and lots of theory. But in terms of actual radios built on your own
time, with your own resources, from your own design....nada. Zip.
Zilch. Zero. Nothing. Not that anyone here knows about in all your
years and petabytes of posting.

If I had extra copies, I could, with a year or so off to do it, digitize
those things and put them on a website that allowed at least 100
MB user space. That includes corporate documents (public)
along with photographs. Not worth it, since the typical PCTA
extra "commentary" (to use a word very loosely) would be
totally derogatory. My little text and photo memorabilia on the
ADA assignment takes 6 MB in PDF.

YOU have REJECTED simple things like a digitized license
repro in the past. You would be expected to reject anything I
present...as "credentials" or whatever real proof there is...and
there is a lot of it.

I even looked through the online database of ham radio magazine
articles. You had 24 "bylines" in ham radio from 1977 to 1982 (even
though ham radio magazine was in operation a lot longer than that).
Most of them were in the 1977-79 time frame (20 bylines). Not one
"build this radio!" article - lots of commentary, some theory, lots of
basic stuff on digital logic theory.

Last mention was over 22 years ago...

Yes. I did it then. Even got paid for it!

I have an Icom R-70. You don't. :-)

You talk about "independent thought". Designing and building a ham
station with only one's available personal resources requires a lot of
independent thought - and action. It also explodes the myth of
amateurs as simple consumers of manufactured products.

Right. All hams do the "recycle" thing. :-)

Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper
collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago.

To each his own. Why do you denigrate what others find as fun? What is
wrong with live and let live?

A federal REGULATION requiring morse code testing in order
to get an AMATEUR license to operate on HF is NOT
"live and let live."

Became a professional in the radio-electronics industry, got regular
money for not only designing, but building and testing, following
through in the field, etc., etc., on many projects.

Completely different game. You sound like someone saying the Tour de
France is no big deal because you did the same route in a car in less
time. Or that a marathon is no big deal because you can do 26.22 miles
in less than half the time on a motorcycle.

Lower your lance, Armstrong. This is NOT about athletic sports
or motorcycling.

Point is, for your own personal use, you just go out and buy a radio.
Yet you put down the salesfolk of 20+ years ago for not knowing some
arcane bit of info about the innards of the set.

"Arcane?" :-)

I put down ANY salesfolk that want to give me a snowjob about a
product they are selling or - in this case - just NOT KNOWING
ENOUGH - about an expensive product.

Does it work any better because you know it has a 3 loop PLL?

No. It works better BECAUSE it has that 3-loop PLL.

I could explain the reasons it does so, but you will dismiss it
as "arcane" and Kellie will think it is all "bafflegab" (because
he is not up to speed on control theory). Davie will snarl and
start babbling about his mini-radio-museum and "you should
SEE this Orion!" :-)

Oh, yeah, the gunnery nurse will probably jump in and talk
about "healthcare credentials" and call everyone "Putz."


Well, now we know where *your* mind is at, Len...

You aren't even close. But, if it pleases you to "recycle" some
imagination and fantasies, you will NOT do "nothing" as you
signed off.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message

Wrong. Incorrect. Not true at all in the real world of HF radio.

Len has just demonstrated, once more, that he just doesn't get it.

You expected anything else??

"Real world of HF radio?" The one that goes from 3 MHz to 30 MHz?

Amateur activity is concerned only with a fraction of that.

That's right. That portion of the radio spectrum used by radio
amateurs.
That's the portion of the spectrum of concern to those in this
newsgroup.

Amateur licenses aren't legal for out-of-amateur band transmission
even if one has a four-on-the-floor extra license.

Right again. We all knew that. It hasn't bothered us in the least.

Has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which is HF amateur radio.

Spank.

Kellie has a spanking fetish?

Not particularly Sweetums but there was this quirky little redhead I
ran into a number of years ago and spanking was one of her . . . Oops:
Off topic again. Knowing how important staying on topic is to you and
all that. Apologies.


The SUBJECT AT HAND is "US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???

Look at the subject line in the message header.

Try to get your subject threads in a row, ducks.

Wouldn't you just love to know the last date on which you commented on
the topic in that header? Shall I google it up for you?

As far as on-off keyed radiotelegraphy, your mention of "phase noise"
as being "crud" in synthesizer frequency control is akin to making
a big case for gold-plated music system speaker wires. :-)

Wrong again, Len.

What a goofball . . .

Where was all the noise about phase noise BEFORE the
cellular equipment expansion? There were oscillators around
then, even PLL frequency control systems.

You didn't read about it; therefore, it could not have taken place.
Izzat about it?

Phase noise was NOT an important buzzword then. Now it is,
coincidental with the cell phone equipment and component
makers using it in their advertisements.

Your facts are wrong.

Conclusion: Too many hams get their "technical expertise"
by memorizing advertisement copy instead of theory texts.

And if your facts are wrong, you end up with a wrong conclusion.


How many points did Len get with it in the last CQWW? Or even the last SS
or Field Day?

Or in RRAP.

Tsk. Jimmie and Kellie avoid answering or discussing. Misdirection
is all they can do...but that is traditional in Usenet since before it was
split from the ARPANET. Saw it then, still see it now...all the
self-professed "experts" making like renowned gurus, dissing and
cussing anyone who disagrees with their immortal words.

I dunno, Len...That sounds an awfully lot like you.


However, I HAVE had experience in civilian and military radio
communications, radionavigation equipment (TACAN, DME, VOR,
Localizer, Glideslope), IFF transponders, radars (search, weather,
target acquisition and tracking), earlier air-to-air missle systems
(principally the first Hughes Aircraft GARs 1 through 4), and the
strange McDonnel decoy drone that could imitate formations of
B-52s to Russky radar...using a TWT as a broadband mixer
covering many octaves.

You just had to get him started again, eh Brian?

Of course. He's just like my brother's big Labrador retriever, I toss
bones down the yard for Gunther to gnaw on and I toss bones out around
here for Sweetums to gnaw on. The only significant difference between
the two being that Gunther doesn't know his way around a keyboard.

Sweetums is a
perfect example of these windbags.

"Windbags?" :-)

That pretty well sums it up.


Kellie and Jimmie want "my scores from the last Field Day" as
one loaded "challenge." :-) Not all amateurs participate in
"Field Day" and no non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate
legally.

Groan, I doan believe it . . ! You're not only flat out dead wrong
*again* but 180 degrees wrong. Fact is Sweetums that at FD sites
non-licensed folk are *encouraged* to operate. At least you're
amazingly consistent.


An example of a NON-challenge, already-known answer
disguised as a sort-of (sort off, really) "civil discourse" question.

No non-amateur-licensee can possibly operate legally on Field Day? I'd
think you'd get one right once in a great while, Leonard. That response
would be wrong.

Dave K8MN

w3rv

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
.com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...

switched to 10 Hz or 1 Hz. Its accuracy was dependent on how well you
set
the
time base and presets. Could be used with almost any rig. Hooked it up
to a
75S3

I'll bet I know where the S3 came from . . .

W3ABT, now N3KZ

and got an A in the course.

Lab course at Penn?

Independent design project.

._.

It could also be set up as a straight counter by setting the preset to zero.

Made the circuit boards meself and all.

Lotta jollies there if yer into such things. I "burned" a number of
homebrewed circuit boards, late '60s? Something like that. Making PCBs
then was basically a drafting and photographic process which
"integrated"nicely into my darkroom "assets" so I went at it a few
times. Translate the circuit diagram in QST to a physical layout for
openers. Yeah, they can draw circuits which show conductors leaping
over other conductors without shorting them but that don't work on
single-sided boards dammit! Which all homebrewers could do then. Dunno
how you did yours but there were complete PCB "kits" available from
Kass and Radio Shack when I did mine.

My method was very simple - and I did double-sided ones.

1) Lay out both sides on grid paper
2) Lightly center punch holes on both sides
3) Cover both sides with transparent packaging tape
4) Use Xacto knife to cut out non-copper parts of tape
5) Ferric chloride bath to etch
6) Wash, remove tape
7) Drill through holes

Some what crude looking but they all worked. To save layout time, I made each
counter decade on one board, then wired the decades together.

They provided sheets of transfers with "donuts" for wire and component
connections and IC pinouts all of which were layed out on a
transparent film. Then ya *very carefully* connected all the dots with
thin tape to make the conductor traces. Tedious. Net result was a 1:1
photograhic negative of the circuit. From there it went into the
darkroom where the negative was positioned over a piece of sensitized
board stock and exposed, developed, neutralized and washed just like
all photos are developed even today. I did a few boards which I
sensitzed myself.

The rest was easy. Drill all the holes, trim the board to size and
stuff it with the components. Then go back and solder-patch all the
busted traces! Hee!

My method was quick/n/dirty but it worked. No busted traces either.

I guess I did ten boards all told. Three keyers, one a monster K3JH
developed which was first large-capacity memory keyer, several
stripline SWR bridges, a vacuum relay QSK TR switch, etc. I think I
showed you some of those "works of art" before I dumstered all that
old crap. I have a yen now to build a couple more widgets using
homebrewed PCBs but so far I have not been able to find the board
stock or chemicals in hobby quantities.

I have the board stock. Ferric chloride is a different matter...

and you're done. Could go to 1 Hz if you were willing to have it update
once
per second.

Neat! (no, I'm not willing to wait a second for the nummers to come up
. . ! )

The 74192 and other TTL family chips were hot stuff 30 years ago when
I was doing that project. You can still get pin-compatible parts
today.

I fed the aformentioned dumpster a *shoebox* full of those old 7400
series chips . . .

They were da bomb in their time but today it would be easier to do it other
ways. Or just do a mechanical dial...

Wait a minnit, if there are sideband signals on the LO output the
inference seems to be that the carrier is being modulated.

That's exactly what's going on.

By something. What something?

All kinds of somethings. Here's just one:

In a PLL synthesizer, the VCO control voltage may wander a bit for a
variety of reasons. Say you have a design where a voltage swing of 5
volts causes the VCO to move 5 MHz. *Any* variation in that control
voltage, from *any* source, will cause the VCO frequency to wander a
bit. 1 millivolt variation gives a shift of 1000 Hz, 1 *microvolt* of
variation gives 1 Hz, etc. Remember that the control voltage is a DC
signal and the rest is obvious.

Not quite. I gotta chase down the links Dave supplied and keep
digging.

It's all there. Main point is simply that the output of many synthesizers isn't
nearly as clean as what comes out of xtal or self-controlled oscillators of
good design. Which is why this wasn't a problem in, say, a Ten Tec Corsair 2.

That's just one source of phase noise.

OK

Note also that most modern rigs synthesize *all* the LOs, so the effect is
magnified.

Typical Ikensu box starts out by converting the input to about 70 MHz. This
permits covering ~DC to 30 MHz without gaps. Also makes image rejection really
good with just a lowpass filter on the input. Of course the LO tunes 40 to 70
MHz, but that's not a problem with a synthesizer.

Keeping the synthesizer *clean* is another matter.

Then the 70 MHz is converted down to the first filter frequency - typically
8.83 MHz. Requires another oscillator - typically synthesized because that way
you can do things like PBT easily. Then BFOs, and such....all synthesized.

That's why phase noise is important to hams.

Huh: I learned a bit from this post.

I hope so!

The upshot of all of it is that in real-world hamming, we often have
to deal with bands full of strong signals, yet we want to hear the
weak ones.

That leaves Sweetums and his half-vast "experience" out. Long-haul
military HF comms are channelized and if a station is weak they just
twist the Variac clockwise. 40kW with rhombics just to push RTTY from
Tokyo to the west coast . . SPARE me . . !

Just a different environment. Army of Occupation takes over JA in 1945, one of
the first orders of business is good comms back to DC and Arlington. Pick out a
good site, put up the poles, haul up the diamonds, fire away. All on the
taxpayer's nickel. Well spent money but has little to do with the reality of
self-funded avocational radio.

I've run into more than a few hams who say they "hate contests because
they make the bands so noisy". What's really going on, in at least
some cases, is that the effects of so many strong signals on the air
all at once raise the apparent noise floor of their *modern*
transceivers, in part due to phase-noisy oscillators in the
contest-haters equipment.

"If ya can't take the heat go up the band!"

Point is, they *could* coexist with better equipment.

One can spend two lifetimes diddling frequency synthesizers and such
but if whatever freq pops out of his gem doesn't make it to the
airwaves via an engineered radiator and it's support structure one
might as well have been a lifeguard in the Mohave desert.

And THAT'S the game!

73 de Jim, N2EY

btw - the way I'd solve the problem would be to email you for the
solution.

. . . boink . . POINT!

"Wouldn't it be easier for *me* if *you* did it?"

It's no big deal at all. As far as the "math" goes any kid who has a
decent grip on 9th grade alegebra can hoof thru it, this is not double
integral or tensor analysis country. All one needs to pull it together
is the material physical properties and the ability to jiggle a few
simple algebraic equations which are only a half-step beyond jiggling
Ohm's Law. All of it is readily available out on the Web and it can
all be done with a pencil and a calculator.

Typical materials info source:

http://www.matweb.com/SpecificMateri...&group=General

Here's a taste of the number-crunching:


http://hsc.csu.edu.au/engineering_st...bending/bendin
g_stress.html

Like I said - don't reinvent the wheel....

For my own part I've gotten into semi-automating the whole process in
order to design widgets like tapered aluminum yagi elememts,
fiberglass quad (squalo?) spreaders, masts and towers. I run a LISP
rountine in Autocad to come up with the cross-sectional properties
then diddle the rest in Excel or Mathcad or a slick little $50
shareware program called "DTbeam" which is a finite elememt analysis
beam analyzer. The M.E.'s version of a Java-based Smith Chart solver.
Sort of.

http://www.dtware.com/

Nice! But I prefer Microstation...

73 de Jim, N2EY

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

Does it? I don't see that, Dave. He wrote that is was a "neat collection".

'Scuse me James but what I "see" here is that Sweetums snookered you
good and it appears that you bought it. Try to get used the fact that
leopards and putzes don't change their spots and that they both quite
enjoy having evangelists for din-din.


looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Why should it? It's not stereo equipment. It's amateur radio equipment.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

It seems to bother our Leonard that you have an extensive QST library.

I don't see that at all, Dave.

.. . . see above . . .

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

I think he means you, Jim. Our Leonard seems to be bothered that you
have the information contained in those magazines. It gives you unfair
advantage over him.

??

The entire run of QST is available on CD-ROM, so the info is available to
anyone willing to spend the $$. (I spent a lot less on the paper mags, but they
take up more space and it's taken me decades to build up the collection).

I have the QSTs, the whole run of CQ, nearly the whole runs of EI and
Pop'tronics, the whole run of the now-defunct Ham Radio and most of HRH.
Add to that a ten-year run of ER, five years worth of Radio Amatoori
(Finnish), about ten years worth of RadComm, some miscellaneous issues
of ham mags from Japan, Germany, Denmark, Italy and Russia, ten or so
years of Radio, loads of old Radio and Radiocraft mags.

That's more extensive than my collection. But if you really want to see a radio
library, go to the AWA annex.

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines.

Please don't! Future generations will be deprived of those magazines if you
burn them. Much of my collection was saved from destruction by hams who would
not let them go to the dump or incinerator. Same for the parts.

I know an amateur (not me) who was *given* a near-complete collection of QST by
an elderly ham who knew he would soon be SK. He had saved every issue from the
post WW1 reawakening to the prsent day. He had many duplicates, too. It took 3
trips in a Citation to move them all.

I'll lie in a rack cabinet as I'm sent
off to the amateur radio valhalla. A special A-1 Op Club honor guard
will be present. The ceremony will be performed by local members of the
Royal Order of Wouff Hong.

Sounds good to me. I want bagpipes at mine. And selected readings from the Book
of Bokonon.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"happy, happy mud"

w3rv

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...
"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have
your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

Actually that would have to be metrology (the science of measurement) since
temperature is not limited to weather.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Not limited to weather, however, the context -was- weather. I'll
allow you to slide on this one if you can produce licensure or
credentials in "metrology."

;^)

bb

On 1 Oct 2004 20:05:47 -0700, William wrote:

Not limited to weather, however, the context -was- weather. I'll
allow you to slide on this one if you can produce licensure or
credentials in "metrology."

Any high school graduate who paid attention during the science
classes knows that -40F = -40C without having to calculate it.

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
(and yes, I do have a degree in
engineering)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Try the inside of a vehicle when the outside air is 116 F (47 C) that
has been closed and sitting in the sun to add 40 C more to the
ambient.

Around here, we generally settle for the decidedly low tech method of
rolling down the windows.


Let's take a look at those phrases:

Yes. Go over and over and over and over and over and over them
until you tire out the opposition to your golden words of truth and
beauty (which are never ever wrong). :-)

Let's at least go over them enough times that everyone except you
realizes your errors.

LHA: "All those subbands are simply for "staking out territory." "

That's my opinion and I'm holding to that.

You're simply wrong. Then again, you aren't a ham so perhaps you could
be excused for not knowing. Now that you've been advised, I'd expect
that you'd be sharp enough to keep from sticking with the same erroneous
view.

A person can hold any opinion they want. Len's stated opinion in this area is
not based on fact.

WRONG. INCORRECT. My opinions are based on FACTUAL
evidence of over a half century of observation.

My, my. You seem to want it both ways. Just a few posts ago, they were
just opinions when I wrote that you presented something as fact. Now
they are opinions based on FACTUAL evidence of over a half century of
observation.

In that case, your facts and your opinions on synthesizer spurs and
phase noise are wrong.

If you don't like it, TS.

"Civil discourse" from Len...

If you don't like that remark, then more TS. I have a sharp TS punch
and will be glad to mark your TS card anytime.

More civil "discoarse".

Does that mean you'll cling to a position no matter how wrong you are?

Isn't that obvious?

Tsk. You guys are a couple of Clingons, bravely regressing to
early pioneer days when Kode was King...because that's all
any ham could come up with on a $100 "recycled parts" budget.

You didn't answer the question posed to you.

Note that Len simply attacks an opposing opinion without any facts to
substantiate his attack.

WRONG. INCORRECT. My opinions are based on FACTUAL
evidence of over a half century of observation.

My, my. You seem to want it both ways. Just a few posts ago, they were
just opinions when I wrote that you presented something as fact. Now
they are opinions based on FACTUAL evidence of over a half century of
observation.

In that case, your facts and your opinions on synthesizer spurs and
phase noise are wrong.


Since when did you two Clingons become sole arbiter and judge of
what is "fact?"


Your view then is that there is no correct or incorrect, no right or
wrong and that there is no invalid opinion?

Is this part of the civil discoarse lesson? Should I be taking notes?

Repeatedly proven to be incorrect, in error, and without any basis in
fact. Hams then and now are able to stay within their bands and
subbands without any need for "modern frequency synthesizers".

Oooooooo! "repeatedly 'proven' to be incorrect, in error and without
any basis in fact! Ooooooo. Tsk, tsk. :-)

An "Ooooooo" and a "Tsk, tsk" aren't much of a defense, are they?

Nope.

Defense? Hardly. Those are just little onomotopoetic phrases to
keep from breaking out in nursie yell-yells maniacal laughter at
the sobresides damning of NCTAs by you two Clingons. Hi hi )as
the emotionless hams do).

That's what I thought of your comments, Len--hardly a defense. You've
been proven wrong. Evidence was presented to you. Your response:

"Ooooooo" and "Task, tsk".

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

The name "Southgate" has certainly appeared in ham literature.

Indeed.

Then it should be in the ARRL Museum, yes?

Should be and might be.

Famous "names" need enshrining in the lore and mythos of the
pioneer days in radio...

It is enshrined, Len. Don't let it worry you that you don't know what
it means.

Just my particular brand of fun in ham radio.

Trying always to be the Superior in anything is fun for the ego-
driven. Lots of PCTA extras in here (practically all of them) get
their jollies that way.

Only you can read "just my way particular brand of fun in ham radio" and
take it as a statement of ego-driven superiority.

What's wrong with any of that?

Nothing "wrong" with that other than taking over the flow of debate
with your pet fun-and-games and promoting morse well over and
above any valid reasons for keeping the morse code test.

The Morse Code test was not mentioned at all, but Len cannot see any other
issue.

Hello? The message thread title is "US Lincensing Restructuring ???
When ???" At stake are some 18 petitions sitting at the FCC waiting
for someone there to put together an NPRM. Most of those petitions
involve the retention or elimination of the morse code test.

Jimmie and Davie (those 'sweethearts') feel that folks in here must
talk ONLY about the subjects THEY approve of?

I've already asked you once, would you like me to google up the last
time you made a comment which dealt with US licensing restructuring in
this thread?

...as compared to your attempting to take over the flow of debate with
your pet fun and games and promoting the abolition of morse code testing
in an endeaver in which you play no part?

But, you consider yourself Superior and therefore "must" triumph
in all things. :-)

Don't you mean "but you've proven me wrong and I just can't abide that"?

bingo!

Tsk...I've not "been proven wrong," just issued the usual baseless
non-facts by PCTA determined to damn every NCTA they can
find.

Balderdash, Leonard. You have indeed been proven wrong by very real
facts, supplemented with several urls where those facts might be
verified.
You're beginning to look very, very silly.


Len walked into a radio store once upon a time and the salespeople couldn't
explain some technical point to his satisfaction. Some of those salespeople
held the Extra class license. Len's conclusion is that people who hold an
Extra class license don't know how radios work.

Poor baby, still feel hurt at not being "respected" for that vaunted
extra class status?

None of your conclusions have hit the mark lately.

I was NOT thinking what you imagined. I was thinking that a sales
outlet that didn't know about its product nor could offer to help
potential customers find out, wasn't a very good business. To this
day I won't look to HRO for "technical answers."

....and I'll bet those guys at HRO are all shook up about it.

"My sales are way down. I wish that nice Mister Anderson would come in
and buy a replacement for the Icom R-70. Twenty years is a long time to
hold a grudge."

Dave K8MN

N2EY wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

snip of Len's lecture on IC's

What was his point, anyway? That 74192s aren't in current production?

His "point" was to impress us with how much he knew about the devices.
Whether he actually knew much or just presented material glommed from
the web is irrelevant. He needed to impress us. Nobody can know more
than Leonard H. Anderson. Certainly not mere radio amateurs.

Dave K8MN

N2EY wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

Does it? I don't see that, Dave. He wrote that is was a "neat collection".

Ah, Jim, if only I could regain such innocence...

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Why should it? It's not stereo equipment. It's amateur radio equipment.

Naw, you just thought it was. Len has already identified it as a
kludge.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

It seems to bother our Leonard that you have an extensive QST library.

I don't see that at all, Dave.

I know, but it is there.

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

I think he means you, Jim. Our Leonard seems to be bothered that you
have the information contained in those magazines. It gives you unfair
advantage over him.

??

The entire run of QST is available on CD-ROM, so the info is available to
anyone willing to spend the $$. (I spent a lot less on the paper mags, but they
take up more space and it's taken me decades to build up the collection).

Len isn't going out to see his pals at the local HRO store to buy QST on
CD-ROM. He certainly isn't going to go round up the actual magazines.



I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines.

Please don't! Future generations will be deprived of those magazines if you
burn them. Much of my collection was saved from destruction by hams who would
not let them go to the dump or incinerator. Same for the parts.

You probably gathered that I had no real intention of doing so.


I know an amateur (not me) who was *given* a near-complete collection of QST by
an elderly ham who knew he would soon be SK. He had saved every issue from the
post WW1 reawakening to the prsent day. He had many duplicates, too. It took 3
trips in a Citation to move them all.

Jack Fulmer, then W4HAV (now W4YF) was Vice President of Cincinnati
Milacron lived near me in Fort Thomas, Kentucky early in '68. He had a
complete run of QST but his late Uncle was also a ham and left Jack his
magazine. Jack gave me the complete run of 1934-1958. That formed the
core of my QST collection. Jack was the guy, who with Jean Shepherd
started the short-lived first VW dealership in the Cincinnati area a few
years after the war.

Dave K8MN

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 1 Oct 2004 20:05:47 -0700, William wrote:

Not limited to weather, however, the context -was- weather. I'll
allow you to slide on this one if you can produce licensure or
credentials in "metrology."

Any high school graduate who paid attention during the science
classes knows that -40F = -40C without having to calculate it.

Folks have flunked out of first-year engineering and science classes
for less than that.

...only if those students were PCTA and tried to beat up an NCTA
teacher. :-)

Tsk. I never saw anyone flunked out of ANY engineering classes
due to not knowing the merge-point of the scales. I just cheat now
by punching a few keys on my little HP 32S II...does the scale
conversion automatically. :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Collins amateur gear was much less expensive than commercial or
military equipment of the same vintage, and more suited to typical
amateur use. Most hams are not going to be using their equipment at
+85 C or -55 C.

Tsk. Not playing the heroic instant Emergency Communicator,
ready for every emergency when the commercial infrastructure fails?

Riiiight...all ham activity happens at "normal room temperature."

Hi hi.

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.

Tsk. How could you stand it being that warm? :-)

Poor baby. Wear your long undies, did you?

Don't forget: he was working uphill both both ways.

And barefoot? :-)

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"William" wrote in message
. com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Now, Leonard -40F and -40C occur at roughly the same point. Have
your
ever participated in amateur radio emergency communications
outdoors
when the temp was -40?

I've been outdoors working when the temperature was -30 F.


-40C and -40F are not roughly the same point, they are EXACTLY the
same
point.

(Celsius * 9/5) + 32 = Fahrenheit
(-40C * 9/5) + 32 = -40F

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Unless any of you can produce licensure or credentials in meteorology
or atmospheric science, I'm going to have to consider your comments
suspect.

;^)

bb

Actually that would have to be metrology (the science of measurement)
since
temperature is not limited to weather.

Wow! A true thing by a morseperson! :-)

Hey, back off! :)

Ooops. My excuse is finding an honest morseperson not trying
(too much) to destroy an NCTA... :-)

I've been testing electronics IN a -55 C environment. Involved in
metrology. Was cold. I didn't stay in the walk-in chamber for
any longer than necessary. :-)

CW telemetry always gets through.

It MUST...whether there's electric power available or not! :-)

Wasn't degreed or credentialed in metrology at the time. Nobody
else involved in that testing was degreed or credentialed in
metrology. NIST doesn't demand that, either!.

Sunnuvagun!

But, but, but... Len. I -need- her to be licensured or credentialed
in metrology whether there's such a thing or not.

I -must- have it.

I DEMAND IT!!!

If SHE doesn't produce licensure in metrology within 24 hours,
Dee will forever be known as a LIAR and a Bag Lady and a Horse Thief!

Because I say so!

;^)

Hmmm...trying out nursie's fantasyworld thinking?

Warning: Do not try that at home!

But...to be super-legal on ham HF one MUST be tested for
morsemanship.

Only in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Yes, so I'm told by all the PCTA extras...if they bother
mentioning it at all... :-)

Ham radios won't work without that credential?

Nope - they refuse.

Physics is altogether different.

Haven't you learned that by now? You've been told often enough.

If you don't get that by now I'm going to have to start Dialing...

Careful, careful, trying to think like nursie may be hazardous to
your health!



Strange brew. The things you learn in a ham newsgroup.

Yes, it is...once in a while a true factoid comes into public view,
about 1 percent of the time in between all the PCTA extras trying
to destroy all NCTA whichever way they can... :-)

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

On 29 Sep 2004 18:47:50 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than
the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel
archives?

Here's a picture, and some technical details...

http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/

Neat collection

Thnak you, Len!

of recycled toob equipment..

The parts are recycled but the designs are new and unique.

It seems to bother our Leonard that vacuum tubes were used.

Does it? I don't see that, Dave. He wrote that is was a "neat collection".

Ah, Jim, if only I could regain such innocence...

What innocence?

If only I could keep it that neat all the time.

looks like "shacks" of
the 50s and 60s.

It seems to bother our Leonard that your equipment doesn't look like
stereo equipment.

Why should it? It's not stereo equipment. It's amateur radio equipment.

Naw, you just thought it was.

I know it is.

Len has already identified it as a kludge.

He's wrong, of course.

Picture is less than 2 years old.

Appears to be a giant collection of QSTs to the
right...

It seems to bother our Leonard that you have an extensive QST library.

I don't see that at all, Dave.

I know, but it is there.

Yes, the collection is there. They're not 'giant' QSTs, either...

Every issue since mid-1926, and some older ones. Also lots of other
radio
magazines, books, manuals, etc. The picture shows only a small part of
the
library.

(archives of the renowned historian no doubt). :-)

Who would that be?

I think he means you, Jim. Our Leonard seems to be bothered that you
have the information contained in those magazines. It gives you unfair
advantage over him.

??

The entire run of QST is available on CD-ROM, so the info is available to
anyone willing to spend the $$. (I spent a lot less on the paper mags, but
they
take up more space and it's taken me decades to build up the collection).

Len isn't going out to see his pals at the local HRO store to buy QST on
CD-ROM. He certainly isn't going to go round up the actual magazines.

Then his ignorance is his own choice.

I'm sure it'll come as no surprise to Leonard that my funeral pyre will
be fueled with those magazines.

Please don't! Future generations will be deprived of those magazines if you
burn them. Much of my collection was saved from destruction by hams who
would
not let them go to the dump or incinerator. Same for the parts.

You probably gathered that I had no real intention of doing so.

Yes - but I think Len would love it if those old QSTs were burned...

I know an amateur (not me) who was *given* a near-complete collection of
QST by
an elderly ham who knew he would soon be SK. He had saved every issue from
the
post WW1 reawakening to the prsent day. He had many duplicates, too. It
took 3
trips in a Citation to move them all.

Jack Fulmer, then W4HAV (now W4YF) was Vice President of Cincinnati
Milacron lived near me in Fort Thomas, Kentucky early in '68. He had a
complete run of QST but his late Uncle was also a ham and left Jack his
magazine. Jack gave me the complete run of 1934-1958. That formed the
core of my QST collection.

Cool!

Mine started out in 1968 with my subscription. Got some 50s and 60s copies when
a local radio club got rid of their small library. Then various hamfests and
such. The ham who got the collection detailed above had some duplicates and
gave them to me. A few copies even came from eBay. Recently, a local ham gave
me his old library, which was in better shape than some of mine. Etc.

Along the way I accumulated a lot of dupes, which were then sold off. All part
of the collecting game.

Jack was the guy, who with Jean Shepherd

K2ORS

started the short-lived first VW dealership in the Cincinnati area a few
years after the war.

That one belongs in the "Radio Stories" thread.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"6SJ7GT"