Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 17th 04, 03:03 PM
N8KDV
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Eric F. Richards" wrote:

"phil " wrote:

hi Eric:

i am responding here as my reader ate the thread...

Quite true, but that's not what you said -- you said it was
"resonant." A nit-pick, perhaps,


at 3/4 wavelenghts resonance is at 736-kHz. as a 2 wavelengths beverage:
1.9-MHz. your antenna is quite capable on MW.


Oh, I don't argue *that*, I just argue that it wasn't resonant.

Not that it matters, really, my WR-G303i reports its signal strength
as 30 mV 120 miles away on a 400 foot wire broadside to the antenna.
Flamethrower, indeed.

As for the "flamethrower" at the end of the wire, they are in
violation of 47 CFR 22.369, which explicitly lays out the field
strength limits on Table Mountain. They may get grandfathered in, but
now that the feds are reopening Table Mountain for NIST projects, the
local HDTV wannabes are chafing at the restrictions -- even though
their antennas would be about 40 miles away.


what frequency are they on?


Dunno. I don't keep up with the local doings of the broadcasters
much. I assume they are in the old standard TV UHF band; 47 CFR 369
says that from 470 to 890 MHz, field strength on Table Mountain must
be less than 30 mV/m.

radios are black boxes: feed them signals within specs and they perform
predictably. ICOM probably left off the LW BPF to save $1. companies are
cheap.


Actually I got word from someone who said that the '75 was considered
a work in progress that never progressed.


That's an understatement if I ever heard one!



i know what the R75 is and is not.


Then all I ask is that you remember that when you brag on it. Good
bargain? definitely. Ultimate radio? No.

i am lucky to
have Pete as a mentor.


That you are. I wish I was fluent enough in electronics to be able to
speak the same language as Pete.

if you gain access to that antenna try your RX340
and bring along a 7030 owner.


No radio is perfect; the '7030 wouldn't hold up out there... To me
the question would be whether or not the '340 would.

Eric

--
Eric F. Richards,
"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940


  #2   Report Post  
Old January 18th 04, 05:19 AM
Telamon
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
N8KDV wrote:

"Eric F. Richards" wrote:

"phil " wrote:

hi Eric:

i am responding here as my reader ate the thread...

Quite true, but that's not what you said -- you said it was
"resonant." A nit-pick, perhaps,

at 3/4 wavelenghts resonance is at 736-kHz. as a 2 wavelengths
beverage: 1.9-MHz. your antenna is quite capable on MW.


Oh, I don't argue *that*, I just argue that it wasn't resonant.

Not that it matters, really, my WR-G303i reports its signal
strength as 30 mV 120 miles away on a 400 foot wire broadside to
the antenna. Flamethrower, indeed.

As for the "flamethrower" at the end of the wire, they are in
violation of 47 CFR 22.369, which explicitly lays out the field
strength limits on Table Mountain. They may get grandfathered
in, but now that the feds are reopening Table Mountain for NIST
projects, the local HDTV wannabes are chafing at the
restrictions -- even though their antennas would be about 40
miles away.

what frequency are they on?


Dunno. I don't keep up with the local doings of the broadcasters
much. I assume they are in the old standard TV UHF band; 47 CFR
369 says that from 470 to 890 MHz, field strength on Table Mountain
must be less than 30 mV/m.

radios are black boxes: feed them signals within specs and they
perform predictably. ICOM probably left off the LW BPF to save
$1. companies are cheap.


Actually I got word from someone who said that the '75 was
considered a work in progress that never progressed.


That's an understatement if I ever heard one!


Welcome to the real world. Engineers will play with a design until they
are happy with it but management runs the show. As soon as the pointy
haired boss thinks that the design has met its goals the effort ends.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
  #3   Report Post  
Old January 19th 04, 02:12 AM
phil :)
 
Posts: n/a
Default

hi Telamon:

Actually I got word from someone who said that the '75 was
considered a work in progress that never progressed.

That's an understatement if I ever heard one!


Welcome to the real world. Engineers will play with a design until they
are happy with it but management runs the show. As soon as the pointy
haired boss thinks that the design has met its goals the effort ends.


sounds like the voice of experience.

regards,
phil
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Icom 730 zero-beat question Michael A. Brown General 2 August 14th 04 12:57 PM
Icom 730 preventative maintenance question Michael Brown Equipment 4 April 26th 04 04:23 AM
Icom 730 preventative maintenance question Michael Brown Equipment 0 April 25th 04 05:46 PM
Newbie question: icom ic-r7000 Steve Uhrig Scanner 0 September 1st 03 06:01 PM
question ICOM PCR-1000 Tomislav Stimac Equipment 0 August 24th 03 10:59 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017