[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] OT: Scopes

To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Scopes
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 23:17:36 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>

There is no better way to troubleshoot a rig than with a scope.
The fact is, almost any scope will do.

In our most recent case, the signal we were tracing was at 9 MHz.
In HF, worst case you will have 30 MHz.
So even if you buy a scope with a bandwidth of 20 MHz, it will still measure
to 30 MHz.  It may not be perfectly accurate but it will be relatively
accurate and  close enough to show you if a stage is amplifying or not.
Like Mike said, Outza must always be significantly more than Inza.  :-)

Most of the time we are trying to isolate the stage causing the trouble,
not trying to do an exact measurement.  One thing to know is that you do
need a good probe.  That is not always included when you buy a used scope.

If Scott had begun with a scope, we would have been at the point we are at
now on the very first day.

Myself, I sold my scope before I moved across the pond.
Haven't replaced it yet and right now I am pondering whether to go the route
of an old used dinosaur or buy one of the USB digital front ends for a PC.
If anyone reads this and has any experience with these new methods, I would
appreciate some info.  I worked for Tektronix 35 years ago, so my knowledge
on scopes is good but somewhat outdated - hi.  (Actually, to be exact, I
worked for Rhode und Schwarz, who had the exclusive distributorship for
Tektronix here in Germany and I repaired and calibrated the 400 series
scopes / 465/475, etc.).

Rick, DJ0IP

-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
On Behalf Of Hulett, Russell
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2012 8:14 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: [TenTec] OT: Scopes

I've avoided owning a scope, but the recent discussion about troubleshooting
low power from an Omni D has me rethinking.  Most of the gear I own now old,
have managed to diagnose problems without owning a scope.  In one case, the
problem with an old hollow-state receiver was found by poking around with a
wooden dowel to expose a poor solder joint.  My main concern is spending
more money on a scope than my shack is worth, or alternately spending more
time fixing a used scope than is warranted.  

Would be curious about thoghts from others who repair their own gear about
what minimum-required scope would be.
TenTec mailing list

TenTec mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>