If I'm going to participate in this S/M silliness I have to have two
rotators, right? Well, thanks to several of you net people, I now have
3 more 400 rotobrakes that I can hopefully use to provide a second
rotator plus a spare.
Any of you that still use this 1970 vintage machine may be interested to
know that I have found a source of indicator pot drive gears and have
called and priced them out. Since the company wants a minimum order of
$25.00, I thought I would see if anyone else wants to participate and
spare themselves the frustration that I have gone through. I think the
price works out to around $6.50 apiece - so let me know.
If you want the company and ordering information, let me know also.
I think the gear damage is usually a result of the failure of the
comparator circuitry due to damage to the pots from rf or lightning.
This damage allows the rotor output shaft to travel more than 2 pi rads
and consequently runs the rotor indicator pot to the stop. This puts a
load on the drive gear, which subsequently fails. I'm amazed that 4000
in-lbs of torque does not spin the pot off of its mount!!
I intend to bypass all 5 of the cable conductors with .01 mfd caps and
place series inductors in the leads at both ends of the cable.
I guess the common mode induced voltage from the tower, acting as the
160 M antenna, (or lightning induced signals) should be broken up into
several sections along the cable with snap - on toroidal cores. I hope
this will eliminate the external influences from the circuitry and keep
the stuff from being smoked again.
My current fail safe method of preventing over rotation is to count to
30 for a 180 degree rotation or 45 for a 270 degree rotation. This will
only help me practice my concentration for this years SS, when I intend
to try S/M. (just to tie this message to a current thread)
CU in Visalia
Eric, NV6O (1....2.....3....4..is it pointing at the green house yet?)
edwoods@pacbell.com
>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com Fri Apr 1 20:07:19 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr@netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
Subject: OOOOOPPS!!!
Message-ID: <Pine.3.85.9404011219.A20040-0100000@netcom6>
It's simply not true that single/Multi uses the same amount of bandwidth
as Single/Single UNLESS the Single/Multis are constrained against CQing
on more than one frequency "at a time" (within a minute or so). and
unless you assume that on Sunday afternoons all the single/Singles will
be CQing constantly.
be CQing constantly. If a cqER = 1 "PRESENCE UNIT" and a S&Per = ca. .05
"PRESENCE UNIT" then your S/M guy is anywhere from 2 units (shouldn't be
allowed) to 1.05 (who cares).
Meanwhile, your S/S guy is somewhere in the range from .05 to 1.0.
Sorry for the raggedy text - I haven't yet figured out this Unix text editor.
73, Pete N4ZR
On Fri, 1 Apr 1994, j.p. kleinhaus wrote:
> It seems I made a rather foolish error in my last message RE:
> Single/Multi. I referred to the ARRL SS as a contest that allows
> CQ'ing on 2 bands at once. Guess what? This si nowhere near the
> truth. I was actually thinking about the Sprint when I wrote that
> but that rule was recently changed due to this exact problem.
>
> The fact then remains that Single/Multi uses *exactly* the same amoutn
> of transmitter bandwidth as Single/Single. The only use for the second
> radio is to S&P for new mults or QSO's (which is what most of us have
> been doing anyway). In that case...I still say LEAVE IT ALONE!
>
> J.P. AA2DU
>
>From Walton L. Stinson" <wstinson@csn.org Fri Apr 1 21:45:26 1994
From: Walton L. Stinson" <wstinson@csn.org (Walton L. Stinson)
Subject: HEIL/YAESU
Message-ID: <Pine.3.05.9404011425.C15939-b100000@teal>
i havent tried this, but it might be possible to correct this problem
with an impedence matching transformer. the 70volt types that are
used in distributed background sound systems have plenty of
impedence taps and should be able to provide a decent match between
the 300 ohm heils and the 8 ohm yaesu output.
On Thu, 31 Mar 1994 bill.lumnitzer@paonline.com wrote:
>
> I installed the replacement speakers supplied by Heil which were
purported > to be the "fix" for the low audio problem when the Pro-Set is
plugged into > an FT-1000; THIS MOD MAKES NO IMPROVEMENT AND IS A WASTE OF
TIME! > > Bob Heil claims the problem is due to poor circuit design by
Yaesu and told me > to short out the two resistors in the stereo audio
lines in the FT-1000. I ran > this by K7JA at Yaesu and after some study,
he STRONGLY DISAGREED with this > proposed solution and feels that damage
to the output stage could result > if 8-ohm phones were used without the
series resistors. > > Chip (K7JA) unsuccessfully tried to retrofit some
....... > > 73 de N6CQ/3 Bill (n6cq@paonline.com)
>
>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Fri Apr 1 22:09:20 1994
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: NA Sprint analysis
Message-ID: <9404012209.AA03473@cmicro.com>
I have generated a report that might be of interest to those who participated
in the last NCJ CW Sprint. It shows all of the information used during
the log checking process.
If you are interested in obtaining a copy for your log, I can send it via
return E-Mail if you like. I am still waiting for three disks to arrive
so I will wait for them before I respond (N4ZZ, W2GD and K5GA).
In the future, you can attach an SASE to your summary sheet and get a
copy if you want.
See you in the Internet Sprint this weekend.
Tree N6TR
tree@cmicro.com
>From ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman) Fri Apr 1
>22:47:49 1994
From: ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.PacTel.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Subject: Why does everyone have to win!?
Message-ID: <9403017652.AA765240469@atlas.ccmail.pactel.com>
The negative comments on S/M really get me down. From my perspective,
naysayers of S/M are just trying to equalize the playing field so that THEY can
have a chance to win. To me, this is just a continuation of the score
equalization and regional box issue. What happend to plain old fun while
operating? If I knew I was going to win every time, I think the fun would be
gone (I've yet to win, and yes, contesting is still fun).
Competition is good. It is the heart of the American system. If you build a
better widget, you get more customers. The same goes for contests.
S/M is just one more technological advance in contesting. When computer
logging came out, was there computer logging program section? Arguably,
computer loging gives you a competative edge. When the FT-1000 came out, did
you put this new high tech radio in a new class? When someone has bigger
antennas or better locations, do you put them in a different class? Hardly.
So why have another class for S/M? It's just one more technical and operating
technique, in the midst of many. I don't buy any arguments in favor of a
special S/M class.
You can operate at the latest wiz-bang station, but if you havent honed your
operating skills, do not expect to even come close to winning. Wait a minute.
Aren't we talking about winning again?
Contesting, and Amateur Radio in general, supports the advancement of
technology, and the developement of skilled talent. To do anything else would
be un-Amateur-Radio-like.
Contesting should be fun. Period. If you have to win, hone your skills, and
improve your station. Don't impeade the ones that do. Just sit back, operate,
and have a good time. That's what contesting is all about.
Best Regards, Ken WM2C
ken.silverman@atlas.ccmail.pactel.com
|