TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

[TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long)

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long)
From: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:23:11 -0600
I agree.  My most recent transmitter is one big enough to step inside, sit
down (carefully) and work on it.  Damn those tiny ones.  Oh yes, it's a 1KW
AM Broadcast rig that I run on 160M AM.  C U on 1885 kHz.  And don't bother
to tell me that the audio sounds great but I have no sideband suppression
and you can hear carrier on my signal.  That what's called AM.

73
Bob K4TAX


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Melland" <w9wis@charter.net>
To: "Duane Grotophorst" <n9dg@yahoo.com>; <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long)


> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:50:37 -0800 (PST)
>  Duane Grotophorst <n9dg@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I&#8217;ve seen several references in various places about
> > how light weight and empty the newer Tec Tec radio
> > boxes are.
>
> I agree...light weight and roomy don't mean "bad".  For
> instance... the Racal RA6790/GM military/government HF
> receiver.  These babies are amazing receivers.  They cost
> well over $10,000 each to the Gov't (inflated...yes) when
> the last one was delivered in 1994 (actually the LF/VLF/HF
> version was $21,000).  They weigh 32 lbs, are as roomy
> inside as a Montana open range having been built in "board"
> style like the Ten-Tec Omni series and other Ten-Tec rigs.
> They are beautiful receivers (I own one).  A consideration
> in building them was whether to make them a small half rack
> size... or a full rack size (5.25" tall, 19" wide, 18.5"
> deep).  They would fit in a very small package easily
> however many ships/aircraft (and several civilian contracts
> like ATT and including the shhhh ! NSA) would use these
> receivers in the rack space of the old R-390A's etc they
> were replacing... so the were built to fit existing rack
> space. Ther radios sure could have been built much smaller
> but existing conditions drove the specs. Personaly I like
> all that room... with my fat fingers it makes service oh so
> much simpler <grin>.
>
> Mike, W9WIS
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>


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