hey some movie i see everyonce in awhile has a real spart station on a ship.
its the most fasinating thing i have every seen. fire flying everyway and pure
ac hum and crackling. i dont understand it but remember those old cuban
stations and their h/b cw rigs.
bob k0wtz
all things are possible in Christ Jesus our savior
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 2/24/14, k6jek <k6jek@comcast.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Monday, February 24, 2014, 2:23 PM
There is something to be said for a
chain saw CW note. You stand out in a crowd.
And as for your station, have you considered an Alexanderson
Alternator as a upgrade to your spark station? They are the
cat's pajamas.
Jon
On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Doug Reid wrote:
> Back when I started out, we used a spark generator and
the frequency was determined by the length of our
antenna......not really.....geez, how old do you guys think
am I anyway ! Although, I did hear a station on 20
meter cw the other evening that resembled a chain saw
sending cq. I should have sent him a few new caps for
his power supply.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Lelieveld <va3dwi@gmail.com>
> To: R. Eric Sluder-W9WLW <resluder@yahoo.com>;
Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Mon, Feb 24, 2014 1:07 pm
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>
>
> Hi all,
> I remember the day when I got my first license, PA0MIH
in the Netherlands. My
> tation was inspected by the PTT (Post Telephone
Telegraph, the Dutch equivalent
> f the FCC) four months after and was approved because I
had a GDO (Grid Dip
> scillator) so I could determine that I was not
transmitting out of band
> i..hi.. They even measured the level of the third
harmonics and assured that I
> ad a plate current meter so I could determine my power
input level. I doubt if
> hey still do that. Aaaah the good old days.
> 73, Tony VE3DWI.
> ********************
> ----- Original Message -----
> rom: "R. Eric Sluder-W9WLW" <resluder@yahoo.com>
> o: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
> ent: Monday, February 24, 2014 12:03 PM
> ubject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>
> ohn:
> That is a great summation of Rick's words!
> Eric
> 9WLW
>
>> ________________________________
> From: John <jh.graves@verizon.net>
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 10:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>
>
> Rick,
>
> I think what you are implying,is that we spend too much
time spending
> and not enough time learning. How to make my antenna
work...Is this
> REALLY an antenna and what do you mean tune my
transmitter, it goes
> right to peak as soon as I turn it on. The salesman
said this will cure
> all the issues (pick your own salesman and issues) Oh
well. Ham radio
> is fun, and if you really work at it, your reading
speed will increase
> as well. Personally, I look for the articles I don't
understand, but
> then, why not!
>
> Cheers,
>
> John - WA1JG
>
>
>
>
> On 2/24/2014 10:28 AM, Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP wrote:
>> ...and then there were the receivers and
transmitters that we home-brewed
>> ourselves, which didn't have any frequency readout
on them at all. We had
>> to depend on the frequency printed on a crystal to
have an idea of about
>> where we were. I guess it was usually within a "kc"
or 2 of what was
>> printed on the front plate of the crystal.
>>
>> The term Hertz was introduced in 1960 but for the
first 5 to 10 years,
>> people were still using "kc's" on the bands.
>>
>> One of my favorite receivers was an old military
surplus National HRO (like)
>> which was the NC-100 series, with that huge knob
with even bigger skirts,
>> but with a readout of 0 to several hundred. Mine
had sliding coils inside,
>> rather than plug in modules. I don't recall how
many ranges it had, perhaps
>> 5 or 6. I believe mine was an NC-101X; can't recall
for sure. The only
>> readout was in meaningless numbers. Again the xtal
controlled TX helped to
>> locate the frequency. Despite that, it was one of
the most fun receivers I
>> ever had. That was in 1963.
>>
>> Back then we were worried about things like cw
tone, chirp, and drift.
>> Accuracy was not even considered. We didn't even
have frequency counters.
>> If you were lucky, you had a surplus BC-221
frequency meter, of course we
>> had no way of knowing how accurate it was
calculated.
>>
>> Now that all of those problems have gone away,
there is not much left to
>> gripe about, is there?
>> So let's take Hz.
>>
>> BUT WAIT . . .
>>
>> What about stuff like:
>> ..> Our transmitters are now the big challenge
of reducing the problem with
>> QRM on the bands, not the receivers; yet nobody is
doing anything about it.
>> ..> Some matchbox OEMs are still selling
matchboxes with Voltage Baluns in
>> them and calling them symmetrical matchboxes, which
they are NOT.
>> ..> Most Balun manufacturers are selling what
they call a 4:1 Guanella
>> Current balun, wound on a single torroid and
calling it a Balun, which it
>> definitely is NOT. It forces an unbalance all the
time. Yet they are
>> selling loads of them, and some poor Joe Ham is
buying this stuff.
>> ..> Some matchbox OEMs are selling matchboxes
with this single core 4:1
>> Guanella and calling it a symmetrical matchbox,
which it definitely is not.
>> ..> Several antenna companies are making
antennas with some random length of
>> wire or aluminum and a "magnetic balun" and
flogging it as a wonder all-band
>> antenna, and many Joe Hams are buying these in good
faith...
>>
>> I could go on.
>>
>> Now compare the list above with the problem of
being 30 Hz off frequency.
>> Talk about majoring in minors!
>>
>> How about we all get focused on the broadband noise
that all modern
>> transmitters these days generate, some less so,
some more so, and some are
>> really culprits. Now that's a technical discussion
that might someday lead
>> to improving our hobby!
>>
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> enTec mailing list
> enTec@contesting.com
> ttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> ______________________________________________
> enTec mailing list
> enTec@contesting.com
> ttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|