Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: staying up with the latest technology, receiver evaluation

To: "Thomas" <ac7a@cox.net>, <topband@contesting.com>, <w7dra@juno.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: staying up with the latest technology, receiver evaluation
From: "ZR" <zr@jeremy.mv.com>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 08:46:08 -0400
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
The RAK and RAL are arguably the best regen ever manufactured. There was a 
pair of them in Emergency Radio aboard a USN tanker I spent a few years on 
in the 60's and I used them often to keep my code speed up by copying 
numbers groups.

Ive a RAK-7/RAL-7 pair here the past few years and have been using the RAL 
more often with the pre WW2 QRP station with the TX being a Meissner Signal 
Shifter VFO with plug in coils.

While the RAK is a better CW radio due to a sharper audio filter its only 
goes to 600KHz. I havent made any mods to the RAL yet but I might add an 
outboard brick wall audio filter.

The audio AVC, actually a limiter, works wonders in T storm static.

These are not light, the radio is 74# and the outboard PS 41#. Remove the 
regulator tube from the PS for a big power savings and heat drop. Its not 
needed on a home mains.

Carl
KM1H



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas" <ac7a@cox.net>
To: <topband@contesting.com>; <w7dra@juno.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 4:04 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: staying up with the latest technology, receiver 
evaluation


> Mike,
>
> I had no idea what a RAL-7 receiver is so I did a Google search. I found 
> that it was built by RCA in 1930s, has 3-stage TRF front-end, and a 
> regenerative detector. There is a neat video on YouTube of a fellow 
> administration of RAL-6 which I presume isn't terribly different than the 
> RAL-7:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95N6boQ4bs
>
> I am astounded how good the receiver sounds on CW. It is unlike both in 
> sound and behavior any regenerative receiver I have laid hands upon. 
> Shoule you actually fire the RAL-7 up, it would be interesting to hear 
> your impressions of this 75-year old technology in light of what we are 
> typically using today.
>
> '73, Thomas - ac7a (in Tokyo)
>
> ---- w7dra@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> Barry Kirkwood's (ex ZL1DD, now XU7AEL) latest receiver acquisition from
>> Ken, W7EKD ended up in my storage shed. I have been interested in
>> possibly updating my  topband receiving capability and thought while it
>> was here waiting for shipment to give it an evaluation.
>>
>> Upon careful observation I see a RIT function along with digitally
>> selectable band pass filtering, and less than a 10 watt power
>> consumption, making it feasible for portable field operation and
>> dxpiditions.
>>
>> I don't know how many of the top performers have arguably one of the best
>> receivers ever built complementing their receiver stable.
>>
>> Now if I can get my son to help me carry Barry's RAL-7 out to the 160
>> Meter Contest Station, I will give it a thorough evaluation this WPX.
>>
>> Mike W7DRA
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
> _______________________________________________
> UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2425/5010 - Release Date: 05/19/12
> 

_______________________________________________
UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK

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