Tic-Ring Motor Assembly

[K8DO at aol.com]

>  What i found was that the pot gear was not engaging with 
>its mate sufficiently and at some point in the rotation, though 
>turing, the the control box didn't know it because the pot wasn't 
>being drivin.  Obviously, this is not good for the coax. 

Thanks for sharing this tip..... I will add this to my file of Tic Ring
fixes...
 
To separate the pot slipping, from the ring gear jumping teeth on the drive
gear, will require some detective work.... the surest way is to be on the
tower to observe the inside of the motor box as the unit is rotated... (be
_very_ careful)... 

Or, if you can take the control box outside so that you can see the ring and
the meter at the same time you should be able to tell if the ring continues
to rotate as the meter stalls, versus the meter moving while the ring
stalls...

The biggest headache is the intermittent problem where you can't observe it
happen...  then you have to assume that you have both problems... you will
need to shim the pot, as well as improve the mesh on the ring to the drive
gear...

Let me also say, that the Tic Ring Rotor is a good unit and does not have
frequent problems.. The problems it does have can be baffling because the
construction and operation of htis unit is so different from the standard
rotor we are all familiar with.. the reason for the recent chatter on this
topic is to improve our knowledge...it does not indicate that there is a
crises among ring owners...

Denny

>From aa4lr at radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR)  Thu Feb 29 16:27:37 1996
From: aa4lr at radio.org (Bill Coleman AA4LR) (Bill Coleman AA4LR)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 12:27:37 -0400
Subject: Contest cq-ing
Message-ID: <v01540b06ad5b80bbdd35@[206.28.194.40]>

>I, too, resent extensive contest cq-ing that is (1) on an otherwise busy
>and open band and (2) does not result in a QSO for the caller for long,
>long stretches at a time.

The two seem to be in conflict. If the band is busy and open, why would
cq-ing be unproductive?

>  I heard lots of this kind of thing on the 160
>m SSB test.  Guys load up at 1.835.25, claim not to be in the window, and
>then call cq with no answers for twenty to thirty minutes at a time.

You sat and listened to folks calling CQ (without an answer) for thirty minutes?

My experience with calling CQ (low power) is that I don't have enough
"oomph" to get sustained runs, but instead get little "bursts" of runs. I
might call CQ for 3 minutes, get a run of 3-5 stations, and then call CQ
for another 3 minutes. I know S & P rates of more than 30/hr are very hard
late in a contest, so I'm loath to abandon this practice until the rates
drop or I just get tired of it.

Now, I didn't operate the 160 (no antennas), but unless you sat there for
the whole time and listened every moment, it is hard to tell whether or not
someone has worked some Qs in the last 30 minutes.

Frankly, I don't see how anyone could sit and mindlessly press F1 for 30
minutes without SOMETHING happening. And it isn't very likely that a second
radio was preoccupying them in a single-band contest.

Of course, it could be they set their DVP to repeat and went to take a nap.....


Bill Coleman, AA4LR      Mail: aa4lr at radio.org
Quote: "Not in a thousand years will man ever fly!"
            -- Wilbur Wright, 1901



>From silver at ax.apc.org (Carlos Augusto Silveira Pereira)  Thu Feb 29 17:25:31 1996
From: silver at ax.apc.org (Carlos Augusto Silveira Pereira) (Carlos Augusto Silveira Pereira)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 14:25:31 -0300
Subject: ARRL SSB CONTEST
Message-ID: <199602291725.OAA01521 at fama.ibase.br>

I have just finished a 20m QSO with K6PIZ, Ron and I am frightned with the idea of trying 20 meters this weekend. I wasted 30 minutes calling on 14225 with
my Cushcraft R4 and 800W and only Ron came back (weak - RS 45).

Two weeks ago I was in the ARRL CW Contest and with 30 minutes I had 50 contacts. Anyway guys, look for me above 14225 and above 7225(split). 

73,

Carlos - PY1CAS
E-mail: silver at ax.apc.org