RadioBanter - View Single Post

September 29th 04, 08:47 PM

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Now consider how much error we're talking about. Some rigs used
heterodyne xtals as high as ~40 MHz on 10 meters. .005% works out to
2000 Hz on a 40 MHz xtal *before correction*. So the worst case could
be a total variation of maybe 4 kHz if one was high and another low -
on 10 meters. On the lower bands the error is less.

But, there is ERROR! Error! Incorrect! Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-)

But all this is pretty meaningless because even the lower-priced rigs
have built-in calibrators and VFO/PTO calibration adjustment (usually
a dial pointer adjustment). The Heath SB-line, which isn't topshelf
stuff by any stretch of the imagination, had builtin calibrators, a
linear VFO and dial adjustment. In the early 1960s, at a price far
below Collins or Drake.

Riiight...you used and tested every one, dintcha? :-)

The digital-dial rigs like the TT Orion D and Corsair avoided the
problem by using a built-in custom frequency counter to actually count
the various oscillators. IIRC, this concept first appeared
commercially in the amateur market in the DG-5 accessory to the
TS-520S.

Riiiight...and you used and tested those, too? :-)

Collins amateur gear was much less expensive than commercial or
military equipment of the same vintage, and more suited to typical
amateur use. Most hams are not going to be using their equipment at
+85 C or -55 C.

Tsk. Not playing the heroic instant Emergency Communicator,
ready for every emergency when the commercial infrastructure fails?

Riiiight...all ham activity happens at "normal room temperature."

Hi hi.

There's also quite a bit of FM in use by hams on 10 meters. Plus FSK
is a form of FM...

"Real" hams use CW to DX on HF. Ho hum.

Let's take a look at those phrases:

Yes. Go over and over and over and over and over and over them
until you tire out the opposition to your golden words of truth and
beauty (which are never ever wrong). :-)

LHA: "All those subbands are simply for "staking out territory." "

That's my opinion and I'm holding to that.

If you don't like it, TS.

They were actually about creating an incentive to learn more theory
without losing access to a band or mode.

If that's your evaluation, then you are badly in need of something
to relieve your mental constipation.

LHA: "None of that elaborate U.S. subdivision would be possible
without the modern frequency synthesizers that were NOT developed for
amateur radio but adopted for that particular market."

That's a corollary to my subdivision opinion.

Again, if you don't like that opinion, TS for you. :-)

Repeatedly proven to be incorrect, in error, and without any basis in
fact. Hams then and now are able to stay within their bands and
subbands without any need for "modern frequency synthesizers".

Oooooooo! "repeatedly 'proven' to be incorrect, in error and without
any basis in fact! Ooooooo. Tsk, tsk. :-)

Geez, better get an Exorcist, you are going to proclaim me the
AntiChrist next. :-)

It is not clear to whom Len refers as "ivy-decorated in here". If he
is referring to me (Jim, N2EY), he's completely wrong, because I could
explain both PLL and DDS designs at length and in detail.

Riiiiight...you've got lots and lots of industry experience in that,
many products on the market...just like you were in the space
business so long that you could call others "wrong" about having
opinions opposite to your "expertise."

Neither HF rig in current use at N2EY is expensive or "ready built".
But they work, are on the air regularly, meet FCC regulations, and do
their jobs well.

I suppose next you have Proof of Performance papers, fully
notarized and witnessed, that they are ipsy-pipsy "within spec?"

I can explain how they work in detail. I'll even draw you schematics
of the Southgate Type 7 from memory. (It ain't simple, either). Amazes
shack visitors of all ages and levels of technical ability.

Tsk. You've yet to explain that "Southgate Type 7." [other than the
unusual name] Does it appear in ham literature? In Nobel archives?

Just my particular brand of fun in ham radio.

Trying always to be the Superior in anything is fun for the ego-
driven. Lots of PCTA extras in here (practically all of them) get
their jollies that way.

What's wrong with any of that?

Nothing "wrong" with that other than taking over the flow of debate
with your pet fun-and-games and promoting morse well over and
above any valid reasons for keeping the morse code test.

But, you consider yourself Superior and therefore "must" triumph
in all things. :-)

The K2 has a single-loop PLL LO that achieves very low phase noise by
an ingenious design. This design intentionally trades off some
accuracy and general coverage reception in order to improve phase
noise, simplicity and power consumption. Its performance against
"ready built" transceivers costing much more is well documented.

Jimmie has a K2. Naturally it is "superior" to all others.

It wasn't designed by Len. I doubt very much he understands how it
works, nor could he explain it....;-)

Jimmie designed the K2? :-)

Which is to say, none of them are perfect!

Len's errors here prove he's not perfect either...

Heavens...Jimmie wants PERFECTION in all things!

Naturally, PCTA extras are "always perfect" in everything?

Of course they are. They will tell you right off... :-)

The fact that we amateurs are actually designing, building and using
rigs on the air seems to bother Len no end. The fact that we are using
equipment, modes and technologies he has not personally blessed seems
to bother him even more.

Doesn't bother me a bit. :-)

I've still "done" modes, modulations far more than is allowed in the
U.S. ham bands. [that even includes CW, heh heh heh]

It's a bit irritating when everyone uses verbatim sales ad phrasing
and OTHERS reviews as Gospel as if they themselves have used
and operated all the equipment they mention.

Not chewing up or spitting out anybody, Dave. Just pointing out a few
errors of Len's. He makes it easy, really.

Isn't it awful? There oughta be a law against anyone having opinions
opposing the PCTA extras!

Recall the original claims that started all of this, and how Len keeps
trying to avoid admitting his mistakes:

"All those subbands are simply for "staking out territory." "

That's my opinion and I'm staying with it.

"I doubt that even the most ivy-decorated in here could explain how to
make a PLL subsystem that achieves 10 Hz resolution using 10 KHz
references for their PFD. I wouldn't even bother asking them if they
knew how a DDS works... :-)"

Tsk. When I preparing to buy my Icom R-70 at the Van Nuys, CA,
HRO, I asked three hams behind the counter how Icom achieved
10 Hz resolution using a 10 KHz reference to all the phase-frequency
detectors. None of the three knew. Two of those were extras.

I got a copy of the Icom User's Manual and figured it out myself.
Looked like it was worth the money. Went back later and bought
one. Cash. It's been working fine ever since.

I'll have to go back to old checkbook transactions to find the
purchase date (one has to be EXACT for Jimmie da Perfectionist).
Needless to say, DDS frequency control subsystems weren't yet
in the offshore-designed-and-made ham transceivers. [this statement
ought to be good for another few weeks of Jimmie "proving me wrong
in all things" :-) ]

Well, Jimmie KNOWS how all that ham frequency control stuff works
so he doesn't have to explain "zeta" (that's a control loop damping
factor, Kellie) nor does he have to explain why a 10 KHz reference
is used (there's a technical reason) nor anything else. When he
needs to show off his Superiority (just about every day), he climbs
K2 and plants his flag on the summit and announces he is
equivalent to Sir Edmund (and probably Tenzing too) of the ham world.

By the way, the '190 and '192 up-down decade counters went
DEFUNCT on everyone's semiconductor production line some years
ago. ON Semiconductor will do a limited production run if you
guarantee acceptance of a lot of 2500 of the 74F190s...just the
thing for any teen ager's senior project, ey? Wow, guaranteed
"A" on a report card, maybe even a gold star sticker to boot. :-)

Tsk. All I got for using some 74S190s back in 1977 was a
continuation of a paycheck every week. Not as good as an "A"
on a report card, huh? :-)

The '191 and '193s are still in active production. I'm currently
using some 74AC191s, by the way. Want to discuss the differences
of the TC (Terminal Count) output between '191 and '193? Timing in
nanoseconds of propagation delay clock-to-TC, setup time to the
PL_not (Parallel Load for preset input), and maximum guaranteed
programmable counter operating frequency? [more "bafflegab" for
Kellie to bitch about, heh heh]

Pack up your pitons. I'm sure you will want to climb K2 again. :-)

BTW, I went to my other screen name and sent a couple of missives
in reply to you. That ought to be good for another year of bitching
about "false identities" and your saying I have "countless other
names." :-) Still "signed" by me with the ieee.org alias. :-)

Ayup, I'll bet you make a big thing about the "alias" too! :-)