Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Noone answered this question in the Collins newsgroup, so I try it here.
I recently inspected a Collins 75S-3B receiver, and I found that someone had modified the BFO circuit with the addition of a transistor (I have not determined whether the transistor actually replaces the BFO oscillator tube, or it instead just amplifies the BFO signal). The receiver works fine, but I cannot figure out the reason for the modification. I would tend to believe that: - either it is a well known modification (but for which purpose?) - or it was just a way to circumvent the problem of a weak BFO crystal that does not start oscillating with the BFO tube alone. As BFO crystals are not easy to find, that could be a possible justification. Thanks in advance for any suggestion. 73 Tony I0JX |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Back in the 70s Howard Sartori had an article published in QST concerning
Solid State tube replacements. He developed a line of "tubsters" for Drake gear and later did some for Collins gear. You may just have one of his in the rig or one someone built from a construction article. Dick K8WHA __________________________ "Antonio Vernucci" wrote in message ... Noone answered this question in the Collins newsgroup, so I try it here. I recently inspected a Collins 75S-3B receiver, and I found that someone had modified the BFO circuit with the addition of a transistor (I have not determined whether the transistor actually replaces the BFO oscillator tube, or it instead just amplifies the BFO signal). The receiver works fine, but I cannot figure out the reason for the modification. I would tend to believe that: - either it is a well known modification (but for which purpose?) - or it was just a way to circumvent the problem of a weak BFO crystal that does not start oscillating with the BFO tube alone. As BFO crystals are not easy to find, that could be a possible justification. Thanks in advance for any suggestion. 73 Tony I0JX |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi, Tony
It could be that someone added an emitter follower to the receiver BFO circuit, in order to bring the BFO signal to the transmitter via coax. A drawback to the S/Line is that the transmitter BFO crystal can be different in frequency than the receiver BFO crystal due to manufacturing tolerances, making exact zero-beating difficult in transceive mode. 73, Ed Knobloch Antonio Vernucci wrote: Noone answered this question in the Collins newsgroup, so I try it here. I recently inspected a Collins 75S-3B receiver, and I found that someone had modified the BFO circuit with the addition of a transistor (I have not determined whether the transistor actually replaces the BFO oscillator tube, or it instead just amplifies the BFO signal). The receiver works fine, but I cannot figure out the reason for the modification. I would tend to believe that: - either it is a well known modification (but for which purpose?) - or it was just a way to circumvent the problem of a weak BFO crystal that does not start oscillating with the BFO tube alone. As BFO crystals are not easy to find, that could be a possible justification. Thanks in advance for any suggestion. 73 Tony I0JX |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Solid state vhf and UHF amplifier designs? | Homebrew | |||
Channel-based AM tube tuner (was Designs for a single frequency high performance AM-MW receiver?) | Shortwave | |||
a page of motorola 2way 2 way portable and mobile radio history | Policy | |||
1N1239 Solid State replacement for 5R4 tube | Boatanchors | |||
Home brew 9 tube receiver for sale | Swap |