Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Highland Ham wrote in :
Unca Pete wrote: "Tim Shoppa" wrote in message news:426c859e-943c You can download all the above for free from the ARRL if you log in with your member ID. With all the old QST's available on the web, everyone ought to be a member! Tim N3QE I'll join the ARRL the day I can choose QEX over the QST forced subscription that comes with the membership. Pete k1zjh ================================================ ====================== Have you ever thought of JOINING ARRL, and using your position as a member to petition for this change? Change is made by those who participate. --N1GAK =============================== Agree with that ,although ARRL members should have a choice. If they prefer QEX over QST they should have that option. ARRL news is sent weekly by e-mail upon request .Moreover, members can access QST articles via the ARRL web site, and also can access QEX articles. Erm ... while I dislike contradicting you directly, I just tried to download a QEX article, afer logging in to my ARRL.net account, and got the following: : The ARRL Periodicals Archive and Search is both an index of articles and an archive of downloadable material. However, not everything in the index is available for download. : : The item you requested is not in the archive of downloadable information. This may be because: : : * Most QST material newer than 2005 is not available for download : * QEX, NCJ and Ham Radio material is not available for download I subscribe to QEX as well as QST, and really would like QEX to be downloadable. I see in my future a letter to the Powers That Be. -- Mike Andrews, W5EGO Tired old sysadmin |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Highland Ham" wrote in message ... =============================== Agree with that ,although ARRL members should have a choice. If they prefer QEX over QST they should have that option. ARRL news is sent weekly by e-mail upon request .Moreover, members can access QST articles via the ARRL web site, and also can access QEX articles. Living in the UK I have opted for the annual CD-ROM ,which is published in March ,including QST , QEX and the Contest Mag. covering the past calendar year ,which suits me fine. However I believe this option is not available to US residents . Perhaps something to go for. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH The ARRL derrives a lot of income from the QST advertisements. Decreased circulation numbers would cost them revenue. I'm sure the answer would be increasing the circulation figures for QEX, and making up the revenue there, but the logistics might be too great. That's why the QSTs are delivered on a timely basis stateside; stale 12 month old adds delivered by CD won't make the advertisers happy. I've complained about this in the past (dumbing down of QST) and was told that they are serving the majority of the membership with the current content. Anyway, I feel I might have hijacked Jimmies' thread, and I'll stop posting with this last comment. Pete |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lawrence Statton posted on Sat, Mar 21 2009 6:46 am
"Unca Pete" writes: I'll join the ARRL the day I can choose QEX over the QST forced subscription that comes with the membership. Pete k1zjh Have you ever thought of JOINING ARRL, and using your position as a member to petition for this change? Change is made by those who participate. --N1GAK CHANGE is made by those who cozy up to the Old Boys Network of the League. The arch-conservatives there want only ONE thing: Preservation of their rank/status/title and the ability to Rule. The rest is just PR BS to convince members that They are 'for' members. As a voting member of the ARRL (until end of March) for two years, I've gotten a chance to 'vote' just once and then only for lower positions; candidacy for Director was unopposed so the incumbent was 'automatically' elevated to another term. Some 'voting,' not. As one who has been around the electronics industry for over a half century, I KNOW all the styles of writing that are acceptable in written correspondence. After three such carefully-structured correspondences FAILED to get an answer (one Form Letter reply is not counted as any sort of real reply), there wasn't any point of wasting my time with them. The Editor of QST seems technically inept but appears to have the 'company man.' The Editor of QEX is technically better but could spend more time going over manuscripts to 'tighten up' some text and yield more technical explanations in the same amount of pages. QST's flavor of presentation is getting more and more like 'Ham Radio for Dummies.' Ohm's Law of Resistance is apparently 'rocket science' according to QST pages...if there is any in between the blitz of self-important PR BS there. Bear in mind I've been (first) a contributor to, then Associate Editor (for two years) at Ham Radio magazine back before 1990 and when I did not have any amateur radio license (just a First 'Phone granted in 1956). Yes, if one wants (marginal quality) PDF downloads from QST since the year dot, membership might be worth something. Most of those PDFs come with an inserted first page of copyright warnings which is about 450 KB size all by itself, always the same page. Makes a lot of difference in downloading over a dial-up connection. It is better to just plain BUY a CD of selected years rather than download the same thing over and over again. That has the advantage of greater monetary revenue for the League...something They NEED to keep the paid high- level staff in 6-figure annual incomes. With paid membership (and its 'voting rights') comes a 3:1 ratio of surface mail spam to BUY BUY BUY this and that as compared to actual worthwhile news/information. Good copy, cleverly misinforms the 'lowered cost of shipping' (on 'specials') as 'member money savings.' Never mind that I can go to HRO or AES outlets and get the SAME product over the couner at the SAME price with NO shipping charges. Shipping direct from Newington Hq means they are pocketing the difference local stores make as profit for reselling, another small revenue booster for the League. Not much, to be sure, but it denies any real savings to paid members. The usual rejoinder from League sycophants is "members get QST free!" as if that were an excuse. Hello? The paid advertising space in ANY hobby magazine pays the staff and most overhead (except fulfillment services, aka mail subscription delivery) to keep everyone working. CQ works that way, 73 and Ham Radio magazines worked that way as Independent periodical publishers for years until the advertisers had to tighten their economic belts. By virtue of being a virtual monopoly on amateur radio publications, the ARRL can offer the widest exposure to advertisers so, when economic chips started to deplete beginning around 1990, advertisers gravitated to QST with its demographic guarantee of about 120K 'sales' per issue back then. Just WHAT has the ARRL gotten for YOU in the past decades? Their influence with the FCC is dropping, witness all the Report and Orders footnotes and denials on dockets 98-143, 05-235, and at least three of the 18 Petitions for change in between those two landmark regulation changes. The ARRL hasn't achieved any new bands on HF except for 5 channels at '60m.' They never got a whole band to play hams-are-vital- and-important to the nation in times of crises. Five CHANNELS. As if the 'technical experts' there had never seen the giant frequency allocation chart in Part 2, Title 47 C.F.R. that shows where everyone is allowed from 9 KHz to 300 GHz...nor did they seem to have a handle on government radio use in HF. The 'WARC' bands came about in 1979 (at WARC-79) by the ITU, not the ARRL. ARRL has yet to join the rest of the IARU in going for any LF bands for amateurs as they do in Europe. For an excellent peek into thinking of the higher-ups in the League, just read their Minutes of Regional meetings. Most of it is just self- congratulary high-fives among the insiders praising each other. WE don't get to see any talks of 'change' (horrors!) in much of anything. You might say the Spirit of AIG had invaded the ARRL long ago. In between asking for More Money for the 'Spectrum Defense Fund' and the 'Foundation' and 'Buying a Brick for the Diamond Terrace,' Will the League soon be asking for 'bail-out money' from ongress? :-( Len Anderson, AF6AY Life Member, IEEE (a Professional Association) |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
AF6AY wrote:
Lawrence Statton posted on Sat, Mar 21 2009 6:46 am "Unca Pete" writes: I'll join the ARRL the day I can choose QEX over the QST forced subscription that comes with the membership. Pete k1zjh Have you ever thought of JOINING ARRL, and using your position as a member to petition for this change? Change is made by those who participate. --N1GAK CHANGE is made by those who cozy up to the Old Boys Network of the League. The arch-conservatives there want only ONE thing: Preservation of their rank/status/title and the ability to Rule. The rest is just PR BS to convince members that They are 'for' members. As a voting member of the ARRL (until end of March) for two years, I've gotten a chance to 'vote' just once and then only for lower positions; candidacy for Director was unopposed so the incumbent was 'automatically' elevated to another term. Some 'voting,' not. [...] Ok, understood, although the ARRL Handbook was "the" eye opener for me as a kid. But: Len Anderson, AF6AY Life Member, IEEE (a Professional Association) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Full disclosu I am also an IEEE member. However, despite numerous efforts by myself and others they could not even get the virtual communities off the ground and with that dreaded web interface they insist on keeping they never will. Now I haven't given up yet and one of the forum admins is also pushing to at least provide a parallel newsreader access. It certainly ain't rocket science. We'll see. Then the "professional" side of their member benefits such as the Financial Advantage Program or FAP. Yesterday I called for the umpteenth time because a new client of mine wants to see professional liability insurance. The answer: As usual they will decline to quote because part of my job is to design medical devices. The topper was when they told me that the IEEE plan does not cover any work for a company outside the US (this one is) even if we'd exclude medical devices. Almost dropped my water bottle. Is the earth still flat and at the end of the oceans we'd fall off of it? And here I thought they had made it into the 21st century ... Oh, and when I asked for a homeowners insurance quote a while ago the answer was "no plans available for the county where I live". To be honest, all this doesn't convey too much professionalism. -- 73, Joerg |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 24, 3:44�pm, Joerg
wrote: Full disclosu I am also an IEEE member. However, despite numerous efforts by myself and others they could not even get the virtual... You seem frustrated and are Venting about something that isn't even remotely "homebrew." When you pick up on a signature, that is a sure sign you are spoiling for some kind of Fight. shrug I've been getting paid for moving electrons around, guiding fields and waves for 56 years. I've been playing around with a slightly different area of electronics for 62 years as a pure hobbyist, not seeking some kind of fame or notoriety or anything else, just for the fascination of moving electrons the way I'd like them to move. I don't pretend to be an "expert" in electronics or radio...just one who has been around both the electronics industry (in rather different areas, not always of my own chosing) and hobby electronics for a rather long time. I'd thought that more people might be interested in some different ways to do the same circuit tasks, therefore I suggested those from time to time in places such as forums. Obviously not. Too many have THEIR "best way" on things and what THEY do is "so much better." Sigh... My enthusiasm for electronics got the better of me and, after a long absence of not bothering to post anything in rec.radio.homebrew, I brought up RELAYS as an ALTERNATE way of switching RF circuits at HF. I will apologize for that since I can (obviously) see that some have their "pet" ways of doing things and aren't open to suggestions. ------------------ I became a member of the IEEE late, in 1973. Dues-paying kind. Main reason was to add to my WORK knowledge...that which paid for my living. I did not go into it for any "benefits" package advantages because I had most such benefits already. I am not one to "fall" for professional Advertising (I am a "hard sell" for all salespeople). Under IEEE association bylaws, Life Membership is achieved solely by tenure, no extra monies involved nor are accepted to achieve that. On reaching Life Membership, NO dues are required, full membership is free, and members get the informative membership magazine "Spectrum" free every month. It is a Professional organization because it is all about the Profession of electronics. I regard myself as a "professional" for the simple reason of getting paid for work in that field, like that work, like that play (as a hobbyist) and have been doing it for over a half century. I've been fortunate (sometimes unfortunate) to work in several varied disciplines within electronics and got interested in those disciplines. Sometimes the different techniques could apply themselves to hobby activities and sometimes hobby experiments were useful in professional work. There never has been a clear-cut demarkation line of technology between avocational activies and occupational activities except as forced by certain groups within the overall activity. You will notice a "callsign" in my signature, that of an Amateur Extra class callsign group assigned by the FCC. I did not bother with getting my first-ever amateur radio license until some time in January 2007 and then to pass all test elements on one Sunday afternoon on 25 February 2007. I did that for two reasons: I was able to do it (and had the chutzpah to do so); it was a convenience to have the least restrictions on operation in what MIGHT have been an enjoyable pasttime in my retirement (I still work in electronics but only on my terms (therefore not often) and not in "regular hours." I run into the SAME sort of "I SHOULD have done it so-and-so" in nearly every field of endeavor where there are CERTAIN ways that things "MUST be done." In a burst of enthusiasm, I joined the ARRL immediately after getting my federal amateur radio license grant (one cannot be a voting member without that grant according to League rules). That was another mistake I made. That AMATEUR organization membership is expiring at the end of March and I am not renewing. As a hobbyist, that AMATEUR membership has offered me almost NOTHING in return. I have voiced my opinion on that AMATEUR organization in OTHER forums, to the FCC on amateur radio regulations, and enought that I don't wish to go into it here. Despite having started in big time HF communications 56 years ago, long-time amateurs consider me a "newbie," a "beginner in radio" and that is disheartening, taking away much of my interest in ALL electronics. In other forums NOT on amateur radio, I have been negatively criticized for being a member of certain organizations that the "expert" critics champion or dislike. For example, the ACM. the first professional association about computing worldwide. NOW, I see complaints about BENEFITS packages of the IEEE not meeting with certain individual's approval. I am not a follower nor an approver of Benefits Packages, nor a spokesperson of any kind for of those. There is very little in ANY Benefits Package that is of "benefit" in ANY homebrew electronics hobby activity. I will emphasize HOMEBREW. Radio. Electronics. For all my time spent working with, or being hobbyist in, electronics, many and varied "experts" have TOLD me in no uncertain terms that "This is the way 'we' do it in activity." I MUST do it as those "experts" say. Sorry, but having been IN the activity for a long time and watching the technology CHANGE, to have NEW ways and components introduced since 1947, I have to throw that didactic insistence (indeed a polemical philosophy) in the dumpster. If someone finds/discovers/innovates something while engaged in hombrewing some radio or other electronics, something NOT normally done but still follows established laws of physics, then it should be, in my viewpoint, be presented for other hobbyists. In the spirit of that being a possible useful thing that others might be able to use in their hobby activity. It should NOT be given in terms of "look what *I* did" as some claim to "expertise." It might be USEFUL to others in their hobby work. I feel that anyone who wants to discuss matters totally different than a forum's intended sphere of interest go find the appropriate forum to vent. I've learned one more thing in Life here. Do not indicate one's affiliation or pride or other personal feelings in a "signature" of a posting...others do not like that. No matter, my amateur radio license callsign can get my legal address. |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 18, 10:50*pm, RFI-EMI-GUY wrote:
JIMMIE wrote: I have 3 mast mounted nuvistor pre amps less power supplies. I was looking for information on these to convert them to use on the 6 and 2 meter *and 70cm ham bands. I may still have a power supply around but as of yet I havent been able to find it. The pre amps are mount in a somewhat egg shaped plastic container with twin lead connections on them. Im not sure of the manufacturer. Schematics on the amplifiers and power supplies would be nice. Directions on doing the mod would be great. There are plans for ham band nuvistor preamps around so if I could figure out what I have it shouldnt be that difficult to conver it to what I want. Besides that it will give me something to do with these old 6cw4s. Jimmie You would do good to find a 70's or earlier ARRL handbook. There were many articles about Nuvistors. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo *;-P Well I got a little 2M nuvistor pre-amp put together last night. Im not sure of the noise figure of the amp but according to my S meter it must have about at least 20 db of gain, maybe 30. I will have to take it into work were I have the test equipment to check it out better. Jimmie |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 27, 3:59*am, JIMMIE wrote:
On Mar 18, 10:50*pm, RFI-EMI-GUY wrote: JIMMIE wrote: I have 3 mast mounted nuvistor pre amps less power supplies. I was looking for information on these to convert them to use on the 6 and 2 meter *and 70cm ham bands. I may still have a power supply around but as of yet I havent been able to find it. The pre amps are mount in a somewhat egg shaped plastic container with twin lead connections on them. Im not sure of the manufacturer. Schematics on the amplifiers and power supplies would be nice. Directions on doing the mod would be great. There are plans for ham band nuvistor preamps around so if I could figure out what I have it shouldnt be that difficult to conver it to what I want. Besides that it will give me something to do with these old 6cw4s. Jimmie You would do good to find a 70's or earlier ARRL handbook. There were many articles about Nuvistors. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo *;-P Well I got a little 2M nuvistor pre-amp put together last night. Im not sure of the noise figure of the amp but according to my S meter it must have about at least 20 db of gain, maybe 30. I will have to take it into work were I have the *test equipment to check it out better. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Anyone know what kind of noise figure I could expect out of a 6cw4 nuvistor preamp. I only saw one reference and it mentioned 3db but mostly all the other references just talked about gain. Jimmie |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 27, 8:22*am, JIMMIE wrote:
On Mar 27, 3:59*am, JIMMIE wrote: On Mar 18, 10:50*pm, RFI-EMI-GUY wrote: JIMMIE wrote: I have 3 mast mounted nuvistor pre amps less power supplies. I was looking for information on these to convert them to use on the 6 and 2 meter *and 70cm ham bands. I may still have a power supply around but as of yet I havent been able to find it. The pre amps are mount in a somewhat egg shaped plastic container with twin lead connections on them. Im not sure of the manufacturer. Schematics on the amplifiers and power supplies would be nice. Directions on doing the mod would be great. There are plans for ham band nuvistor preamps around so if I could figure out what I have it shouldnt be that difficult to conver it to what I want. Besides that it will give me something to do with these old 6cw4s. Jimmie You would do good to find a 70's or earlier ARRL handbook. There were many articles about Nuvistors. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo *;-P Well I got a little 2M nuvistor pre-amp put together last night. Im not sure of the noise figure of the amp but according to my S meter it must have about at least 20 db of gain, maybe 30. I will have to take it into work were I have the *test equipment to check it out better. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Anyone know what kind of noise figure I could expect out of a 6cw4 nuvistor preamp. I only saw one reference and it mentioned 3db but mostly all the other references just talked about gain. Jimmie Hey OM The reason you see those high noise figures: Carbon comp resistors being used in tube circuits. The gain of the preamp amplifies the noise of the carbon comp resistors. Best is to use metal film resistors much lower noise. And squeezing 20db out of a 6cw4 that has only gain of around 64 or about 14 db is quite the feat. 73 OM de n8zu |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
AF6AY wrote:
On Mar 24, 3:44�pm, Joerg wrote: Full disclosu I am also an IEEE member. However, despite numerous efforts by myself and others they could not even get the virtual... You seem frustrated and are Venting about something that isn't even remotely "homebrew." When you pick up on a signature, that is a sure sign you are spoiling for some kind of Fight. shrug Not a pick of a fight, I am not that kind of guy. Has in part to do with my other affiliation (church). I just found it a bit strange when you blasted the ARRL and at the end in the sig line listed IEEE as a professional organization. Which I do not see quite that way. I've been getting paid for moving electrons around, guiding fields and waves for 56 years. I've been playing around with a slightly different area of electronics for 62 years as a pure hobbyist, not seeking some kind of fame or notoriety or anything else, just for the fascination of moving electrons the way I'd like them to move. I don't pretend to be an "expert" in electronics or radio...just one who has been around both the electronics industry (in rather different areas, not always of my own chosing) and hobby electronics for a rather long time. I'd thought that more people might be interested in some different ways to do the same circuit tasks, therefore I suggested those from time to time in places such as forums. Obviously not. Too many have THEIR "best way" on things and what THEY do is "so much better." Sigh... My enthusiasm for electronics got the better of me and, after a long absence of not bothering to post anything in rec.radio.homebrew, I brought up RELAYS as an ALTERNATE way of switching RF circuits at HF. I will apologize for that since I can (obviously) see that some have their "pet" ways of doing things and aren't open to suggestions. Not a pet way. All I wanted to do is show the pitfalls because newer hobbysits need to be aware of those. For high-powered stuff I also use relays, just as you do. ------------------ I became a member of the IEEE late, in 1973. Dues-paying kind. Main reason was to add to my WORK knowledge...that which paid for my living. I did not go into it for any "benefits" package advantages because I had most such benefits already. I am not one to "fall" for professional Advertising (I am a "hard sell" for all salespeople). Under IEEE association bylaws, Life Membership is achieved solely by tenure, no extra monies involved nor are accepted to achieve that. On reaching Life Membership, NO dues are required, full membership is free, and members get the informative membership magazine "Spectrum" free every month. It is a Professional organization because it is all about the Profession of electronics. ... I wish it was professional all the way, not just partly. The last FAP mailer from them with the "professionality" level of a credit card solicitation came Friday. Well, at least it was useful to start the wood stove ;-) ... I regard myself as a "professional" for the simple reason of getting paid for work in that field, like that work, like that play (as a hobbyist) and have been doing it for over a half century. I've been fortunate (sometimes unfortunate) to work in several varied disciplines within electronics and got interested in those disciplines. Sometimes the different techniques could apply themselves to hobby activities and sometimes hobby experiments were useful in professional work. There never has been a clear-cut demarkation line of technology between avocational activies and occupational activities except as forced by certain groups within the overall activity. That's a great career, when you can bring hobby experience into professional work. Same here, but only about 25 years pro work experience since my degree. Lots of homebrew electronics before that. However, I don't see this kind of cross-fertilization between hobby and professional life happen much in the next generation :-( You will notice a "callsign" in my signature, that of an Amateur Extra class callsign group assigned by the FCC. I did not bother with getting my first-ever amateur radio license until some time in January 2007 and then to pass all test elements on one Sunday afternoon on 25 February 2007. I did that for two reasons: I was able to do it (and had the chutzpah to do so); it was a convenience to have the least restrictions on operation in what MIGHT have been an enjoyable pasttime in my retirement (I still work in electronics but only on my terms (therefore not often) and not in "regular hours." I run into the SAME sort of "I SHOULD have done it so-and-so" in nearly every field of endeavor where there are CERTAIN ways that things "MUST be done." In a burst of enthusiasm, I joined the ARRL immediately after getting my federal amateur radio license grant (one cannot be a voting member without that grant according to League rules). That was another mistake I made. That AMATEUR organization membership is expiring at the end of March and I am not renewing. As a hobbyist, that AMATEUR membership has offered me almost NOTHING in return. Ok, can't speak to that because I was a member in the German club (DARC). But ARRL did one great thing for me: Very low cost books, full of very useful technical information. Lots of stuff and antennas were built with the help of ARRL books. I have voiced my opinion on that AMATEUR organization in OTHER forums, to the FCC on amateur radio regulations, and enought that I don't wish to go into it here. Despite having started in big time HF communications 56 years ago, long-time amateurs consider me a "newbie," a "beginner in radio" and that is disheartening, taking away much of my interest in ALL electronics. I remember that, in Germany call signs were issued in alphanumeric order (like non-vanity license plates in most states here) and some hams had the tendency of prejudice. Newer call sign ... aha, rookie. Which just wasn't true in many cases. In other forums NOT on amateur radio, I have been negatively criticized for being a member of certain organizations that the "expert" critics champion or dislike. For example, the ACM. the first professional association about computing worldwide. NOW, I see complaints about BENEFITS packages of the IEEE not meeting with certain individual's approval. I am not a follower nor an approver of Benefits Packages, nor a spokesperson of any kind for of those. ... Just my humble opinion: If an organization can't get commercial products like FAP straight they ought to dump them and not keep them to make a penny. It's unprofessional, no matter what organization. And PL insurance is not a benefit, it's a paid commercial product that numerous members direly need in this case. Note the other thing I mentioned, much more important: Member forums, has to do with learning, helping others, exactly what also happens in a hobby. It ain't rocket science to set that up yet they blew it. Like you were with ARRL I was twice just about to ditch my IEEE membership but didn't at the last minute. Haven't given up hope yet, but I've learned that one has to be rather loud in the IEEE to be heard. It seems there are strict hierarchies that slow things down a lot. It should not be that way. ... There is very little in ANY Benefits Package that is of "benefit" in ANY homebrew electronics hobby activity. I will emphasize HOMEBREW. Radio. Electronics. Right. Once you are retired, or mostly retired in your case, and insured by Medicare none of that insurance stuff matters anymore. But it does matter to the majority of members who aren't there yet. My advice to them would be: If you can't offer it as a decent product, don't offer it at all. Just like I (and probably you) would not want to be engaged in an engineering project we didn't believe in. For all my time spent working with, or being hobbyist in, electronics, many and varied "experts" have TOLD me in no uncertain terms that "This is the way 'we' do it in activity." I MUST do it as those "experts" say. Sorry, but having been IN the activity for a long time and watching the technology CHANGE, to have NEW ways and components introduced since 1947, I have to throw that didactic insistence (indeed a polemical philosophy) in the dumpster. If someone finds/discovers/innovates something while engaged in hombrewing some radio or other electronics, something NOT normally done but still follows established laws of physics, then it should be, in my viewpoint, be presented for other hobbyists. In the spirit of that being a possible useful thing that others might be able to use in their hobby activity. It should NOT be given in terms of "look what *I* did" as some claim to "expertise." It might be USEFUL to others in their hobby work. I feel that anyone who wants to discuss matters totally different than a forum's intended sphere of interest go find the appropriate forum to vent. I've learned one more thing in Life here. Do not indicate one's affiliation or pride or other personal feelings in a "signature" of a posting...others do not like that. ... Should be ok to do that. But people will see it and might react to it ;-) ... No matter, my amateur radio license callsign can get my legal address. Mine's DK9JK. Not active at all right now though. Once I retire I plan to sit for the US license exam just like you did. Probably will start back out on 15m and 40m, CW and SSB, and maybe some of the newer modes. -- 73, Joerg |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 27, 10:37*am, raypsi wrote:
On Mar 27, 8:22*am, JIMMIE wrote: On Mar 27, 3:59*am, JIMMIE wrote: On Mar 18, 10:50*pm, RFI-EMI-GUY wrote: JIMMIE wrote: I have 3 mast mounted nuvistor pre amps less power supplies. I was looking for information on these to convert them to use on the 6 and 2 meter *and 70cm ham bands. I may still have a power supply around but as of yet I havent been able to find it. The pre amps are mount in a somewhat egg shaped plastic container with twin lead connections on them. Im not sure of the manufacturer. Schematics on the amplifiers and power supplies would be nice. Directions on doing the mod would be great. There are plans for ham band nuvistor preamps around so if I could figure out what I have it shouldnt be that difficult to conver it to what I want. Besides that it will give me something to do with these old 6cw4s. Jimmie You would do good to find a 70's or earlier ARRL handbook. There were many articles about Nuvistors. -- Joe Leikhim K4SAT "The RFI-EMI-GUY"© "Use only Genuine Interocitor Parts" Tom Servo *;-P Well I got a little 2M nuvistor pre-amp put together last night. Im not sure of the noise figure of the amp but according to my S meter it must have about at least 20 db of gain, maybe 30. I will have to take it into work were I have the *test equipment to check it out better. Jimmie- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Anyone know what kind of noise figure I could expect out of a 6cw4 nuvistor preamp. I only saw one reference and it mentioned 3db but mostly all the other references just talked about gain. Jimmie Hey OM The reason you see those high noise figures: Carbon comp resistors being used in tube circuits. The gain of the preamp amplifies the noise of the carbon comp resistors. Best is to use metal film resistors much lower noise. And squeezing 20db out of a 6cw4 that has only gain of around 64 or about 14 db is quite the feat. 73 OM de n8zu- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yeah I used metal film on my preamp. I tossed all of my carbon resistors a few years ago after I fixed a guitar amp for a friend and he brought it back telling me how noisy it was. I traced the problem back to the NOS(40 years) resistors I had used. Like I said those were S meter db. ![]() Jimmie |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Preamp, RF amp and LNA. | Homebrew | |||
Preamp | Homebrew | |||
OR:Nuvistor plate(anode) voltage | Shortwave | |||
FA: Ameco PCL-P Nuvistor Cascade Preamp | Swap | |||
Ant Preamp AW-203-1 ? | Shortwave |