"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...


Yes, transverters can be a bit of fiddle. In the 70s, I made one to go
with my 80 to 10m gear (on 14MHz), to get on 160m. It worked OK, but it
was all a bit of a fiddle if I wanted to swap back and forth.


I built a europa into an FT101 speaker cabinet ....I had to cut a bit
off each end of the circuit board.... build a chassis..... cut a front
panel for the europa meter.....stuck in a coax relay instead of the
crappy bog standard one...... painted the front panel morris oxford
green.....stuck an ft101 fan on the back..........oh yes and white
leteraset .....and laquared the front panel...I surprised myself with
the result


sorry for the smelling in the above......So the Glasgow club asked me to
do a talk at their friday night meeting in the late 70's about it.......I
started : 'as I only want matching commercial equipment in my station
...ft101... fv101... sp101....I had to resort to building this to get a
matching 100w 2m transverter'.....that went down
well....not...........still got that chassis punch I used for the
meter...never used it again...tee hee

ah yes and it had jackson bull slo mo drives as well as yaesu knobs ....

did you know the original ft101 ser used British Jackson drives on the
vfo?...about 17 Kc/s a turn where trio at the time went from 20 on the ts520
to 25 on the ts530 etc.....why I always slag off trio ........but all said
the 520 was the best of the hybrids

"rickman" wrote in message
...
Sure you do. Every time to get into a ****ing match with them you are
feeding their troll and being your own troll. If you don't like what
they
say, just ignore them and it will all blow over. They only do it to get
you all wound up. And you seem to enjoy all the drama as much as they
do.
So just stop all the back and forth and we will see that you aren't a
troll.


I am falling into one trap and that is responding to the tripe that you
offer instead of a conversation. There is nothing gratuitous about my
remarks. I am calling the shots as I see them without bias. You refuse
to even consider that you are as much a part of the problem as the others
are.

I won't continue to discuss this with you, as I have said my piece. You
can either improve your behavior or continue as you have done in the past.
So show some restraint and prove me wrong, or continue to blame others for
your issues and prove me right.

Nonsense.

And with your series of gratuitous personal remarks you are fallling into
the
trap of becoming the sort of person that you seek to criticise.

Physician, heal thyself.

"Charlie" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 15:22:46 -0500, Michael Black wrote:

I saw talk somwhere about the price of punches. I remember them being
as "expensive" forty years ago, but still within range. But apparently
now they have gotten really expensive.

I've picked up a couple in good conditions at junk sales - no more than a
£ or two.

I've one for punching holes for the D serial port connector, but
not much use for radio.

"gareth" wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
Sure you do. Every time to get into a ****ing match with them you are
feeding their troll and being your own troll. If you don't like what
they
say, just ignore them and it will all blow over. They only do it to get
you all wound up. And you seem to enjoy all the drama as much as they
do.
So just stop all the back and forth and we will see that you aren't a
troll.


I am falling into one trap and that is responding to the tripe that you
offer instead of a conversation. There is nothing gratuitous about my
remarks. I am calling the shots as I see them without bias. You refuse
to even consider that you are as much a part of the problem as the others
are.

I won't continue to discuss this with you, as I have said my piece. You
can either improve your behavior or continue as you have done in the past.
So show some restraint and prove me wrong, or continue to blame others for
your issues and prove me right.

Nonsense.

And with your series of gratuitous personal remarks you are fallling into
the
trap of becoming the sort of person that you seek to criticise.

Physician, heal thyself.

Reported to ISP for off-topic posting and monumental stupidity.

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 07/03/15 10:33, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
Sure you do. Every time to get into a ****ing match with them you are
feeding their troll and being your own troll. If you don't like what
they
say, just ignore them and it will all blow over. They only do it to get
you all wound up. And you seem to enjoy all the drama as much as they
do.
So just stop all the back and forth and we will see that you aren't a
troll.


I am falling into one trap and that is responding to the tripe that you
offer instead of a conversation. There is nothing gratuitous about my
remarks. I am calling the shots as I see them without bias. You refuse
to even consider that you are as much a part of the problem as the others
are.

I won't continue to discuss this with you, as I have said my piece. You
can either improve your behavior or continue as you have done in the past.
So show some restraint and prove me wrong, or continue to blame others for
your issues and prove me right.

Nonsense.

And with your series of gratuitous personal remarks you are fallling into
the
trap of becoming the sort of person that you seek to criticise.

Physician, heal thyself.



Reported to ISP for complete lack of self-awareness.

rickman wrote:
On 3/7/2015 3:01 AM, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
On 3/7/2015 2:56 AM, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Gareth can't stop, causing trouble on Usenet is this perverse
compulsion
of
his.

Yeah, I could live with his nonsense as I find it rather harmless. It
is
when a few here get their jollies by provoking him that it really turns
me
off. Sure, correct him when he is wrong, but why turn it into a public
spectacle?

In fact....you are now in danger of brian and steve starting on you
because
of your benign attitude to gareth .....

Whatever... bring it


Rick

but they won't do it now just to spite me.....

Ok, now that we are finished with that. Anything about the biscuit idea?

Sadly, Jim is as thick as pig****. He'll have nothing constructive to add
to the conversation.

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 06/03/2015 15:07, rickman wrote:

I didn't know about these things. Pretty amazing. A UHF/VHF tuner for
under $10 on eBay. Which one do you have?

I have 3 (because they are so cheap) they are are just generic usb TV
dongles based on the RT2832 chipset.
They are remarkably versatile devices and can pull in a lot of
interesting data. There is a thriving community online, they can tell
you far more than I can.

You do have to be prepared to get you hands dirty with some coding as
off-the-shelf sdr software for the devices are not quite there but all
the various bits are available you just need to stitch the code together
yourself.

You can even use them for radio astronomy - I have not tried this but it
could be fun.

Andy

On 06/03/2015 19:04, Brian Reay wrote:

I've not used it much. I was curious and decided to try one. I don't
like radios you 'drive' from a keyboard or computer, I prefer the
traditional front panel.

For a self- coded radio it should be a breeze to add your own 'dials and
knobs' front end.
I have to agree that inputting a number or clicking the sweep button is
not the same and turning a heavy tuning dial but it does produce a hell
of a lot more useful data than an older radio.

However - like MP3s and vinyl, they just don't have the same richness of
sound as a proper radio.

Andy

On 09/03/2015 08:28, AndyW wrote:
On 06/03/2015 19:04, Brian Reay wrote:

I've not used it much. I was curious and decided to try one. I don't
like radios you 'drive' from a keyboard or computer, I prefer the
traditional front panel.

For a self- coded radio it should be a breeze to add your own 'dials and
knobs' front end.
I have to agree that inputting a number or clicking the sweep button is
not the same and turning a heavy tuning dial but it does produce a hell
of a lot more useful data than an older radio.

Agreed but the attraction of SDRs is the 'tweakability' and, if you
build it all into a box with, say, a modest uP to handle the comms to
the dongle, drive a display, etc. etc. and run any other software of
course, 'tweaking', while still possible, is more of a faff. Not quite
the worst of both worlds but certainly heading that way.

Of course, others many like this approach, it is a matter of taste.

Likewise, having a control panel, or controls, which connect to the PC,
really doesn't appeal.

Occasionally, I operate a station in the US remotely but I find it a
'fiddle', I don't even care to do it locally. Again, others enjoy it,
each to his own, it just isn't something I enjoy. Just as I don't enjoy
reading books etc. from things like Kindles, although I am trying to get
used to that.

On Mon, 9 Mar 2015, Brian Reay wrote:

On 09/03/2015 08:28, AndyW wrote:
On 06/03/2015 19:04, Brian Reay wrote:

I've not used it much. I was curious and decided to try one. I don't
like radios you 'drive' from a keyboard or computer, I prefer the
traditional front panel.

For a self- coded radio it should be a breeze to add your own 'dials and
knobs' front end.
I have to agree that inputting a number or clicking the sweep button is
not the same and turning a heavy tuning dial but it does produce a hell
of a lot more useful data than an older radio.

Agreed but the attraction of SDRs is the 'tweakability' and, if you build it
all into a box with, say, a modest uP to handle the comms to the dongle,
drive a display, etc. etc. and run any other software of course, 'tweaking',
while still possible, is more of a faff. Not quite the worst of both worlds
but certainly heading that way.

But that is what's happening in commercial radios, it's just less a
visible process.

They hide the computer and software behind the panel, they lay on software
that interfaces the controls with that software. Done well, you can't
tell what's real and not. 20 years ago, it was probably software between
the panel and the radio internels, except software wasn't involved in
processing the signal. Now the software is doing so much more, and if it's
written well, still invisible.

I'd figure out what controls are necessary to be controls as we know them.
Certainly a tuning knob, maybe some other things. WIth software, you can
always reallocate them to some other function, so long as you have them
there. I recall complaints about menu based front panels, in test
equipment if not amateur radio equipment, where you can decide what
controls get primary status and such.

Michael