|
Title: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 03, 2006, 05:50:56 PM Hi!
Well, I've been using the new class E-Z transmitter for about a month now... and have run an extensive battery of tests designed to prove the robustness of the design under adverse conditions. To quickly recap the design: The transmitter is a 10 MOSFET transmitter designed to run about 300 - 400 watts of power. The RF amp uses a single driver IC for each module, and the rig is bandswitched between 80 and 160 meters. The modulator is a small Pulse Width design. The tests: 1) At full power, and under modulation, repeatedly short-circuit the RF output, both at the transmitter and along the feedline. Rig shut down each time; no failures. 2) At full power and under modulation repeatedly disconnect the antenna at several points. Rig shut down each time; no failures. 3) Attempt to operate the transmitter at too high current. Rig shut down each time; no failures. 4) At full power and under modulation remove the RF drive. Rig shut down each time; no failures These tests were repeated on purpose, and by accident numerous times. I am in the process of creating complete schematics of the entire transmitter, modulator and power supply. Also laying out a PC board for the modulator and associated control and protection circuitry. The design is complete from microphone to modulated output. The layout will accept up to 6 MOSFETs in the modulator output section (up to 1200 watts of modulated DC) and includes all drivers, pwm generator, 8 pole Butterworth input filter, negative peak limiter, tone compensation (mic preamp), etc. The builder can opt to not populate whatever sections of the PC board are not needed (such as the mic preamp, if this is not desired, or the output section, etc. etc.). The board layout is flexible enough to allow it to be used in a wide variety of applications and transmitter designs. I am absoultely looking for feedback, if anyone has any. 8) Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: K6IC on March 03, 2006, 07:35:19 PM Hi Steve,
Thanks for the update, many of have been anxiously awaiting this info. I assume that a brute-force DC supply is required ala the one for the previous design, just scaled for the required power of the RF Deck ? Some of us may want to get the critical parts on order, so a heads up on the Driver chip part #, and any other critical part #'s would be helpful. Thanks again for your efforts. Did hear U on 75 Meters, think that it was in early January, was approaching 2:00 AM EST on a weekday, and you were working some in the Midwest and West Coast. U sounded marvelous ! 72 Thanks again Vic K6IC Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WBear2GCR on March 04, 2006, 12:21:54 AM WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Sqeeeeeeeeeeeeegggggggggggg SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Feedback. :o Steve... what more can anyone say other than can't wait to see the schematics! Sounds fabuloso! _-_-WBear2GCR Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: w3jn on March 04, 2006, 07:08:00 PM I suspect most class E xmitter failures are due to people driving them with riceboxes. People forget and rrun a hunnert watts into 'em, or there are switching transients that blow the gates. Better to run with an internal VFO/buffer/driver, IMHO.
Look forward to the project publication, Steve. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 04, 2006, 07:21:55 PM John, I bet you are right on the drive thing.
Steve, Motorola tested their amplifiers with a length of coax hanging across the output to reflect a 30 to 1 swr and a good reflected vlotage. You might look at some old manuals. I've found a partial short a lot worse than a dead short. I need to get some of these cool driver chips for my 160 meter rig driver. Steve, Consider this. I provide a digital output from my transmitter at operating frequency. This way I can monitor my frequency with a counter. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WBear2GCR on March 05, 2006, 10:37:57 AM Seems like it's none to difficult to set up ur own Class E rig to prevent overdrive at the input. Maybe even a zener would suffice to clip the voltage if overdriven... dunno. Seems like the protection circuit that Steve has now will shut it down anyhow.. Perhaps I'm all wet on this. _-_-WBear2GCR Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 05, 2006, 02:01:59 PM Seems like it's none to difficult to set up ur own Class E rig to prevent overdrive at the input. Maybe even a zener would suffice to clip the voltage if overdriven... dunno. Seems like the protection circuit that Steve has now will shut it down anyhow.. Perhaps I'm all wet on this. _-_-WBear2GCR Hi Bear, The input protection is well established. For transmitters that use an external driver, we've been using TransZorbs (18 volt units) to protect the gates. Works like a charm! My new transmitter uses a driver IC, with a 12 volt power supply so the gates can't be overdriven. I still use TransZorbs across the gates just in case :-) Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: K6JEK on March 10, 2006, 12:21:26 AM Boards? You're making boards? When you get these going, I'll build one. I'm a lousy test though. I still run the 6 FET single ended with the class H modulator and haven't blown anything up since the original construction screw ups. Jon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 10, 2006, 05:32:29 AM Steve I know you've been self-conscious about the series of crap-outs most if not all of the Class E stations have suffered in the past few years. Brent feels awful and I have a lot of compassion while he was off the air.
I wonder if the type of MOSFET commonly used in your projects could be a problem? The broadcast industry's use of this solid state device, patented 30 years ago in the context of "Class E," has proven very reliable. It is because of that reliability that stations have been tossing out the old plate-modulated tube transmitters in to the grateful, awaiting arms of AMers here. I wish you the best in boosting the confidence people can have in a ham radio version of a Class E design, even if they're not likely to throw out their heavy metal if that's a result... Cheers, Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 10, 2006, 08:00:29 AM Steve I know you've been self-conscious about the series of crap-outs most if not all of the Class E stations have suffered in the past few years. Brent feels awful and I have a lot of compassion while he was off the air. I wonder if the type of MOSFET commonly used in your projects could be a problem? The broadcast industry's use of this solid state device, patented 30 years ago in the context of "Class E," has proven very reliable. It is because of that reliability that stations have been tossing out the old plate-modulated tube transmitters in to the grateful, awaiting arms of AMers here. I wish you the best in boosting the confidence people can have in a ham radio version of a Class E design, even if they're not likely to throw out their heavy metal if that's a result... Cheers, Hi Paul, Hmmmmm... Well, I don't think I'm particularly self-conscious about people experimenting with class E - any more than you might be if someone who experiments with a tube rig and has a problem.... :o I'm an engineer, and this sort of stuff is pretty normal in the engineering world. If we ran scared from automobiles, space travel or computer software each time someone had a problem, we'd all be riding horses would never have gone to the moon, and we'd be writing on paper ;) It's sort of like computers were 25 years ago. "I'll never have one of them dang thangs in MY house". To address Brent's issue - there are exactly 4 people, world wide (that I know of) who have successfully built class E transmitters as extensive as Brent's. That's quite an accomplishment on Brent's part (since it's strictly experimental), and he is certainly a pioneer. Yup, he will probably experience some problems because it's an experiment. Same things happens in ALL fields - but we LEARN from our mistakes. My hat is off to those who have the balls to get out there and try something unproven. To sail big ships you have to go where the water is deep. Everyone's Having Crap Outs? I don't think so! It would appear that the assumption that class E IN GENERAL is less reliable than tube equipment is a rumor started by users of the same. In fact, "most" people running *proven design* class E transmitters (once built properly and in regular operation) DON'T have crap outs... and for sure, at no higher rate than tube operators. I can site a number of such stations (myself included) who have NEVER had a crap out of any kind since the transmitter was built (over 4 years for my 5 class E transmitters on 3 bands). The nature of experimentation Like the experimenters in tubes, the experimenters in class E, building non proven designs may experience crap outs. I sure have experienced a lot of crap outs when I was building TUBE equipment because everything I built was experimental!! Well, most of the solid state transmitters on the air today are experimental. There is not a 50 year body of knowledge of "proven practice" from which to draw. Back in the '70s, tube equipment failures were rampid - it seemed EVERYONE was having crap outs. Fires, exploding capacitors, tube melt downs, arc-overs, MODULATION TRANSFORMER FAILURES, mercury vapor rectifier arc-backs.... How many times did I hear Tim WA1HLR say "So and so had a craaaaaaaaaap out last week". Well, people running tubes are STILL having crap outs.. I heard just YESTERDAY someone talking about their blown modulation transformer. In fact, among builders, improper transmitter operation, failure, constant modifications, rebuilding, etc. is common - tube or solid state. As I think about it, going back over my 35 years in ham radio, I know of a number of tube transmitters that didn't go a couple of weeks without some kind of problem.... because they were experimental in nature. Should I draw the conclusion that tube equipment is junk because SOME PEOPLE have crap outs? I could draw a conclusion that class E rigs are more reliable because many folks (including myself) are on the air daily and there are no failures. The fact from my own personal experience is, my solid state equipment is MUCH more reliable than any of my tube equipment ever was. And it sure is SAFER to build and operate the solid state equipment, that's for sure!!! Solid State Broadcast Rigs To answer the question about broadcast rigs: In the broadcast industry, most designs until recently were using an H bridge configuration, with very slow, very high power devices. The H bridge is self-protecting from a voltage standpoint. At 3.5 mHz and above, the H bridge design cannot be used for a variety of reasons - mostly due to the switching speed of diodes - internal and external - associated with the design. Another difference between broadcast rigs and short wave is, at broadcast frequencies, square wave drive is practical. This is a much better drive method (I'm using it with the new driver chips in my 2 band transmitter) because it reduces the likelyhood of parasitics. One of the biggest technical challenges builders of high gain, very low impedance, wide bandwidth, switching amplifiers face is parasitic oscillations. The best way to eliminate parasitics is to make sure the amplifier is not allowed to operate in the analog region long enough for a parasitic to build up. This is where the driver circuitry and circuit layout become very important. Remember, most of these folks are rolling their own physical layouts here, and herein comes a problem. If you lay it out correctly, and drive it correctly, your class E amplifier will be ultimately stable. Anyway, this is where my new design comes in. The design significantly reduces the driver and driver layout problem, and the result is a very stable RF amplifier. By the way, the early solid state broadcast rigs crapped out ALL THE TIME (remember that first Gates solid state transmitter)? I was offered one of those, and apparently, every device in the transmitter was bad!! Talk about catastrophic failure!! But, the industry learned, and the transmitters have become much more reliable. The broadcast tube rigs still survive lightning much better (I was in broadcast engineering for years). The main reason the broadcasters have migrated from tubes to solid state is the same reason I have - the transmitters SOUND BETTER, are MORE EFFICIENT (less expensive to operate).... and in the case of Ham Radio, are LESS EXPENSIVE to build than a tube transmitter with the *same capabilities* (if you could even build it at all!). Old Dogs, and do you "love" your Transmitter (does SHE have a name??) So, what's the conclusion of all this? There is no "tube v/s solid state - which is better" argument or problem. Experimenters have failures - tube or solid state. The "tube v/s Class E" "issue" is strictly emotional. People have "relationships" with their transmitters, particularly if they are big, expensive, and took a lot of work to get into their houses and on the air! And that's OK. It's part of the fun. I would never presume to say my class E rig is "better" or a tube rig is "better". "Better" is in the mind of the beholder. And, the old saying about "old dogs and new tricks" is also coming into play here. As an "old dog" myself, there are certain things I don't want to see changed... my transmitter technology NOT being one of them. Music - that's another story! But, a lot of "old radio dogs" LIKE the old, comfortable tube technology - it makes them feel nice - and this is a good thing :-) I like Rite 1 (a form of church service) and Rite 1 is very old and traditional. It makes me feel good - gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling of tradition. Amateur is derrived from the French word "to love" - and love is an emotion... and that's what this whole discussion is really about - and that's OK ;) 8) :) Fond Regards, Steve, QIX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 10, 2006, 08:12:12 AM Steve,
I don't understand the defensive tone in your posting. There was no premise of "tube vs. solid state" in my offering, and I certainly didn't posit that one is better than the other. I know there's been understandable feelings of not fitting in among certain people who are running your design, but it's the same, in my opinion, as people who check into an AM QSO using a rice box. Some folks are in awe of the classic big tube heavy metal transmitters of the past. They describe feeling dwarfed when they run a simple little box, or a project like yours that does not glow when it is working properly. You're to be commended, and have been, for promoting an aspect of homebrew that otherwise might have been overlooked. With all such experimentation there are setbacks, yours included, and recognizing that inevitable vulnerability is part of feeling satisfied when indeed the rig is successfully repaired or re-designed. Regards Quote Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? « Reply #9 on: Today at 01:00:29 PM It would appear that the assumption that class E IN GENERAL is less reliable than tube equipment is a rumor started by users of the same. In fact, "most" people running *proven design* class E transmitters (once built properly and in regular operation) DON'T have crap outs... and for sure, at no higher rate than tube operators. I can site a number of such stations (myself included) who have NEVER had a crap out of any kind since the transmitter was built (over 4 years for my 5 class E transmitters on 3 bands). The nature of experimentation Like the experimenters in tubes, the experimenters in class E, building non proven designs may experience crap outs. I sure have experienced a lot of crap outs when I was building TUBE equipment because everything I built was experimental!! Well, most of the solid state transmitters on the air today are experimental. There is not a 50 year body of knowledge of "proven practice" from which to draw. Back in the '70s, tube equipment failures were rampid - it seemed EVERYONE was having crap outs. Fires, exploding capacitors, tube melt downs, arc-overs, MODULATION TRANSFORMER FAILURES, mercury vapor rectifier arc-backs.... How many times did I hear Tim WA1HLR say "So and so had a craaaaaaaaaap out last week". Well, people running tubes are STILL having crap outs.. I heard just YESTERDAY someone talking about their blown modulation transformer. In fact, among builders, improper transmitter operation, failure, constant modifications, rebuilding, etc. is common - tube or solid state. As I think about it, going back over my 35 years in ham radio, I know of a number of tube transmitters that didn't go a couple of weeks without some kind of problem.... because they were experimental in nature. Should I draw the conclusion that tube equipment is junk because SOME PEOPLE have crap outs? I could draw a conclusion that class E rigs are more reliable because many folks (including myself) are on the air daily and there are no failures. The fact from my own personal experience is, my solid state equipment is MUCH more reliable than any of my tube equipment ever was. And it sure is SAFER to build and operate the solid state equipment, that's for sure!!! Solid State Broadcast Rigs To answer the question about broadcast rigs: In the broadcast industry, most designs until recently were using an H bridge configuration, with very slow, very high power devices. The H bridge is self-protecting from a voltage standpoint. At 3.5 mHz and above, the H bridge design cannot be used for a variety of reasons - mostly due to the switching speed of diodes - internal and external - associated with the design. Another difference between broadcast rigs and short wave is, at broadcast frequencies, square wave drive is practical. This is a much better drive method (I'm using it with the new driver chips in my 2 band transmitter) because it reduces the likelyhood of parasitics. One of the biggest technical challenges builders of high gain, very low impedance, wide bandwidth, switching amplifiers face is parasitic oscillations. The best way to eliminate parasitics is to make sure the amplifier is not allowed to operate in the analog region long enough for a parasitic to build up. This is where the driver circuitry and circuit layout become very important. Remember, most of these folks are rolling their own physical layouts here, and herein comes a problem. If you lay it out correctly, and drive it correctly, your class E amplifier will be ultimately stable. Anyway, this is where my new design comes in. The design significantly reduces the driver and driver layout problem, and the result is a very stable RF amplifier. By the way, the early solid state broadcast rigs crapped out ALL THE TIME (remember that first Gates solid state transmitter)? I was offered one of those, and apparently, every device in the transmitter was bad!! Talk about catastrophic failure!! But, the industry learned, and the transmitters have become much more reliable. The broadcast tube rigs still survive lightning much better (I was in broadcast engineering for years). The main reason the broadcasters have migrated from tubes to solid state is the same reason I have - the transmitters SOUND BETTER, are MORE EFFICIENT (less expensive to operate).... and in the case of Ham Radio, are LESS EXPENSIVE to build than a tube transmitter with the *same capabilities* (if you could even build it at all!). Old Dogs, and do you "love" your Transmitter (does SHE have a name??) So, what's the conclusion of all this? There is no "tube v/s solid state - which is better" argument or problem. Experimenters have failures - tube or solid state. The "tube v/s Class E" "issue" is strictly emotional. People have "relationships" with their transmitters, particularly if they are big, expensive, and took a lot of work to get into their houses and on the air! And that's OK. It's part of the fun. I would never presume to say my class E rig is "better" or a tube rig is "better". "Better" is in the mind of the beholder. And, the old saying about "old dogs and new tricks" is also coming into play here. As an "old dog" myself, there are certain things I don't want to see changed... my transmitter technology NOT being one of them. Music - that's another story! But, a lot of "old radio dogs" LIKE the old, comfortable tube technology - it makes them feel nice - and this is a good thing :-) I like Rite 1 (a form of church service) and Rite 1 is very old and traditional. It makes me feel good - gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling of tradition. Amateur is derrived from the French word "to love" - and love is an emotion... and that's what this whole discussion is really about - and that's OK ;) 8) :) Fond Regards, Steve, QIX --------- Hi Paul, Hmmmmm... Well, I don't think I'm particularly self-conscious about people experimenting with class E - any more than you might be if someone who experiments with a tube rig and has a problem.... :o I'm an engineer, and this sort of stuff is pretty normal in the engineering world. If we ran scared from automobiles, space travel or computer software each time someone had a problem, we'd all be riding horses would never have gone to the moon, and we'd be writing on paper ;) It's sort of like computers were 25 years ago. "I'll never have one of them dang thangs in MY house". To address Brent's issue - there are exactly 4 people, world wide (that I know of) who have successfully built class E transmitters as extensive as Brent's. That's quite an accomplishment on Brent's part (since it's strictly experimental), and he is certainly a pioneer. Yup, he will probably experience some problems because it's an experiment. Same things happens in ALL fields - but we LEARN from our mistakes. My hat is off to those who have the balls to get out there and try something unproven. To sail big ships you have to go where the water is deep. It would appear that the assumption that class E IN GENERAL is less reliable than tube equipment is a rumor started by users of the same. In fact, "most" people running *proven design* class E transmitters (once built properly and in regular operation) DON'T have crap outs... and for sure, at no higher rate than tube operators. I can site a number of such stations (myself included) who have NEVER had a crap out of any kind since the transmitter was built (over 4 years for my 5 class E transmitters on 3 bands). The nature of experimentation Like the experimenters in tubes, the experimenters in class E, building non proven designs may experience crap outs. I sure have experienced a lot of crap outs when I was building TUBE equipment because everything I built was experimental!! Well, most of the solid state transmitters on the air today are experimental. There is not a 50 year body of knowledge of "proven practice" from which to draw. Back in the '70s, tube equipment failures were rampid - it seemed EVERYONE was having crap outs. Fires, exploding capacitors, tube melt downs, arc-overs, MODULATION TRANSFORMER FAILURES, mercury vapor rectifier arc-backs.... How many times did I hear Tim WA1HLR say "So and so had a craaaaaaaaaap out last week". Well, people running tubes are STILL having crap outs.. I heard just YESTERDAY someone talking about their blown modulation transformer. In fact, among builders, improper transmitter operation, failure, constant modifications, rebuilding, etc. is common - tube or solid state. As I think about it, going back over my 35 years in ham radio, I know of a number of tube transmitters that didn't go a couple of weeks without some kind of problem.... because they were experimental in nature. Should I draw the conclusion that tube equipment is junk because SOME PEOPLE have crap outs? I could draw a conclusion that class E rigs are more reliable because many folks (including myself) are on the air daily and there are no failures. The fact from my own personal experience is, my solid state equipment is MUCH more reliable than any of my tube equipment ever was. And it sure is SAFER to build and operate the solid state equipment, that's for sure!!! Solid State Broadcast Rigs To answer the question about broadcast rigs: In the broadcast industry, most designs until recently were using an H bridge configuration, with very slow, very high power devices. The H bridge is self-protecting from a voltage standpoint. At 3.5 mHz and above, the H bridge design cannot be used for a variety of reasons - mostly due to the switching speed of diodes - internal and external - associated with the design. Another difference between broadcast rigs and short wave is, at broadcast frequencies, square wave drive is practical. This is a much better drive method (I'm using it with the new driver chips in my 2 band transmitter) because it reduces the likelyhood of parasitics. One of the biggest technical challenges builders of high gain, very low impedance, wide bandwidth, switching amplifiers face is parasitic oscillations. The best way to eliminate parasitics is to make sure the amplifier is not allowed to operate in the analog region long enough for a parasitic to build up. This is where the driver circuitry and circuit layout become very important. Remember, most of these folks are rolling their own physical layouts here, and herein comes a problem. If you lay it out correctly, and drive it correctly, your class E amplifier will be ultimately stable. Anyway, this is where my new design comes in. The design significantly reduces the driver and driver layout problem, and the result is a very stable RF amplifier. By the way, the early solid state broadcast rigs crapped out ALL THE TIME (remember that first Gates solid state transmitter)? I was offered one of those, and apparently, every device in the transmitter was bad!! Talk about catastrophic failure!! But, the industry learned, and the transmitters have become much more reliable. The broadcast tube rigs still survive lightning much better (I was in broadcast engineering for years). The main reason the broadcasters have migrated from tubes to solid state is the same reason I have - the transmitters SOUND BETTER, are MORE EFFICIENT (less expensive to operate).... and in the case of Ham Radio, are LESS EXPENSIVE to build than a tube transmitter with the *same capabilities* (if you could even build it at all!). Old Dogs, and do you "love" your Transmitter (does SHE have a name??) So, what's the conclusion of all this? There is no "tube v/s solid state - which is better" argument or problem. Experimenters have failures - tube or solid state. The "tube v/s Class E" "issue" is strictly emotional. People have "relationships" with their transmitters, particularly if they are big, expensive, and took a lot of work to get into their houses and on the air! And that's OK. It's part of the fun. I would never presume to say my class E rig is "better" or a tube rig is "better". "Better" is in the mind of the beholder. And, the old saying about "old dogs and new tricks" is also coming into play here. As an "old dog" myself, there are certain things I don't want to see changed... my transmitter technology NOT being one of them. Music - that's another story! But, a lot of "old radio dogs" LIKE the old, comfortable tube technology - it makes them feel nice - and this is a good thing :-) I like Rite 1 (a form of church service) and Rite 1 is very old and traditional. It makes me feel good - gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling of tradition. Amateur is derrived from the French word "to love" - and love is an emotion... and that's what this whole discussion is really about - and that's OK ;) 8) :) Fond Regards, Steve, QIX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 10, 2006, 09:19:06 AM No tube rig or solid state rig is indestructable.....sorry Steve
solid state rigs are a lot easier to build (if you follow the rules) than tube rigs, having done both. but then real men can design synthesizers and I will be the first to admit my synthesizer design is lacking performance. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 10, 2006, 09:54:12 AM Steve, Hi Paul,. . . Some folks are in awe of the classic big tube heavy metal transmitters of the past. They describe feeling dwarfed when they run a simple little box, or a project like yours that does not glow when it is working properly. You may be missing something very important - and maybe that's why some of us get really turned on by class E stuff - just like you do with tube equipment. Simple Little Box? I believe your equating of a project like a home brew class E transmitter to a "simple little box" is inaccurate. The only thing they have in common is that they're solid state. Would I get any more pleasure from an unmodified Sonar tube rig than a rice box? It certainly glows. But, somehow I don't think I'd feel a whole lot better running that thing than I would a rice box. I have received MANY emails and comments on the air about how much fun folks are having in building their class E transmitters, and how good they feel about using and owning them. Somehow, this does not seem dissimilar from the feeling you get from your tube equipment. In fact, it appears to be the same. Many people, myself included, are in absolute awe of putting out a high power, high quality AM signal from something that doesn't wear out, makes virtually no noise, wastes very little power, and is completely home built. I still at times look inside the transmitter, which looks EXACTLY like a vintage tube transmitter on the outside, and am rather amazed at the fact that it's doing what it's doing. But, one would have had to actually do it and experience it for one's self to understand. The feeling is EXACTLY the same. And, it is a feeling - like I said - this whole discussion is emotional. Class E rigs boring? "Don't have a soul"? Feel drarfed? Not hardly!. Don't knock it 'till you've tried it 8) Ham Radio Today - AM Today - and the Next Generation We have a problem in ham radio today: Rice boxes have largely killed off the "feeling" and personal satisfaction folks experienced as a result of work and accomplishment. And, the demographics and types of operators we see in the hobby today brear this out. We need to get the "feeling" back if we want the hobby as we know it (or knew it) to survive. Like it or not, we need to move to an accessible, practical, affordable and AVAILABLE technology for folks to build, get their hands dirty with, and feel good about. My 14 year old is studying for his ham license. Only 14 - he does not know about tubes, tube testers in every drug store, old TV sets, boat anchors or virtually anything about the 50 year old technology that WE know all about because we grew up with it in our world. It is not in his world. Not because of me, because it's simply not used anymore - except by a few of us "old dogs". My son's world is ICs, transistors, circuit boards, instant-on, etc. because everything he encounters from his TV set to his computer to his radio is made of this stuff. He does know personal accomplishment, the thrill of building something that he can use to talk with someone else, the feeling of wonder and discovery, and everything else that makes folks become involved in this (or any) hobby. He has already built a transmitter. From junk parts lying around the shack floor and some stuff from Radio Shack - solid state parts - because that's the reality of today. He needed a power transformer - 25VCT. Rat Shack had it. Good thing the transmitter he built didn't need a 450 volt transformer or 450 volt filter capacitor or a tube because he would not have known where to such a thing. Not to mention all of the other special parts (tube parts ARE special parts in today's world) he would have needed!!!! 20 distributors could have supplied the solid state parts my son used for his transmitter, reliably, and at low cost. And, he got some parts from old solid state stereo units and an old VCR. These things are today's version of the old tube TVs we used to get parts from many, many years ago. On AM'ers There is something very special about most of the AMers - they get their hands dirty with building and tinkering, they take pride in their personal accomplishments, are generally trying to learn more, and are generally interested in helping others get into the hobby. But, if we do not move all of that good stuff to a practical, current technology platform, all of that good stuff I mentioned will disappear when we do. In conclusion, I do not say class E or tubes are "better", but I can probably say, with reasonably certainty, that solid state transmitters are the only way we are going to inspire the next generation of hams into doing what we all did and do that keeps us coming back for more of this great hobby and the great thing we call AM and home building. Thanks and Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 10, 2006, 10:06:45 AM No tube rig or solid state rig is indestructable.....sorry Steve solid state rigs are a lot easier to build (if you follow the rules) than tube rigs, having done both. but then real men can design synthesizers and I will be the first to admit my synthesizer design is lacking performance. Well, of course :-) That is why I put it as "quote" indestructable "quote" :-) ;) I do enjoy the "real men" do (whatever) Let's see :-) Real men: . . . adjust the balance of their class E rigs when they're transmitting (Brent does this!). . . . use a 50 amp power transformer when a 10 amp unit will do because it's "more reliable" . . . put up their antennas during a snow storm (of course it will work better, too!) . . . attach relays to the side of their racks because it makes that "chunk" when going from receive to transmit . . . don't get freaked out when something explodes . . . like a little smoke in the shack from time to time - gives it "character" . . . think measuring AM power in PEP is for wimps . . . draw arcs of their transmitter's tank components just to show "it's working correctly" . . . make sure they schedule important events such as weddings, baby births, funerals and the like far from important hamfests like the Hosstraders . . . are not members of the Marconi net Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 10, 2006, 10:34:46 AM Hmmmmm.......................... This is getting good!! the ford vs chevy thing is still alive and well! I can argue both sides of this argument, but you know what, it is a lot more fun to stand on the side and watch others argue!!!!
Sort of reminds me of the old "I spent $3000 on my valiant" and no one can hear me thing. If no one can hear me I'll just take my toys and go home! (hee, hee,hee) Grab that plate cap, whistle into the mike, and hang on till your mega hurts!!!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 10, 2006, 10:38:50 AM Steve,
I apologize that today I seen to be having trouble writing clearly for you. I tried to portray my impression that there is a sort of apologetic entrance to AM QSOs I've been part of by some people, some of whom are on rice boxes, some of whom are on your MOSFET homebrew rigs. Each pays some sort of polite, introductory homage when they enter a QSO where classic tube transmitters are at play. Most of the people I hang with don't need any sort of deferential comment just because they're running big old tube transmitters, yet such comments are warmly received as the conversation welcomes the person in. Nice for all concerned, even though I wonder why such people are self-conscious in the first place. Many people have heard me go out of my way to try to dispel any feeling they should feel dwarfed or less-worthy, or whatever else they've given off. Maybe it's just a way to politely join up, I don't know. Next time I shall ask. The reference to a simple little box was not intended to malign you, and I'm sorry you bristled at what you thought I meant. The reference was to the contemporary modern transceiver, also not "simple," but certainly diminuitive and that's where I now see I could have been more accurate. In the posting, I said "or" to then cite my experiences interacting with some people using your homebrew design, and I had not considered the level of complexity they may represent. Remember that the comparison of tube vs. solid state, and characterization of "better or worse" were entirely yours, and that you now are spending time elaborating on those two points you made. I'm not there, and have little interest in promoting some sort of competition between what resembles a class struggle. It's probably more helpful to independently establish the merits of whatever technology, intellectual discussion, or other topic under discussion, and avoid comparisons that may unintentionally cause bad feelings. For my part, I'll try harder not to lump things together as seems to have been the case here for you. --Paul/VJB Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? « Reply #12 on: Today at 02:54:12 PM » Hi Paul, You may be missing something very important - and maybe that's why some of us get really turned on by class E stuff - just like you do with tube equipment. Your equating of a project like a home brew class E transmitter to a "simple little box" is quite inaccurate. The only thing they have in common is that they're solid state. Would I get any more pleasure from an unmodified Sonar tube rig than a rice box? It certainly glows. But, somehow I don't think I'd feel a whole lot better running that thing than I would a rice box. I have received MANY emails and comments on the air about how much fun folks are having in building their class E transmitters, and how good they feel about using and owning them. Somehow, this does not seem dissimilar from the feeling you get from your tube equipment. In fact, it appears to be the same. Many people, myself included, are in absolute awe of putting out a high power, high quality AM signal from something that doesn't wear out, makes virtually no noise, wastes very little power, and is completely home built. I still at times look inside the transmitter, which looks EXACTLY like a vintage tube transmitter on the outside, and am rather amazed at the fact that it's doing what it's doing. But, one would have had to actually do it and experience it for one's self to understand. The feeling is EXACTLY the same. And, it is a feeling - like I said - this whole discussion is emotional. Class E rigs boring? "Don't have a soul"? Feel drarfed? Not hardly!. Don't knock it 'till you've tried it 8) We have a problem in ham radio today: Rice boxes have largely killed off the "feeling" and personal satisfaction folks experienced as a result of work and accomplishment. And, the demographics and types of operators we see in the hobby today brear this out. We need to get the "feeling" back if we want the hobby as we know it (or knew it) to survive. Like it or not, we need to move to an accessible, practical, affordable and AVAILABLE technology for folks to build, get their hands dirty with, and feel good about. My 14 year old is studying for his ham license. Only 14 - he does not know about tubes, tube testers in every drug store, old TV sets, boat anchors or virtually anything about the 50 year old technology that WE know all about because we grew up with it in our world. It is not in his world. Not because of me, because it's simply not used anymore - except by a few of us "old dogs". My son's world is ICs, transistors, circuit boards, instant-on, etc. because everything he encounters from his TV set to his computer to his radio is made of this stuff. He does know personal accomplishment, the thrill of building something that he can use to talk with someone else, the feeling of wonder and discovery, and everything else that makes folks become involved in this (or any) hobby. He has already built a transmitter. From junk parts lying around the shack floor and some stuff from Radio Shack - solid state parts - because that's the reality of today. He needed a power transformer - 25VCT. Rat Shack had it. Good thing the transmitter he built didn't need a 450 volt transformer or 450 volt filter capacitor or a tube because he would not have known where to such a thing. Not to mention all of the other special parts (tube parts ARE special parts in today's world) he would have needed!!!! 20 distributors could have supplied the solid state parts my son used for his transmitter, reliably, and at low cost. And, he got some parts from old solid state stereo units and an old VCR. These things are today's version of the old tube TVs we used to get parts from many, many years ago. There is something very special about most of the AMers - they get their hands dirty with building and tinkering, they take pride in their personal accomplishments, are generally trying to learn more, and are generally interested in helping others get into the hobby. But, if we do not move all of that good stuff to a practical, current technology platform, all of that good stuff I mentioned will disappear when we do. In conclusion, I do not say class E or tubes are "better", but I can probably say, with reasonably certainty, that solid state transmitters are the only way we are going to inspire the next generation of hams into doing what we all did and do that keeps us coming back for more of this great hobby and the great thing we call AM and home building. Thanks and Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WBear2GCR on March 10, 2006, 11:52:53 AM Hmmmmm.......................... This is getting good!! the ford vs chevy thing is still alive and well! I can argue both sides of this argument, but you know what, it is a lot more fun to stand on the side and watch others argue!!!! Sort of reminds me of the old "I spent $3000 on my valiant" and no one can hear me thing. If no one can hear me I'll just take my toys and go home! (hee, hee,hee) Grab that plate cap, whistle into the mike, and hang on till your mega hurts!!!!! The Slab Bacon Ford vs. Chebby? Valiant? $3,000?? Everyone knows a Valiant is a Plymouth!! I've got a '61 Wagon, fwiw... (they called that a "compact car") :P ::) ;D :o 8) ??? :D Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 10, 2006, 12:33:45 PM Hey Frank,
Have you looked at a Chev Vortex block....= Ford Y block Y Block strongest hunk of iron known to man and a bitch to machine. classe Driver since '95 and have blown it up a couple times. I WANNA SPARK RIG Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 10, 2006, 01:21:09 PM Hey Frank, Have you looked at a Chev Vortex block....= Ford Y block Y Block strongest hunk of iron known to man and a bitch to machine. classe Driver since '95 and have blown it up a couple times. I WANNA SPARK RIG Frank, I have always been the oddball, I used to race MOPARs back in the 70's!! MOPAR big blocks (383's and 440's) are also "Y" block designs. they are also only 2 bolt main bottom ends. I never had any bottom end problems with my 440's twisting them well in excess of 7000 rpm! 3800 lb stickshift cars going 10.90's back then were a lot of fun!!!! THE SZHT HITS THE FAN WHEN YOU LET THE CLUTCH FLY !!!!!! And to Bear: A valiant is a Plymouth love them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 10, 2006, 01:47:07 PM ok, and uh, furthermore lets stir the pot a little!
I built my 4x1 transmitter around 5 years ago. It has run since then without any hint of a crapout. This includes bouncing it up and down the stairs on a handtruck. bouncing it down the road in the back of a pick up truck, beating the crap out it doing the "Special Event" things. We have literally ran the ba's off of that thing, and it still ticks like s timex" It is my own design with no help from anyone else in design or construction. It is truely an "appliance" all I do is turn it on and use it! And furthermore You should have seen the look on Steve (WB3HUZ) and Ritchie (KB2AM)'s faces the night that i disconnected the antenna connector and hit the transmit switch, and then went upstairs to make coffee! I left it on for a half hour while we did coffee and donuts! they looked at me like I was nuts and I just giggled. When we returned to the radio room, I killed the tx switch, reconnected the antenna and we got back on the air without even the slightest hint of a failure. So this proves that it CAN be done if you do the proper head scratching! Real men can pull a mean second gear and build transmitters that DONTcrap out!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 10, 2006, 03:19:00 PM Real men can spank second gear in about 3 feet starting at red line and never take your foot off the gas.
I used to offset the neutral gate a littls so it would slide in to third the same way. Lots a grease on the shifter guts and steal bushings everywhere. AND PRAY IT SLIPS IN and stays turning Then I worked on airplanes.....test pilots have 3 balls! I have to agree My pair of CG310s sitting in the bottom of the rack like a pair of ox yanking the 4CX3000A presents a lot more fear than .3F charged to 150 volts. But a solid state rig is the thing to use on a hot summer day. Who cares what you use it is the pride of rolling your own. I don't care what the active element is it is all in the taming of the beast. "It's not the kill it's the thrill of the chase"! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 11, 2006, 10:40:19 AM Real men can spank second gear in about 3 feet starting at red line and never take your foot off the gas. I used to offset the neutral gate a littls so it would slide in to third the same way. Lots a grease on the shifter guts and steal bushings everywhere. AND PRAY IT SLIPS IN and stays turning Dont forget to weld up the factory rubber handle isolator bushings if it was a mopar factory Hurst. 468 cid + 12.5-1CR + 320deg cam + 512gear + 90/10 shocks = 2nd gear with the front wheels still off the ground!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And you better be able to pull second QUICKLY! Boy, Frank, sounds like we grew up in a parallel universe! An eyeball qso could be a lot of fun, we seem to have a lot in common. I agree with you 100% the feeling of satisfaction that comes from "rolling your own" is one of life's greatest pleasures no matter what it is. I still remember the first day "maiden run" on the first real drag car that I built over 30 years ago. I was at Capital Raceway with a bunch of the the local "elders" that I looked up to. When I went up to make the maiden run, they all stayed in the pits and were cracking on me. They were betting that My car wouldnt fall out of a tree. All but 1, he watched me build it. When I pulled back down in the pits, they were smugly laughing when they asked me "How fast did it go". They all liked to have szht when I didnt say a word and handed them an 11.01 time card for the first run. Their attitudes changed dramatically from that point on. It only got faster from that point on! Respect in ANY field of conquest is something that must be earned, and the best way to earn it is by showing the "elders" that you can run with or outrun them whenever you want! I am sort of an ornry bastard by nature, it is just the way that I am. I love to occasionally "put one accross your bow". I tease and antagonize just about everyone close around me. It is really no fun when you do that to somebody and they get upset. If I put " one across your bow" I am full well expecting you to fire one back! If you dont / cant, I am usually a bit dissapointed! Life is far too short to walk around with your nose up un the air and a chip ou your shoulder!!!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 11, 2006, 03:28:37 PM Hi Slab B...
I just drive an old pick-em-up truck (Ford F350) so I can plow my driveway during those New England winters! So far, it's been a great LIGHT SNOW winter! Not much curb appeal, but does get the job done. Hey, you ever going to get back on the air :-) ;) Talk later and Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 11, 2006, 04:07:13 PM Hi Slab B... I just drive an old pick-em-up truck (Ford F350) so I can plow my driveway during those New England winters! So far, it's been a great LIGHT SNOW winter! Not much curb appeal, but does get the job done. Hey, you ever going to get back on the air :-) ;) Talk later and Regards, Steve Hi Qixie, I think you got me confused with the other Bacon, he is Bacon light, I am the "Slab Babon wit the fat meat shakin" all 270 lbs. I have never gotten off of the air, I was on last night till around 2:00 am. I am still very active on the air (unlike the "other" Bacon) (Hee Hee). We have worked many times and I have always complimented you on your signal strength. See, if you were on the air more, you would know who I am. Everybody else does! Funny, you should mention the snowless winter, It has been the same down here, I was just out cleaning out the garage. I just put the snow blowers away in the back shed and brought out the summer implements of destruction. It was near 89 deg down here today. It has me itching for a good long motorcycle ride!!! The Slab Bacon has become a pen name that I have taken, but that is another long story. The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WD8BIL on March 11, 2006, 07:02:04 PM I don't know if its indestructable or not....
But my 1988 F150 is set to turn 300,000 miles old this spring. I figure.... if it ain't brokt by now, it ain't a' gonna !!! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 11, 2006, 09:28:13 PM Hi Qixie, I think you got me confused with the other Bacon, he is Bacon light, I am the "Slab Babon wit the fat meat shakin" all 270 lbs. I have never gotten off of the air, I was on last night till around 2:00 am. I am still very active on the air (unlike the "other" Bacon) (Hee Hee). We have worked many times and I have always complimented you on your signal strength. See, if you were on the air more, you would know who I am. Everybody else does! Funny, you should mention the snowless winter, It has been the same down here, I was just out cleaning out the garage. I just put the snow blowers away in the back shed and brought out the summer implements of destruction. It was near 89 deg down here today. It has me itching for a good long motorcycle ride!!! The Slab Bacon has become a pen name that I have taken, but that is another long story. The Slab Bacon Wow, now I'm COMPLETELY confused :-). I'm on the air often, but I don't know at all who you are by that alias :-). I certainly was confusing you with the "other" Bacon!! Sorry about that. I'm sure I know who you are by call and not by "handle". :D Talk later! Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 11, 2006, 10:56:38 PM Good deal Bud,
My '88 Chev. 2500 would have had the same miles if some moron didn't rear end it at 145K right after the first major tune up. Timing chain, water pump and radiator. That was a good year for trucks. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 12, 2006, 11:07:17 AM Budley, That sounds like my old '88 ford ranger! I had almost 250K on it whan I sold it. I put it in the local paper and sold it to the first caller for the full asking price!
I loved that little truck, it was the absolute epitome of reliability. Come on, Qixie, I find it very difficult to believe that you dont know who I am! You are just about the only one of the major players from the northeast who doesnt know me by that name. See, you should have been around for more of those rapid-fire break-in sessions on friday and saturday evenings!!! I'll give you 2 hints, 1 I live in Baltimore, and 2 look around on this bulletin board! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 12, 2006, 02:46:55 PM Come on, Qixie, I find it very difficult to believe that you dont know who I am! You are just about the only one of the major players from the northeast who doesnt know me by that name. See, you should have been around for more of those rapid-fire break-in sessions on friday and saturday evenings!!! I'll give you 2 hints, 1 I live in Baltimore, and 2 look around on this bulletin board! The Slab Bacon Yeah, I figured it out right after the post. I do miss out on many of the evening QSOs. I'm usually not able to get on the air between 5:30 or so and about 9:30 or 10:00. I still have relatively young children, so I'm generally with the family between those hours... and my wife and I seem to go out on many Friday and Saturday evenings. I hear about it the next day, however ;) Hey, isn't that part of the "Amateur's Code" - The Amateur never lets his job, family or social obligations interfere with Amateur Radio!! Guess I'm violating it! Talk later and Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 12, 2006, 06:32:30 PM Hey Frank, I like to cook wop food too...but do you like pickled egg plant.
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WD8BIL on March 12, 2006, 08:18:25 PM Ahhh Slab.... I had an '82 Ranger (first year) and put 281K on it. Then donated it to a Church Farm and it's still haulin' corn to market fer 'em.
This 300 inline 6 cyl. in the '88 just keeps runnin'. Gas, oil, air n tires !! Oh, BTW, Steve, I'll be lookin' forward to the new transmitter !!! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: steve_qix on March 12, 2006, 08:35:24 PM Ahhh Slab.... I had an '82 Ranger (first year) and put 281K on it. Then donated it to a Church Farm and it's still haulin' corn to market fer 'em. This 300 inline 6 cyl. in the '88 just keeps runnin'. Gas, oil, air n tires !! Oh, BTW, Steve, I'll be lookin' forward to the new transmitter !!! I love the inline 6! Sorry to the group if I went off on a long winded monolog about this stuff. I type *way* too fast for my own good :-[ Open keyboard, insert foot? Face to face communication is the best. This solid state project has been going on for over 20 years for me, so as you can imagine, there was quite a feeling of yes Yes YES when things started coming together and really working :D I gave up and walked away many times (once for more than 3 years)... so there have been frustrations as well as joys. Thanks for the understanding. Regards, Steve Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? - nice Post by: wa1knx on March 12, 2006, 11:23:09 PM Hi Steve,
Nice work. I look forward to seeing your xmtr when I get back east. And hearing the tape of you and me doing a PWM to PWM qso with my 100w fet rig around 82-83, fun times. btw my very first fet rig was a VN67AF, around 1980. pushed out a whopping 5 watts. Keep up the great work Steve, you put E into mainstream. btw, I was very very impressed with the work and accomplishments that brent has done, when I saw his big fet rig. that is quite a project he did. Deano! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 13, 2006, 07:54:24 AM Steve, We have all had that feeling of frustration on a project, I have had some that frustrated me so bad that I was ready to reach for the can of gasoline and a match.
Then the light goes on, you find the answer that you are looking for,,, You throw your hands up in the air and scream "God likes me!!". We have all been there one time or another. It is just fun to take a poke at somebody once in a while. Bud and Steve, we have gotten well over 300k out of Fords 300cid 6's in company trucks. One of the best utility engines they ever produced. It is a shame that they dont make them any more!!!!!! Frank, I can cook dago food every bit as well as I build transmitters! It is a labor of love, you know, I think it is something in the blood or something! I put the proof in the eating, especially every year for the party! AND, UH, FURTHERMORE, I FRIGGIN LOVE PICKLED EGGPLANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I dont make it very often because my wife doesnt like it, and it is too much of a pain in the ass to make for just 1 person. My mom used to make pickled eggplant to die for! Now, lets talk about some holiday octopuss and squid salad.............................. The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 13, 2006, 09:09:52 AM We plan to do a jar this hostraders again. My buddy also does peppers.
My Dad just gave me a jar when I cleared his driveway from snow last big storm and xyl also does not like it. (Her family from up north) My buddy just got the procedure. I'm still working on my dad to write his down. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 13, 2006, 09:32:45 AM We plan to do a jar this hostraders again. My buddy also does peppers. My Dad just gave me a jar when I cleared his driveway from snow last big storm and xyl also does not like it. (Her family from up north) That is almost enough incentive for me to drive up there! The hell with radio, it sounds like we need to get together for a good old fashioned dago food festival. The "special event station" would be the kitchen. And the "operating position" would be the dining room table. Now, where is that bottle of dago red............................ The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 13, 2006, 09:52:24 AM Damn it, Frank, I am sitting at my desk here at work tasting friggin pickled eggplant!!!!
Now, lets see, Day 1 Peel, slice and salt eggplant stack salted slices on pan and weight down. set aside overnight. Day 2 Boil slices of eggplant in red wine vinegar and set aside to drain and dry slightly Stack slices in storage jar: EVOO, eggplant, sliced fresh garlic, red pepper flakes, oregano, EVOO Repeat layers till jar is almost full be sure to keep covered with EVOO Yumm Yumm I cant friggin stand it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 13, 2006, 10:58:01 AM Now my mouth is watering. I know what I'm going to eat as soon as I get home. I have about 1/4 a jar left.
TNX for the schematic. My Dad throws some other spices in I need to twist his arm. Sounds like the procedure my sister talked about. fc Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 13, 2006, 01:04:36 PM Oh, yea, forgot the nice fresh crusty loaf of itralian bread and a nice glass of dago red.
Maybe a nice hunk of some good sharp provolone....................................... Ahhhhhh....................... Life is good!!!!!! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 13, 2006, 02:16:18 PM I'm kicking myself now that you mention cheese. I built a couple dagwoods after loading fire wood yesterday and forgot to put some egg plant on it what an idiot.
I'll make up for it when I get home tonight.....Sorry you have none to go home to Frank. Hop a plane and I'll share it with you. You have till 6 or we will need to take a ride to Dad's and shake him down for another jar....... Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 13, 2006, 06:24:25 PM Frank,
My sister thought you only boil in the vinegar for a few minutes. I saved you a couple hunks. I walked into the house changed and made a bee line to the Jar. XYL asked what was my problem eating just before dinner. Northerners just don't understand...ah the after taste. now to butter up Dad for another jar.....when I return his empty. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 14, 2006, 07:34:57 AM Frank,
Your sister is right you only boil it for a few minutes. Yea, my wife is the same way. they just dont understand. Better be good to pop if you want that jar refilled!! It has been a looooong time since I have made them. I'm gonna have to make some after the party. You have got me craving that stuff. My mom used to make it all the time, but age has caught up to her and she cant do it anymore. I guess its now my turn to make some and share it with her. She loves it is much as I do. Its not that hard to make, just friggin time consuming. You know, its that dago thing! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 14, 2006, 08:32:40 AM [Hey, isn't that part of the "Amateur's Code" - The Amateur never lets his job, family or social obligations interfere with Amateur Radio!! Guess I'm violating it! Talk later and Regards, Steve Steve, I thought the "Amateur's Code" was to never let family or social obligations get in the way of a good "Strap Session" on the radio! "The Amateur is well balanced. He spends his time equally between trying to increase his antenna efficency, getting more carrier output, and making his munky schwing" Good talking to you on 160M the other night and hope to catch you in there again soon. Best Regards, Joe Cro N3IBX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 08:36:39 AM Frank,
My first grade buddy WA1EWQ just got the procedure and made a batch. He usually brings a jar to hostraders to go with stuff we cook on the grill. I need to get some ball jars. Yea, we need another big snow storm so I can return the empty and hope Dad has another spare. My GM used to make a pile of it when she was around. fc Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 14, 2006, 08:40:10 AM Oh, yea, forgot the nice fresh crusty loaf of itralian bread and a nice glass of dago red. Maybe a nice hunk of some good sharp provolone....................................... Ahhhhhh....................... Life is good!!!!!! With all the talk going on between the two Franks over GOOD food, my tastebuds are having multiple orgasms! If it smells like sharp provolone, I don't wanna leave it alone! Joe Cro N3IBX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 14, 2006, 08:46:05 AM Life is far too short for cheap domestic provolone!!!!!!!!!!
real men eat the real thing!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 08:47:45 AM OK Joe XYL gave me the last hunk of cheese left over from her making chicken and only have a few more hunks of egg plant. Maybe we need to talk about transmitters now. Poor Frank is going to be importing egg plant to cure his jones.
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 14, 2006, 09:03:48 AM OK Joe XYL gave me the last hunk of cheese left over from her making chicken and only have a few more hunks of egg plant. Maybe we need to talk about transmitters now. Poor Frank is going to be importing egg plant to cure his jones. Frank, Ever since I was an infant I LOVED the sharpest cheese you could put in front of me. My parents couldn't have a hunk of "Locatelli" around the house because I'd eat it - ungrated, of course. Even after repeated reprimands; I'd still go for the cheese. My parents told me I'd get "worms" if I ate it whole and that (somewhat) cured me. My father then learned that he'd have to grate the whole hunk so I wouldn't eat it. I'd just put my spoon in the jar and go for it greated! If you want to try something really different and delectable with provolone, try grilling it up in a frying pan with a little olive oil and serve it up whole. It's a real culinary experience!!!! I personally like the burnt parts the best! As we used to say: Acqua fresca Vino puro Fica streeta Con u gotz duro Beautiful women,good food and pure wine, amd I'm not going to elaborate on what else the above means - hi! BTW, I think "Da Slab Bacon" needs an eggplant (gagootz) fix! Best Regards, Joe N3IBX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 14, 2006, 09:32:01 AM Joe,
Panne fresca, vino buono............................................ My parents told me that if I did something else (Hee Hee) I would go blind. I told them that I was only going to do it till I needed glasses!!!!!!!!! Frank, I WILL be making eggplant for easter! To go along with the dago fish and octopuss salad. Remember, if it smells like fish it must be delish!!!!! Real men have garlic and olive oil in their veins, and dont mind walking arond with it on their breath!!!!!!!!! The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 09:43:47 AM I take 2 garlic tabs each day. The fresh stuff when I'm outside, keeps the bugs off me.
olive oil goes with everything. Easter my GM would make calzone with ham, hot sausage, egg and cheese. Mt uncle still makes it. I need that procedure too. You were very lucky to get a second helping.....I was oldest grandson so rank has.... Title: Qui a coupe la fromage ? Post by: WA3VJB on March 14, 2006, 12:12:29 PM You don't know cheese until you have Danish Havarti, block or sliced.
Ooooo La La Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 14, 2006, 12:32:38 PM You don't know cheese until you have Danish Havarti, block or sliced. Ooooo La La Too mild. Cheese isnt worth eating unless it smells like dirty socks. The sharper the better!!!!!! I guess its just that dago thing again. The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 14, 2006, 01:13:59 PM You don't know cheese until you have Danish Havarti, block or sliced. Ooooo La La Too mild. Cheese isnt worth eating unless it smells like dirty socks. The sharper the better!!!!!! I guess its just that dago thing again. The Slab Bacon Smelly cheese = minqua forte. If it smells like cologne, I leave it alone! Title: Re: Qui a coupe la fromage ? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 14, 2006, 01:19:58 PM You don't know cheese until you have Danish Havarti, block or sliced. Ooooo La La Paul, Perhaps Harvati is like a Danish woman. Soft and delicious with a delicate bouquet. Perhaps provolone and smelly Italian cheeses are like my ideal Italian woman. A lady in the parlor, and a pouton in bed! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 03:26:49 PM remember "Gumby" his sister was named Mingua but I think she smelled like plastic.
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 03:29:59 PM and Joe she has to be good at cooking and cleaning too.
Also thinks ham radio keeps you out of trouble. But loves to see junk leaving the house. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 14, 2006, 03:41:26 PM Ah, yes "the way to a man's heart is still through his stomach"
As far as the YL goes you got to train them right, mine even looks for junk for me at hamfests!!!! The Slab Bacon (if you dont believe me ask any of the locals) Smells like plastic, Hmmm.......................... Now thats a scarey thought!!!! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 03:50:43 PM let's see, transmitters, food, beaver, rigs.........I think we closed the loop on thei thread.
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 14, 2006, 03:52:55 PM Quote She was ALL PLASTIC !!! All plastic. --WA1HLR, "The Tillie and Lillie Story" as told at Chuck WA1EKV's house Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 14, 2006, 04:03:36 PM Wait a minute Paul, Tim added a little human touch....fur
That classic should be stored here. Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 15, 2006, 07:33:50 AM Frank,
I left here yesterday craving something nasty and garlicky, Went home, made and devoured a huge bowl of capallini with oil and garlic. Damn, it hit the spot, it was so strong that i am still belching it, and it tastes as good as it did yesterday!! Paul, I still have a hissette of the "Tim and Tillie" story around somewhere. As recorded by Steve (huz) when Timmy retold it to us on new years night around 5 years ago. If anyone wants to hear it I will break it out for the pharty. The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: Vortex Joe - N3IBX on March 15, 2006, 08:15:33 AM Frank, I left here yesterday craving something nasty and garlicky, Went home, made and devoured a huge bowl of capallini with oil and garlic. Damn, it hit the spot, it was so strong that i am still belching it, and it tastes as good as it did yesterday!! The Slab Bacon Frank - Would Carol kiss you Goodnight? Joe N3IBX Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 15, 2006, 08:20:28 AM You guys should burn some CDs so Tim can sell them at Hostraders.
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 15, 2006, 08:50:57 AM There are so many really good sound sound bites out there, someone should do an
"AM's Greatest Hits" cd, but no one has as of yet. I think Bruce (UJR) was talking about it some time ago, but it never happened. I told him to let me know the price and put me on the list, I wanted one. I would give just about anything to have a recording of The Prime Minister and Irb in the imfamous "Shut up Irb" episode. I laugh till my sides hurt everytime I hear it!!!! You can just see his eyes bulging out of his head with the tone of voice! There have been so many great moments in AM that it would be a crime for them to dissapear and be forgotten about. There are so many really good sound clips out that it would make a fabulous cd and I'm sure there would be a waiting list to get them. It sounds like a great business opportunity, but I dont have the equiptment to do it. Any takers out there???? The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 15, 2006, 09:02:49 AM After all:
A Heathkit Apache about $250 A Super Pro 600 about $600 A Johnson 500 about $5000 The Prime Minsta tearing Irb a new one....................Absolutely Priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 15, 2006, 09:54:55 AM Yeah there are many many famous "audio moments" that circulate in the aether.
The first such legend was TimTron's "50C5 Story," which became an annual holiday offering usually told on either Chistmas Eve or New Years Eve. There would be an all-night QSO underway, and it would be 30+ S9 and no QRM around 0500 GMT or so. Someone would typically realize the conditions, validate the mellow attitude of all involved, and would then call upon Timmy to "tell" the "50C5 Story" for us. Tim would reflect a few minutes, be somewhat reluctant, but he would turn up the filaments on the 811 rig and return to the subject as we would all settle in. Tape was often rolled on these renditions, and we would get one of several versions (a long, a short, and an interactive are in my own library alone). A half hour later (shorter as the years past), when Timmy would get to the part about again encountering Little Billy Heiland at a Shady O'Rack, we were spent and the night was complete. The universally understood nature of this story was demonstrated in 1977 when I took a particularly good recording of the "50C5 Story" down to Virginia Tech over Spring Break. I suppose that meant I had recorded it December 1976, or coming up on 30 years ago. My best friend, Pete, WA3WBJ and his four room-mates were spellbound as the open reel spooled out the tale. Indeed, years later, their group continues to write such words as "NERZLE" and "HYELLIFIED" on their Christmas cards to one another, and utter phrases such s "NOT LIKE THAT, LIKE THIS," as part of a language only The Wise understand. (http://www.wa3vjb.com/pics/TC-650.jpg) Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 15, 2006, 10:10:03 AM When I hear the "tim and tilly" story as told in such vivid detail by Timmy I can actually envision it happening something like this:
Knowing that Gary was part of it I can see him sitting at the table egging Timmy on, setting there with the proverbial szht eating grin on his face. Then I envision Timmy sneaking up the stairs like the John Belushi charactor in "Animal House" when he snuck Niedermeyers horse into dean Wermers office, before Flounder shot it. All the while you hear the "Mission Impossible" theme in the background.................. Some of these great "AM Moments" are just too good to let fade away. We really need someone to make some cd's so those who have never heard them can share in some of the fun. The Slab Bacon Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 15, 2006, 10:20:08 AM "... there was this tap tap tap of an IBM Selectric as I came up the stairs, and a woman's voice called out WHO GOES THERE? as I guess I made some noise..." "Then, I went into an unfinished area of the upstairs and it was dark and there was lumber laying around ... and I saw a door, and I said that must be the back door to one of them sluts !! (off mic, someone else utters 'Ten-Four, back door!"
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: The Slab Bacon on March 15, 2006, 10:58:40 AM "Ah, Yes, Then I opened the door and looked down and saw Gary, he pointed that I had to go to the next door. I opened the next door and took my handkerchief and unfolded it. Then I started to remove some of the beard clippings"...........................
Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA1GFZ on March 15, 2006, 11:56:00 AM But does anyone have any W2OY on tape.....
W1TJX...is anyone around...is that you John? Title: Re: "Indestructable" Transmitter ?? Post by: WA3VJB on March 15, 2006, 12:19:12 PM Bert, WA3JYU has a ton of the older stuff. AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
His problem is organizing it and cranking it down to CD. I had a prototype CD for a while that included some W2OY and Jesse K3GKB's famous paracheute jump, live on AM. |