The AM Forum
March 28, 2024, 05:55:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: you got to see read e ham " 40 meters what are you doing "  (Read 42164 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Opcom
Patrick J. / KD5OEI
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8308



WWW
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2009, 01:36:30 AM »

Or when using something like the GRC-106 HF set in "AM compatible" mode (50W carrier+USB, 400W PEP), then they "tech-up" and inform you about your carrier leakage. I love them rigs.
Logged

Radio Candelstein - Flagship Station of the NRK Radio Network.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2009, 04:39:20 AM »

Sometime back in the 80's I got an ARRL OO card complaining that I had excessive carrier on my "SSB signal".  It went on to say that I was in violation of the rule regarding spurious emissions.  I was running full carrier DSB AM!
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
W3SLK
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2651

Just another member member.


« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2009, 07:51:38 AM »

Don said:
Quote
Sometime back in the 80's I got an ARRL OO card complaining that I had excessive carrier on my "SSB signal".  It went on to say that I was in violation of the rule regarding spurious emissions.

Heh, heh. I got one of those too.  Grin I actually called the 'observer' on the phone and sparred with him. He was so besides himself he couldn't speak once I got him in a corner when reading Part 97.
Logged

Mike(y)/W3SLK
Invisible airwaves crackle with life, bright antenna bristle with the energy. Emotional feedback, on timeless wavelength, bearing a gift beyond lights, almost free.... Spirit of Radio/Rush
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2120



« Reply #28 on: April 18, 2009, 10:12:37 AM »

The SSB'ers that hate AM say that AM is obsolete.

Back on page 1 I posed a question on what mode would you pick today for the VHF AM aircraft band, ignoring the totally impractical switchover mess.

Looking at all the voice modes including the new digital modes, listing all the quirks, advantages and disadvantages of each mode, you still come up with AM. 

Consider a total change to the AM broadcast band, same thing, you wind up with AM. 

Obsolete?  Fundamental.  How can fundamentals become obsolete?  Ignorance is never obsolete either.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
K1ZJH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 299


« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2009, 12:04:47 PM »

The SSB'ers that hate AM say that AM is obsolete.

Back on page 1 I posed a question on what mode would you pick today for the VHF AM aircraft band, ignoring the totally impractical switchover mess.

Looking at all the voice modes including the new digital modes, listing all the quirks, advantages and disadvantages of each mode, you still come up with AM. 

Consider a total change to the AM broadcast band, same thing, you wind up with AM. 

Obsolete?  Fundamental.  How can fundamentals become obsolete?  Ignorance is never obsolete either.


Do you really believe that a viable and proven mode is immune to the current
thinking in Wa$hington???  Honestly?Huh

http://tinyurl.com/cbw8zs
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #30 on: April 18, 2009, 01:05:23 PM »

Do you really believe that a viable and proven mode is immune to the current
thinking in Wa$hington???  Honestly?Huh

http://tinyurl.com/cbw8zs 

Doesn't digital have the same problem that FM does?  The dominant signal "captures" the receiver and everything else becomes inaudible.  With digital audio, video and data it's all or nothing.  No in-between.  That "in between" is what could make the difference between life and death in aircraft traffic control near a busy air terminal, and has kept AM the standard all these decades.

I have been told that one reason they have kept AM as opposed to slopbucket is that from high-speed aircraft, the Doppler effect can introduce enough error to make SSB signals appear mis-tuned.

Quote
Quote from: Tom WA3KLR
The SSB'ers that hate AM say that AM is obsolete.

Isn't that a little like the pot calling the kettle black?  SSB dates back almost as far as regular AM.  The first SSB communication links were set up for VLF transatlantic telephone circuits in the early 20's.  I have in my personal R/9 magazine collection a series of four articles from 1933-34 with theory and construction details of a 75m filter type amateur radio SSB exciter.

The digital proponents may someday try to shove digital down the throats of radio amateurs just as slopbucket was shoved down our throats in the 50's and 60's, with a high pressure salesmanship campaign, propaganda, peer pressure and threats of FCC rulemaking action.  But I suspect it might take a while, with hundreds of thousands of expensive analogue riceboxes already in service. 100,000 old-fart retirees could raise a lot of hell if someone tried to tell them they couldn't use their radios any more.

It took over 10 years for SSB to become widely accepted in ham radio, and this was made possible only after the cheap "sideband for the masses" radios like Swans, Galaxies and Heapshit Hotwater rigs hit the market and the manufacturers were able to generate a whole new market for a product.

But I don't think hams and the general public to-day are as trustful of marketeering and gimmickry as they were in the 50's and 60's, and people are more cynical and less gullible to propaganda campaigns.  Look at the ham community's response to the ARRL "bandwidth" petition.

One of the things that hardened my determination to stay with AM was that I strongly resented all that pressure that was being exerted to force me and everyone else to "go sideband".
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2120



« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2009, 04:11:38 PM »

Two jetliners travelling towards each other, each doing 520 knots will see 244 Hertz shift at 136 MHz.

Two military jets travelling towards each other, each doing Mach 1.5 will see 1.325 kiloHertz shift at 399 MHz.
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2009, 04:42:42 PM »

The radio manufacturers back in the 1980's didn't help matters either. If you remember the majority of the rice boxes made during that decade didn't even have the DSB AM mode. The TS-830S for example. That was right about the time AM started to regain popularity and make its comeback. It was bad enough having appliance operators will almost no technical experience and the lack of a DSB AM mode just made it worse. They would tune around and here your carrier and didn’t understand why it was there.

Its funny how all of the new rice boxes now have the DSB AM mode again.

Actually, TS-830S was also manufactured as the TS-830M (for non U.S. sales) that included AM. And, there was an optional board that could be purchased from Kenwood Parts that allowed AM (in the "Wide CW" mode switch position) in the TS-830S. An optional 6 KHZ AM filter could also be purchased and installed in the 830S when the AM board was installed. I believe only the 520, 530, 820, 830 series of rigs did not include AM as a standard offering. The Yaesu and, I believe, most of the Icom HF rigs included AM in their rigs. Domestically, Ten-Tec was a hold-out for a long time in not including AM in their rigs.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
W2VW
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3489


WWW
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2009, 04:56:33 PM »

Two jetliners travelling towards each other, each doing 520 knots will see 244 Hertz shift at 136 MHz.

Two military jets travelling towards each other, each doing Mach 1.5 will see 1.325 kiloHertz shift at 399 MHz.

2 slopbucket appliance operators sit in their shacks moving at zero miles per hour.

Calculate the amount of time necessary for them to complete their QSO discussing features and benefits of new appliance radios.

Logged
WB2YGF
Guest
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2009, 11:37:49 PM »

Yeah, It's kind of ironic that the HF equipment I have that CAN'T do AM, is all American.   (Heath SB 101, Heath SB 104A, Drake 2NT, & Ten Tec 540).  Got to give the riceboxes some credit for helping to promote AM.
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #35 on: April 19, 2009, 04:44:38 AM »

Remember that memo sheet that Ten-Tec sent out to all their customers that included a rant about why they would never include AM in their rigs, implying that hams who ran AM were the scum of the earth?  Once that memo got spread around amongst the AM community and people started writing letters telling them they were disappointed and pissed off, and would never buy anything else from them as long as they maintained that attitude, they released another memo that was somewhat apologetic, and they moderated their anti-AM stance.  Hank, W2IQ, lived near the Ten-Tec factory and got to know some of their engineers.  I think he had a big influence on getting them to start including AM in their rigs.  He even took some prototypes home and tested them over the air for evaluation.  As I recall,  the anti-AM attitude turned out to originate from just one or two tight sphincters who worked there.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Jim KF2SY
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 291



« Reply #36 on: April 19, 2009, 08:01:08 AM »

Yeah, It's kind of ironic that the HF equipment I have that CAN'T do AM, is all American.   (Heath SB 101, Heath SB 104A, Drake 2NT, & Ten Tec 540).  Got to give the riceboxes some credit for helping to promote AM.

This is the just the American ham gear you have
Fact is that Drake 2NT is CW only.  Virtually all of Drakes full featured gear came with AM.
Their T4X(x)and R4(x) separates and the TR4x transceivers all had AM.  Then came the oddball
shortlived TR5 xcvr. (no AM)
But even their last HF ham market radio the TR7 series, continued to feature AM.  (early 80's)
Almost all of their gear had AM.  They were in fact an AM hold-out & Amercian made. kudos for them. I think the only ricebox from the 70's that had AM was the Yaesu stuff.   

Logged
WB2YGF
Guest
« Reply #37 on: April 19, 2009, 08:52:10 AM »

Yeah, It's kind of ironic that the HF equipment I have that CAN'T do AM, is all American.   (Heath SB 101, Heath SB 104A, Drake 2NT, & Ten Tec 540).  Got to give the riceboxes some credit for helping to promote AM.

This is the just the American ham gear you have
Fact is that Drake 2NT is CW only.  Virtually all of Drakes full featured gear came with AM.
Their TX and R4 separates and the TR transceivers all had AM.  Then came the shortlived TR5 xcvr. (no AM)
But even their last HF ham market radio the TR7, continued to feature AM.  (early 80's)
Almost all of their gear had AM.  They were in fact an AM hold-out & Amercian made. kudos for them. I think the only ricebox from the 70's that had AM was the Yaesu stuff.   
Sorry, didn't mean to bash Drake.  Kudos to them for offering AM, in fact, I am seriously thinking of getting a TR4 ot T4X.

BTW, my Kenwood T599D from the 70's also has AM.
Logged
Opcom
Patrick J. / KD5OEI
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8308



WWW
« Reply #38 on: April 19, 2009, 09:27:18 AM »

Back on page 1 I posed a question on what mode would you pick today for the VHF AM aircraft band, ignoring the totally impractical switchover mess.

Do you really believe that a viable and proven mode is immune to the current
thinking in Wa$hington???  Honestly?Huh

Yeah, but your talking about aircraft communications. Both the commercial and general aviation industries are always decades behind all modern technology. I don't see them eliminating DSB AM any time soon if ever. Even the FAA knows better and their only a paper tiger.

They better not switch to dogital. I paid alot of $$ for my AM FAA radios.

Remember that memo sheet that Ten-Tec sent out to all their customers that included a rant about why they would never include AM in their rigs, implying that hams who ran AM were the scum of the earth?

Anyone have a good scan of that? I always knew there was something rotten about Ten-Tec, but it wasn't their equipment. Something more sinister, deep insiode.. MOOOOHAHAHAhahahaaaaa!
Logged

Radio Candelstein - Flagship Station of the NRK Radio Network.
Opcom
Patrick J. / KD5OEI
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8308



WWW
« Reply #39 on: April 19, 2009, 11:25:34 AM »

http://www.myrockport.com/world.htm

scroll down, searching for "veal".  truly funny.
Logged

Radio Candelstein - Flagship Station of the NRK Radio Network.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #40 on: April 19, 2009, 01:19:11 PM »

Remember that memo sheet that Ten-Tec sent out to all their customers that included a rant about why they would never include AM in their rigs, implying that hams who ran AM were the scum of the earth?

Anyone have a good scan of that? I always knew there was something rotten about Ten-Tec, but it wasn't their equipment. Something more sinister, deep insiode.. MOOOOHAHAHAhahahaaaaa!

IIRC it was published in The AM Press/Exchange.  I probably have a copy of the original round here somewhere, but it would take a knockdown-dragout search to ever find it.  I think it dates back to sometime in the 80's.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
WB2YGF
Guest
« Reply #41 on: April 19, 2009, 01:51:03 PM »

ISSUE 85, Aug 1990:

http://www.amfone.net/AMPX/85.html
Quote
TEN-TEC Compares AM to Illegal CB Operation.

(submitted by Jay Mathisrud, WB0L)

I received some literature from TEN-TEC recently. Included with the new catalog and magazine reprints was a sheet answering the most frequently asked questions about TEN-TEC gear. Here is one of the questions and answers:

5. WHAT, NO AM MODE IN TRANSMIT?! Not now, not ever! The best thing we can say about the AM mode, as compared to SSB, is that it developed some good CW ops. Maybe part of our hang-up is that we remember when AM was King. The phone bands were a sea of heterodynes even with a ham population less than half of the present count. Unless you had high power and competitive antennas, you were well advised to polish your CW skills. As many will recall, the transition to SSB was frequently an emotional issue and took a number of years. Logic, demonstrated communications effectiveness and the need for spectrum conservation finally prevailed and the transition was made by all. To re-introduce the AM mode on modern amateur radio transceivers, to our way of thinking, is as irresponsible as adding mode compatibility for illegal CB operation.

... Our priorities may not receive universal acclaim but we hope that they do match yours.

TEN-TEC, Inc.

1185 Dolly Parton Parkway

Sevierville, TN 37862

EDITOR’S NOTE: Many AM operators have long maintained a good opinion of TEN-TEC, the only major remaining U.S. amateur radio manufacturer, even though their equipment has never included the AM transmit mode. Most of us just assumed that they omitted AM because they believed there was not enough demand for AM capability to justify the extra expense of including it in their transceivers. Most of us who have ever dealt with the company have been impressed by their friendly, helpful attitude, especially in servicing what they sell.

The attitude displayed in this literature is most distressing to those of us who include AM phone among our major interests in amateur radio, and it will no doubt cause many of us to take a second look at the Japanese imports, which universally include AM capability along with the other legal modes. I suggest that all AM’ers who are upset with this display of anti-AM arrogance drop the company a line and let them know how you feel – especially if this has influenced your decision to buy from their competition. While you are at it, it wouldn’t hurt to drop Yaesu, Icom and Kenwood a line to remind them that there is indeed a market in amateur radio for AM capability, and express your appreciation to them for including in on their product – especially if this influenced your decision to buy from them.

Perhaps Ten-Tec should be made aware of the response to the current AM petitions before the FCC, so that they would think twice about the market forces at work. A major reputable amateur radio manufacturer should strive to serve the entire amateur radio community, not to limit its clientele to the Robert Stankus and William Prechtl types within our hobby.


 
ISSUE 109 (1993 ?) :

http://amfone.net/AMPX/109.html
Quote
Ten-Tec Adds AM

Ten-Tec has reversed its anti-AM company policy and added AM transmit capability to the Paragon II transceiver. Ten-Tec Marketing’s Tom Salvetti states that the company is now striving to be more customer driven and that denying the AM transmit mode was both controversial and wrong. He also indicated that pressure from the AM community did a great deal to change the company’s view. AMers looking for a ‘modern’ transceiver may wish to consider the Paragon II before making a decision. I suggest sending a note to Ten-Tec, thanking them for supporting AM (1185 Dolly Parton Parkway, Sevierville, TN 37862).

Jay Mathisrud, WB0L
Logged
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #42 on: April 19, 2009, 09:04:48 PM »

Never say never.

Ooops I just did.  Tongue
Logged
W1ATR
Resident HVAC junkie
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1132


« Reply #43 on: April 19, 2009, 10:11:15 PM »

Never say never.

Ooops I just did.  Tongue

Twice.


on edit: wait, i quoted it, so that makes 4 times.
Logged

Don't start nuthin, there won't be nuthin.

Jared W1ATR


Click for radio pix
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #44 on: April 19, 2009, 11:11:32 PM »

My head hurts.
Logged
KA1ZGC
Guest
« Reply #45 on: April 20, 2009, 01:59:49 AM »

Told you not to dry your hair in the microwave.
Logged
Steve - WB3HUZ
Guest
« Reply #46 on: April 20, 2009, 10:43:25 AM »

LOL. My mother told me to NEVER do that.   Cry
Logged
W1ATR
Resident HVAC junkie
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1132


« Reply #47 on: April 20, 2009, 11:01:03 AM »

 Grin My mother NEVER told me to NEVER stick my head in the microwave. I NEVER listened to her anyway and now I can NEVER remember the........What were we talking about???

Ahhh, NEVERmind..
Logged

Don't start nuthin, there won't be nuthin.

Jared W1ATR


Click for radio pix
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2009, 01:47:39 PM »

Regarding the AM broadcast band, there has been a proposal by some in the industry to convert TV channel 6 into an extended FM band once the digital transition is complete, and allow AM daytimers and those with severely restricted night time power to move to the expanded portion, either using FM or digital-only.  The existing AM band would be left to former clear channel stations and others with protected night time sky wave coverage.  Some propose mandating the change while others have proposed allowing the AM stations not occupying a clear channel station's night time frequency, and that wish to, stay on the AM band.  Some channel 6 TV stations that want to keep their old frequency for digital transmission would be forced to move.

Actually, that doesn't sound like a bad idea.  The AM band has long been stacked with too many local-coverage stations per channel, rendering most of the band totally useless at night.  VHF is much more appropriate for that type of broadcasting, while the AM band should be left to what it is most useful for, stations with extended coverage via sky wave at night.  The present situation is about as foolish and unrealistic as the 27 mHz allocation for CB, with the intent of local communication while the band periodically opens to distant sky wave propagation.

Under the proposal, the remaining stations in the AM band would be able to spread out to 20 or 30 kHz channel separation so there would be no overlapping of sidebands at night, and they would have enough room to use either analogue or digital transmission without trashing adjacent channel stations as the AM IBOC does at present.

According to  the broadcast rags I get, the main opposition to the proposal is not from the ch 6 TV stations that want to stay put, but from existing FM broadcasters that don't want the additional competition.  They say that the broadcast industry has already fallen on  hard times, and that the additional competition in local markets could be the straw that breaks the camel's back to pull them under.

But if the extended band would stay limited to re-accommodating existing AM stations, that claim would be bogus; the existing FM stations want to keep their advantage of round the clock reception over the AMs' crappy or non-existent night time coverage.  I agree that the last thing we need is even more broadcast stations than we already have in any urban area, regardless of transmission mode. I suspect the competition the local FM broadcasters are really worried about is from distant sky-wave AM stations at night.  To keep their listening audience, they might be forced to actually put something on the air worth listening to.

But as I see it, the FCC is unlikely to approve the proposal; the idea makes too much sense from a technical perspective and requires a sense of judgement too sound to be expected from FCC bureaucrats.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Tom WA3KLR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2120



« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2009, 02:11:27 PM »

2 slopbucket appliance operators sit in their shacks moving at zero miles per hour.

Calculate the amount of time necessary for them to complete their QSO discussing features and benefits of new appliance radios.


"Which guy do I send my rig off to, to get repaired?"
Logged

73 de Tom WA3KLR  AMI # 77   Amplitude Modulation - a force Now and for the Future!
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.125 seconds with 18 queries.