Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /homepages/11/d132647312/htdocs/Amfone/mkportal/include/SMF/smf_out.php on line 47
Boatanchor for WARC and 60 Meter Bands




 
The AM Forum
October 21, 2018, 11:38:12 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]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Boatanchor for WARC and 60 Meter Bands  (Read 13790 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
KM1H
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3519



« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2011, 09:16:44 PM »

The biggest problem with the V2, HT-9, HT-20, etc is building a VFO to cover those bands. You could modify the 11M range in the 122. The Heath HG-10B VFO is cheap, just hack that for the 3 WARC bands and nobody will get upset.

Maybe Im missing something but I dont see much different in the CDC RF area; I just moved the 11M 122 range to 12M with a one cap pad.

Carl
Logged
k9qs
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2011, 11:54:49 PM »

Regarding the Drake 4-line transmitters, the use of 60 and 30 meters should be ruled out completely. I say this because there is the 5645 kc heterodyne oscillator that would ride right through the final tank on 60m, and its second harmonic, 11290 kc, is only minimally attenuated by the tuned circuits on 30m. I put my T4X on a spectrum analyzer, and the 11290 carrier was only 15 db down from the frequency the rig was tuned to for the test: 10110 kc. True, re-visiting the alignment of the RF deck may knock that down a bit more, but this kind of issue isn't really worth the trouble, in my opinion. However, the T4X is great on 17 and 12 meters, and clean too-nothing out of spec. I only use the 30m crystal in the R4A.

Steve
Logged

\\\"Dogs have masters; cats have staff.\\\"
sndtubes
Guest
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2011, 12:47:11 AM »

According to the Drake manual you are supposed to use a crystal to start the band at 9.7 MHz instead of 10.0 MHz.  That avoids the possible spurs.

Also, could anyone confirm that there are no modifications that need to be made to the Viking II for 30 / 17 / 12 meter coverage (VFO not withstanding).
Logged
KM1H
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3519



« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2011, 09:29:45 AM »

The V-1 and V-II manual lists the coverage, Ive never confirmed it; my V-II is a CDC.

Carl
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10062



« Reply #29 on: January 11, 2011, 12:36:01 PM »

I have no interest in 60m.  I might become interested some day if it is ever upgraded to a real ham band, as was first proposed, before the plan was nixed in the flurry of "9-11" paranoia, and in face of opposition from HomePlug and other Part 15 whiners.

I recall the preliminary discussion in which it was being debated whether or not the proposed new band should have mode sub-bands, or be open to all modes on all frequencies, like 160m is.
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
Pages: 1 [2]   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 0.056 seconds with 18 queries.