[AMRadio] AM vs SSB!


Bob Macklin macklinbob at msn.com
Wed Oct 24 23:57:17 EDT 2007


And at that time I had a S-38 and a BC-312. Neither was worth a damn on 75M
at night. But I was able to use the S-38 for my Novice CW work on 40M at
night. It was another 2 years before I got a decent receiver!

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa,
"Real Radios Glow in the Dark"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Markavage" <manualman at juno.com>
To: <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] AM vs SSB!


> And it was at the peak of the largest solar cycle on record.
>
> Pete, wa2cwa
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:07:14 -0700 "Bob Macklin" <macklinbob at msn.com>
> writes:
> > One of the primary thing that caused SSB to take over as the main
> > mode of phone operation was the hetrodyning caused by AM when the
> > bands were busy. And in 1957 and 58 the bands were very busy every
> > night! And at times they were very noisy.
> >
> > SSB solved 2 problems. A given QSO only took 1/2 the space and the
> > hetrodynes were eliminated.
> >
> > Unless the bands are very crowed, AM at 6KHz (KC/S) is really not a
> > problem.
> >
> > Bob Macklin
> > K5MYJ
> > Seattle, Wa,
> > "Real Radios Glow in the Dark"
> ______________________________________________________________
> Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
> AMRadio mailing list
> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body.
>



More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 18 Dec 2017.