From Ron.K3PID at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 3 20:13:43 2016 From: Ron.K3PID at sbcglobal.net (K3PID) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 19:13:43 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] HMR Message-ID: <09B903A18F284EF796C6BF60FB0F4A3D@Zeus> Anyone know the dates for the 2016 HMR? Ron K3PID From manualman at juno.com Mon Oct 3 20:56:48 2016 From: manualman at juno.com (manualman at juno.com) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 20:56:48 -0400 Subject: [AMRadio] HMR Message-ID: You best bet is to send Ray at ER an e-mail. https://www.ermag.com/ Pete, wa2cwa On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 19:13:43 -0500 "K3PID" writes: > Anyone know the dates for the 2016 HMR? > > > Ron K3PID From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 06:42:33 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 05:42:33 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] BC-1G schematic Message-ID: I'm trying to hunt down a decent BC-1G schematic. I have a poor copy on 11 x 17 inch paper but I'd like to find an original, the kind that's around 3 feet by 4 feet that Gates provided. That's probably near impossible but a high resolution scan I can get printed out at Kinkos would be nice. I've seen some on-line but unfortunately they are marked up with colored highlighter and I'd like a clean one. Thanks very much Rob K5UJ From Foltarz at rocketmail.com Tue Oct 4 21:25:44 2016 From: Foltarz at rocketmail.com (Mark Foltarz) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 01:25:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Clear 866A References: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171@mail.yahoo.com> I came across a box of tubes labeled 866A.The odd thing about them is there absolutely no mercury and no gettering - although there is clearly a getter mounted to one of the filament leads.Has anyone ever seen an 866A like described above ??I haven't tried these in any of my transmitters yet. Thanks Mark From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 21:37:58 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 20:37:58 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Clear 866A In-Reply-To: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Early 866As from my observations were loaded with mercury but later ones, made in the 1970s for example didn't have much that can be seen by looking. My hunch is that at some point, someone figured out it doesn't take much and the amount going in went way down. they'll probably work fine and in fact, may be less likely to flash over. I have old RCAs that you can see the mercury in, and 1970s 866As that look devoid of mercury. Rob K5UJ On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Mark Foltarz via AMRadio wrote: > I came across a box of tubes labeled 866A.The odd thing about them is there absolutely no mercury and no gettering - although there is clearly a getter mounted to one of the filament leads.Has anyone ever seen an 866A like described above ? I haven't tried these in any of my transmitters yet. > From jc at pctechref.com Wed Oct 5 10:44:22 2016 From: jc at pctechref.com (John Coleman) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:44:22 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> Message-ID: <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> On the other hand. You might imagine a 100 watt transmitter and to make this a simple way to see let us say it is a plate modulated class C rig. When the Rig is not modulated the receiver receives a signal carrier of say 100uV and the S meter reads the same regardless of the bandwidth. Now modulate the rig to say 100% with a 3 khz tone. The receiver still sees the same S meter sig strength regardless of bandwidth. However if the receiver is set to say a 10 khz bandwidth with a center notch of 1 khz and then center tune to the carrier and has a notch filter of very deep notch capability so as to completely get rid of the carrier so the un-modulated sig is now zero on the S meter. Now when the rig is modulated with the 3 khz tone, the S meter will read the algebraic addition of the two sidebands less the carrier. This will be less than the carrier and the S meter should read 50uV which would be the peak of the algebraic addition of the two sidebands. I theory a transmitter could be constructed with carrier generator applied to one antenna and then two other transmitters adjusted above and below the carrier rig of .25 power of the carrier transmitter and applied to two other antennas. If the phase relationship is correct then a receiving station miles away would hear a AM sig. and if constructed just right turning on the two sideband rigs could make the sig from the carrier frequency disappear from the receiver. Sidebands have phasing components that add and subtract from the carrier. The sideband rigs must be exactly the same freq and phase apart from the carrier rig as long as there is a difference between the carrier freq rig and the sideband rigs sine wave modulation would be detected at the distant receiver. But in order to block the carrier over a long period of time the two sideband rigs would need to be adjusted to the same freq as the carrier rig and held at a proper phase as to cancel any signal that the receiver hears. Here is where the uncertainty thing comes in. It is in the act of receiving that causes the signal to appear to be canceled. It has been proven that any electromagnetic waves, radio or light, does not interfere with each other except in the detection. The interference occurs in the receiving antenna or apparatus. which BTW is a very good thing else the ether would be full fo noise caused by all the radio wave interfearing and hetrodyning creating signals whos bandwidth would never end. John, WA5BXO BTW. Two lasers of different freq have been shined on some suface to produce a third color but only when they or shined on the same spot. crossing the beams does nothing. -----Original Message----- From: AMRadio [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Donald Chester Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:50 PM To: amradio at mailman.qth.net Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal From jc at pctechref.com Wed Oct 5 11:35:18 2016 From: jc at pctechref.com (John Coleman) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:35:18 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> Message-ID: <000b01d21f1e$139be730$3ad3b590$@pctechref.com> I should say also that the phasing products are also not present in the three transmiter imaginary senario but are generated within the receiver to give the apearance of an AM signal. So once again does the AM rig really transmit these phasing products? But if not, then where is the energy from the modulator going to. -----Original Message----- From: AMRadio [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Donald Chester Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:50 PM To: amradio at mailman.qth.net Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal From k4kyv at charter.net Wed Oct 5 11:50:56 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:50:56 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> Message-ID: <002d01d21f20$430c2690$c92473b0$@charter.net> > Here is where the uncertainty thing comes in. It is in the act of receiving > that causes the signal to appear to be canceled. It has been proven that > any electromagnetic waves, radio or light, does not interfere with each other > except in the detection > John, WA5BXO If the phase of the carrier is rotated 90 degrees relative to the sidebands, the amplitude modulation is nulled out completely, and the signal becomes phase modulated. Recalling from memory, I believe that's what Armstrong did during his 1930s experiments with FM. He rotated the phase of an AM carrier, then applied de-emphasis to the audio that modulated the signal, to convert phase modulation to frequency modulation. This was done at some low frequency below the broadcast band, and then multiplied up to around 40 MHz where it appeared as a wide-band FM signal. The problem with generating sidebands and carrier with separate transmitters, you would have to use the same antenna to radiate both, or two separate antennas with negligible spacing between them. Otherwise, with any significant physical distance between the antennas, the signals would add up properly to form an AM signal only in certain directions, but in other directions the carrier and sidebands would be out of phase with each other. At 90 degree spacing between the antennas, some receiving locations would receive pure PM, not AM. If outputs from both transmitters could be fed into the same antenna without the transmitters intermodulating each other's' signals or the power output of one transmitter appearing in the transmission line of the other, then the total power output would be the simple algebraic sum of the outputs from both transmitters. Build a high level balanced modulator to generate a double-sideband suppressed carrier signal, and use a regular class-C amplifier to generate a carrier derived from the same master oscillator that feeds the balanced modulator. Adjust the intermediate amplifier tank circuit settings so that the carrier and sidebands come out in proper phase, then the output power would be the measured carrier power from one transmitter + the measured sideband power from the other. Adjust the output level of the DSB generator to just barely modulate the carrier 100%. The legal maximum output would be 1000 watts carrier, modulated by the 500-watt p.e.p. double-sideband generator, to make 1500 watts total. The vector summation that causes the peak power to appear as 4 times the carrier power would occur at the detector in the receiver, not at the modulated stage in the transmitter. Transmitter power would be read by adding together the readings of two Bird 43s, one in the transmission line of the DSB transmitter, and the other in the transmission line of the carrier transmitter. Don k4kyv From k4kyv at charter.net Wed Oct 5 13:31:28 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 12:31:28 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000b01d21f1e$139be730$3ad3b590$@pctechref.com> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000b01d21f1e$139be730$3ad3b590$@pctechref.com> Message-ID: <000701d21f2e$4e1cc270$ea564750$@charter.net> > I should say also that the phasing products are also not present in the three > transmitter imaginary scenario but are generated within the receiver to give > the appearance of an AM signal. John, That will take some head scratching. The last time I remember contemplating it was in Houston, the time you and I were at some Mexican restaurant (or was it a honky-tonk?), we were discussing synchronous detectors, and I drew out some vector phasing diagrams on a paper napkin. Remember that? Anyway, it's a good question. Say you had a high-level balanced modulator for a DSB generator and you mixed in a carrier and combined the outputs to generate an AM signal. Now add an rf phase shift network somewhere between the carrier oscillator and the final, and adjust the coil and capacitor to rotate the phase of the carrier 90 degrees. Now, you come out with a phase modulated carrier, with no amplitude modulation and therefore no net increase in average power when modulation is applied. Where is all that audio power going? Don k4kyv From donroden at hiwaay.net Wed Oct 5 13:51:06 2016 From: donroden at hiwaay.net (donroden at hiwaay.net) Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 12:51:06 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> Message-ID: <20161005125106.Horde.wWpJzNvf204FnZ6mT9sqoeD@webmail.hiwaay.net> WRL built a transmitter once that had no carrier but two fully modulated sidebands. Simple to build. No heavy mod transformers needed Don W4DNR Quoting John Coleman : and if constructed just right turning on > the two sideband rigs could make the sig from the carrier frequency > disappear from the receiver. From jc at pctechref.com Wed Oct 5 14:37:47 2016 From: jc at pctechref.com (John Coleman) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 13:37:47 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000701d21f2e$4e1cc270$ea564750$@charter.net> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000b01d21f1e$139be730$3ad3b590$@pctechref.com> <000701d21f2e$4e1cc270$ea564750$@charter.net> Message-ID: <000d01d21f37$91a5a4e0$b4f0eea0$@pctechref.com> Correct as usual Don. I used the separte XMTR and ANT senario for imagination only. But, seams that I remember a high efficency XMTR being built using balanced modulator and a limiter and then into class C. and a separate carrier XMTR and something abouot a 90 deg transmision line mix at the antenna. As I recall the thing was old even back when I was reading all of this. On another note. I have been looking at theoretical phisics lately, hence the statement about EM energy waves beiing obivious to one another except at colision with mater. Why can't I find more referenes to the impedance of space to EM radiation (377 ohms). Maxwell caculated it way long ago. It is basicaly the ratio of E to H and is constant in all EM wave in the far field existance irreguardless of power or frequency. It seems to me that this should be a very important clue in theory of everything. John, WA5BXO And I never see my on posts come back from AMRADIO only comments of others. Is that norm now. -----Original Message----- From: Donald Chester [mailto:k4kyv at charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 12:31 PM To: 'John Coleman'; amradio at mailman.qth.net Subject: RE: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal > I should say also that the phasing products are also not present in > the three > transmitter imaginary scenario but are generated within the receiver > to give > the appearance of an AM signal. John, That will take some head scratching. The last time I remember contemplating it was in Houston, the time you and I were at some Mexican restaurant (or was it a honky-tonk?), we were discussing synchronous detectors, and I drew out some vector phasing diagrams on a paper napkin. Remember that? Anyway, it's a good question. Say you had a high-level balanced modulator for a DSB generator and you mixed in a carrier and combined the outputs to generate an AM signal. Now add an rf phase shift network somewhere between the carrier oscillator and the final, and adjust the coil and capacitor to rotate the phase of the carrier 90 degrees. Now, you come out with a phase modulated carrier, with no amplitude modulation and therefore no net increase in average power when modulation is applied. Where is all that audio power going? Don k4kyv From k4kyv at charter.net Wed Oct 5 16:18:39 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:18:39 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000d01d21f37$91a5a4e0$b4f0eea0$@pctechref.com> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000b01d21f1e$139be730$3ad3b590$@pctechref.com> <000701d21f2e$4e1cc270$ea564750$@charter.net> <000d01d21f37$91a5a4e0$b4f0eea0$@pctechref.com> Message-ID: <000301d21f45$a8f94a80$faebdf80$@charter.net> > From: John Coleman [mailto:jc at pctechref.com] > Correct as usual Don. I used the separte XMTR and ANT senario for > imagination only. But, seams that I remember a high efficency XMTR being > built using balanced modulator and a limiter and then into class C. and a > separate carrier XMTR and something abouot a 90 deg transmision line mix at > the antenna. As I recall the thing was old even back when I was reading all of > this. The Doherty and Terman-Woodward high-efficiency linear amplifier and grid modulation systems use the 90 degree transmission lines (usually lumped L and Components, not actual full-length transmission lines). No balanced modulators; a "carrier tube" that saturates essentially at full unmodulated carrier level, allowing only negative modulation peaks, and a "peak" tube that remains cut off until the modulation peaks go positive, taking on where the carrier tube left off to transmit the positive half of the modulation waveform. The outputs of the carrier and peak tubes are combined to generate the full AM signal. Another system that claims not to require the quarter-wave transmission lines is so-called "Taylor Modulation". I have seen articles; some construction articles ran in CQ magazine back in the 50s and 60s. I'm not sure anyone has ever successfully got it to work; I have never heard one on the air. But many broadcast transmitters have used the Doherty system for many years, including Continental Electronics. Don k4kyv From WB2AHK at aol.com Wed Oct 5 18:48:19 2016 From: WB2AHK at aol.com (WB2AHK at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 18:48:19 -0400 Subject: [AMRadio] INTERESTING FUN EXPERIENCES Message-ID: <4f46ca.7d04f7f2.4526dd33@aol.com> Up until the last 6 months, i, for 18 years i operated an AM transmitter remotely . The transmitter was operated on a STL link. My Receiving spot was seven miles away from the transmitter and it was a AM only receiver, seven land miles from the transmitter. From time to time and over the years many SSB only stations have called me. Obviously using a AM only receiver i could not understand them very well with them sending no carrier. But, however, 100% of the time i could hear them perfectly as if they were operating on AM when i applied my seven miles away from meAM carrier. Yes , my Am receiver at my remote site was quite happy. Chet From paul at paulbaldock.com Wed Oct 5 18:56:07 2016 From: paul at paulbaldock.com (Paul Baldock) Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 15:56:07 -0700 Subject: [AMRadio] 15M open In-Reply-To: <4f46ca.7d04f7f2.4526dd33@aol.com> References: <4f46ca.7d04f7f2.4526dd33@aol.com> Message-ID: <20161005225553.68D82F515D@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> At this moment (2300Z) 15M is open from W7 to East Coast 21.430MHz - Paul KW7Y From garyschafer at largeriver.net Wed Oct 5 23:27:32 2016 From: garyschafer at largeriver.net (Gary Schafer) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:27:32 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM signal In-Reply-To: <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> References: <004701d21a79$f0d19e00$d274da00$@charter.net> <000901d21f16$f6258000$e2708000$@pctechref.com> Message-ID: <5834BA5AA9554FC1884FCF61E8B950DD@garyPC> Hi John, Long time since I have talked to you. As far as two signals interfering with each other consider the forward and reflected waves on a transmission line. There is constructive and destructive interference between the two. They add and subtract at particular points but they do not mix to produce a new wave. An easy way to view AM modulation is to look at it as a mixer. Two signals in and 4 signals out (sum, difference and the two original signals, audio and RF) as any mixer gives you provided it is not a balance type of mixer. If you have a carrier at say 1 MHz and modulate it with a 100 KHz signal you can easily tune to each of the output signals of the "mixer" and you will not know that any other signal exist out of the mixer. None of the other signals will have any influence on any other output signal including shifting phase or otherwise of individual signals. When looking at the output of the "mixer" as an AM signal, (looking at the carrier and two side band signals) The phase shift (rotation) involved with an AM signal is because of the relationship between the carrier frequency and the side band frequencies. They are all on different frequencies. When looking at the whole signal using the carrier frequency as the reference the phase is constantly changing "between the signals at the rate of the difference in frequency" between them. But on their own they do not change in phase. So I would say that the phase change does not necessarily take place in the receiver but the phase relationship is already established by the time it gets to the receiver. The receiver detector is another mixer that combines the received signals along with their phase relationships to give us the demodulated audio. As to the total power of the modulated AM signal the average power is the sum of the three signals. Just as you can see the RF ammeter increase in the transmission line of an AM transmitter when modulation is applied, you will also see the S meter on a receiver increase by 1.76 Db with 100% modulation. The receiver S meter measures total received power. Multiple signals in the ether do not inter fear with one another and create heterodynes because there is no non-linear element for them to mix in. If you feed two equal level signals into an antenna that are on the same frequency they will add to produce twice the average power out when in phase (constructive interference) and they will subtract to produce zero output when they are out of phase (destructive interference). 73 Gary K4FMX > -----Original Message----- > From: AMRadio [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John > Coleman > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:44 AM > To: 'Donald Chester'; amradio at mailman.qth.net > Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The Physical Reality of Sidebands in the AM > signal > > On the other hand. > You might imagine a 100 watt transmitter and to make this a simple way > to > see let us say it is a plate modulated class C rig. When the Rig is not > modulated the receiver receives a signal carrier of say 100uV and the S > meter reads the same regardless of the bandwidth. Now modulate the rig > to > say 100% with a 3 khz tone. The receiver still sees the same S meter > sig > strength regardless of bandwidth. However if the receiver is set to say > a > 10 khz bandwidth with a center notch of 1 khz and then center tune to > the > carrier and has a notch filter of very deep notch capability so as to > completely get rid of the carrier so the un-modulated sig is now zero on > the > S meter. Now when the rig is modulated with the 3 khz tone, the S meter > will read the algebraic addition of the two sidebands less the carrier. > This will be less than the carrier and the S meter should read 50uV > which > would be the peak of the algebraic addition of the two sidebands. > > I theory a transmitter could be constructed with carrier generator > applied > to one antenna and then two other transmitters adjusted above and below > the > carrier rig of .25 power of the carrier transmitter and applied to two > other > antennas. If the phase relationship is correct then a receiving station > miles away would hear a AM sig. and if constructed just right turning > on > the two sideband rigs could make the sig from the carrier frequency > disappear from the receiver. > > Sidebands have phasing components that add and subtract from the > carrier. > The sideband rigs must be exactly the same freq and phase apart from the > carrier rig as long as there is a difference between the carrier freq > rig > and the sideband rigs sine wave modulation would be detected at the > distant > receiver. But in order to block the carrier over a long period of time > the > two sideband rigs would need to be adjusted to the same freq as the > carrier > rig and held at a proper phase as to cancel any signal that the receiver > hears. > > Here is where the uncertainty thing comes in. It is in the act of > receiving > that causes the signal to appear to be canceled. It has been proven > that > any electromagnetic waves, radio or light, does not interfere with each > other except in the detection. The interference occurs in the receiving > antenna or apparatus. which BTW is a very good thing else the ether > would be > full fo noise caused by all the radio wave interfearing and hetrodyning > creating signals whos bandwidth would never end. > > John, WA5BXO > > BTW. Two lasers of different freq have been shined on some suface to > produce a third color but only when they or shined on the same spot. > crossing the beams does nothing. > > > > From edwmullin at aol.com Thu Oct 6 12:32:41 2016 From: edwmullin at aol.com (Ed) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 12:32:41 -0400 Subject: [AMRadio] Clear 866A In-Reply-To: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1119880732.9785129.1475630744171@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9C3BDBA6-5820-4FBB-B6A5-42F2A955727F@aol.com> My HB dual 4-400 deck has a full wave rectifier that I built using 4 866s and home brewed filament transformers. While it's a bit of a Frankenstein's monster looking affair, it works. I do like the glow of the tubes. It has a timer circuit so the HV won't come on for a few minutes after main power is applied. VR, Ed Mullin > On Oct 4, 2016, at 9:25 PM, Mark Foltarz via AMRadio wrote: > > I came across a box of tubes labeled 866A.The odd thing about them is there absolutely no mercury and no gettering - although there is clearly a getter mounted to one of the filament leads.Has anyone ever seen an 866A like described above ? I haven't tried these in any of my transmitters yet. > > Thanks > Mark > ______________________________________________________________ > Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net > AMRadio mailing list > Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Post: 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. > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to edwmullin at aol.com From k4kyv at charter.net Thu Oct 6 16:47:05 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 15:47:05 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth Message-ID: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> FCC Part 2 (General Rules and Regulations) thus defines occupied bandwidth: ? 2.202 Bandwidths. (a) Occupied bandwidth. The frequency bandwidth such that, below its lower and above its upper frequency limits, the mean powers radiated are EACH equal to 0.5 percent of the total mean power radiated by a given emission. Part 97 defines bandwidth differently: ?97.3 Definitions. (a) The definitions of terms used in Part 97 are: (8) Bandwidth. The width of a frequency band outside of which the mean power of the transmitted signal is attenuated at least 26 dB below the mean power of the transmitted signal within the band I see a 6 dB discrepancy between the Part 2 and Part 97 definitions. 0.5 percent is a ratio of 1/200, or minus 23 dB. According to the Part 2 definition, it appears that the power radiated above the defined frequency band is 0.5 percent, and the power radiated below the defined frequency band is another 0.5 percent; adding the two together makes the total power radiated outside the defined band 1 percent, which would equal minus 20 dB. According to the Part 97 definition above, the total mean power radiated above and below the defined frequency band is minus 26 dB. This means that, according to the amateur rules, the definition of occupied bandwidth is more severe by 6 dB, than the definition under the general rules and regulations. Am I missing something, or are amateur signals under a stricter standard than the general definition? ?2.202 (a) goes on to state: "In some cases, for example multichannel frequency-division systems, the percentage of 0.5 percent may lead to certain difficulties in the practical application of the definitions of occupied and necessary bandwidth; **in such cases a different percentage may prove useful**". So perhaps the FCC has intentionally applied a stricter bandwidth standard for amateur radio than for other services? Or is this an error where someone added 6 dB instead of subtracting it. Or maybe I?m the one reading it wrong. I?d be interested in other opinions. From oldrotorheadsarge at outlook.com Thu Oct 6 18:41:39 2016 From: oldrotorheadsarge at outlook.com (Robert Bethman) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 22:41:39 +0000 Subject: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth In-Reply-To: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> Message-ID: Don and the group, Welcome to the Land of Oz! I've spent a total of 34+ years dealing with U.S. Government "Rules and Regulations". You've hit upon the crux of all of its entirety! Things have been put into words at very different times by far too many disparate entities! None of which have been reconciled nor thoughtfully been adequately proofread by the mess in Washington! Those entities that I worked for have never found ANY cohesive pieces amongst anything that has CFR in its title! I'd also add that submitting any query to the "responsible" entity for such, only results in an answer that is as obscure to the portion queried, or adds more ambiguity than one began with. Best of luck attempting to find an answer! Bob - N0DGN -----Original Message----- From: AMRadio [mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Donald Chester Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 4:47 PM To: amradio at mailman.qth.net Subject: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth FCC Part 2 (General Rules and Regulations) thus defines occupied bandwidth: ? 2.202 Bandwidths. (a) Occupied bandwidth. The frequency bandwidth such that, below its lower and above its upper frequency limits, the mean powers radiated are EACH equal to 0.5 percent of the total mean power radiated by a given emission. Part 97 defines bandwidth differently: ?97.3 Definitions. (a) The definitions of terms used in Part 97 are: (8) Bandwidth. The width of a frequency band outside of which the mean power of the transmitted signal is attenuated at least 26 dB below the mean power of the transmitted signal within the band. I see a 6 dB discrepancy between the Part 2 and Part 97 definitions. 0.5 percent is a ratio of 1/200, or minus 23 dB. According to the Part 2 definition, it appears that the power radiated above the defined frequency band is 0.5 percent, and the power radiated below the defined frequency band is another 0.5 percent; adding the two together makes the total power radiated outside the defined band 1 percent, which would equal minus 20 dB. According to the Part 97 definition above, the total mean power radiated above and below the defined frequency band is minus 26 dB. This means that, according to the amateur rules, the definition of occupied bandwidth is more severe by 6 dB, than the definition under the general rules and regulations. Am I missing something, or are amateur signals under a stricter standard than the general definition? ?2.202 (a) goes on to state: "In some cases, for example multichannel frequency-division systems, the percentage of 0.5 percent may lead to certain difficulties in the practical application of the definitions of occupied and necessary bandwidth; **in such cases a different percentage may prove useful**". So perhaps the FCC has intentionally applied a stricter bandwidth standard for amateur radio than for other services? Or is this an error where someone added 6 dB instead of subtracting it. Or maybe I'm the one reading it wrong. I'd be interested in other opinions. From k4kyv at charter.net Fri Oct 7 14:52:10 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 13:52:10 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth In-Reply-To: References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> Message-ID: <003901d220cb$e90cb620$bb262260$@charter.net> > You've hit upon the crux of all of its entirety! Things have been put into > words at very different times by far too many disparate entities! > > None of which have been reconciled nor thoughtfully been adequately > proofread by the mess in Washington! > > Those entities that I worked for have never found ANY cohesive pieces > amongst anything that has CFR in its title! > Bob - N0DGN There are the ITU definitions, from which the national requirements are derived: " 1.152 necessary bandwidth: For a given class of emission, the width of the frequency band which is just sufficient to ensure the transmission of information at the rate and with the quality required under specified conditions. 1.153 occupied bandwidth: The width of a frequency band such that, below the lower and above the upper frequency limits, the mean powers emitted are each equal to a specified percentage ?/2 of the total mean power of a given emission. Unless otherwise specified in an ITU-R Recommendation for the appropriate class of emission, the value of ?/2 should be taken as 0.5%." The original document is here: http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-s/oth/02/02/S02020000244501PDFE.PDF (you may have to copy & paste the url into your browser to make it work) Scroll down to page 21. Apparently, when writing Part 97, the FCC added 3 dB the wrong way from -23 dB, so it became -26 dB instead of -20 dB which would be consistent with the ITU-RR language as stated above, and the FCC's own definitions in ? 2.202. From oldrotorheadsarge at outlook.com Fri Oct 7 16:05:50 2016 From: oldrotorheadsarge at outlook.com (Robert Bethman) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 20:05:50 +0000 Subject: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth In-Reply-To: <003901d220cb$e90cb620$bb262260$@charter.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> <003901d220cb$e90cb620$bb262260$@charter.net> Message-ID: Don, What you see is indeed true! The FCC has fouled up more regulations than any of us can count or keep track of! Too many cooks spoil the broth! Bob N0DGN -----Original Message----- From: Donald Chester [mailto:k4kyv at charter.net] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 2:52 PM To: 'Robert Bethman' ; 'AM Radio List' Subject: RE: [AMRadio] FCC's Definition of Bandwidth > You've hit upon the crux of all of its entirety! Things have been put into > words at very different times by far too many disparate entities! > > None of which have been reconciled nor thoughtfully been adequately > proofread by the mess in Washington! > > Those entities that I worked for have never found ANY cohesive pieces > amongst anything that has CFR in its title! > Bob - N0DGN There are the ITU definitions, from which the national requirements are derived: " 1.152 necessary bandwidth: For a given class of emission, the width of the frequency band which is just sufficient to ensure the transmission of information at the rate and with the quality required under specified conditions. 1.153 occupied bandwidth: The width of a frequency band such that, below the lower and above the upper frequency limits, the mean powers emitted are each equal to a specified percentage ?/2 of the total mean power of a given emission. Unless otherwise specified in an ITU-R Recommendation for the appropriate class of emission, the value of ?/2 should be taken as 0.5%." The original document is here: http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-s/oth/02/02/S02020000244501PDFE.PDF (you may have to copy & paste the url into your browser to make it work) Scroll down to page 21. Apparently, when writing Part 97, the FCC added 3 dB the wrong way from -23 dB, so it became -26 dB instead of -20 dB which would be consistent with the ITU-RR language as stated above, and the FCC's own definitions in ? 2.202. From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Sat Oct 8 16:06:07 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2016 15:06:07 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] BC-1G schematic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks to Gary Glaenzer of No Bull Technical Services, Inc., in Jacksonville IL, I have a clean copy 3 x 4 foot schematic. Maybe it's 2 x 3 foot. Anyway it's big enough to read without magnifiers, hi. 73 Rob K5UJ On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote: > I'm trying to hunt down a decent BC-1G schematic. I have a poor copy > on 11 x 17 inch paper but I'd like to find an original, the kind > that's around 3 feet by 4 feet that Gates provided. That's probably > near impossible but a high resolution scan I can get printed out at > Kinkos would be nice. I've seen some on-line but unfortunately they > are marked up with colored highlighter and I'd like a clean one. > > Thanks very much > > Rob > K5UJ From mjcal77 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 9 11:03:04 2016 From: mjcal77 at yahoo.com (CL in NC) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 15:03:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Vintage radio info on the cheap References: <1541652743.836104.1476025384399.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1541652743.836104.1476025384399@mail.yahoo.com> Not affiliated with these folks, just like hard copies of information. There are some books here you may find interesting for their historical data and building information, like in the Impoverished Radio Experimenter series. They are also running a 50% off deal with the 50OFF code that you put in at checkout. If you ever wanted to build a superhet from scratch, including the IF transformers, along with ideas on other radio related project using a lot of other lost bits of skill, you may find useful ideas here. https://www.youroldtimebookstore.com/category-s/2072.htm While Lindsay books is still in biz, the old man passed away, and the son is not really into as much apparently, so this company is reprinting selling alot of their stuff. Charlie, W4MEC in NC From paul at paulbaldock.com Sun Oct 9 15:25:33 2016 From: paul at paulbaldock.com (Paul Baldock) Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 12:25:33 -0700 Subject: [AMRadio] 10M is open In-Reply-To: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> Message-ID: <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> 10M is open from W7 to East Coast and South America (1930Z) 29.000MHz - Paul KW7Y From ne1s at securespeed.us Sun Oct 9 15:42:00 2016 From: ne1s at securespeed.us (Larry Szendrei) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 15:42:00 -0400 Subject: [AMRadio] 10M is open In-Reply-To: <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> Message-ID: On 10/9/16 3:25 PM, Paul Baldock wrote: > 10M is open from W7 to East Coast and South America (1930Z) 29.000MHz > Calling CQ on 29.010 now with antlers pointed west. I heard a W6 on 29.000. 73, -Larry/NE1S From paul at paulbaldock.com Sun Oct 9 15:58:00 2016 From: paul at paulbaldock.com (Paul Baldock) Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 12:58:00 -0700 Subject: [AMRadio] 10M is open In-Reply-To: References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> Message-ID: <20161009195749.8094C16A7C4@filter02.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net> I just worked a PY on 29.000 I'll listen again at 20:30Z if you are around - Paul KW7Y At 12:42 PM 10/9/2016, you wrote: >On 10/9/16 3:25 PM, Paul Baldock wrote: >>10M is open from W7 to East Coast and South America (1930Z) 29.000MHz >Calling CQ on 29.010 now with antlers pointed west. I heard a W6 on 29.000. > >73, >-Larry/NE1S From w5jo at brightok.net Sun Oct 9 16:44:31 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 15:44:31 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] 10M is open In-Reply-To: <20161009195749.8094C16A7C4@filter02.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net><20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> <20161009195749.8094C16A7C4@filter02.dlls.pa.frontiernet.net> Message-ID: At my Southern Oklahoma location I am hearing a religious station on 28.947. It is not very strong so I can't tell if it is a mixing product or a harmonic. The direction from me seems to about 100 degrees from here. I don't know of any shortwave stations near to my location that could offer a mixing product. Jim W5JO -----Original Message----- I just worked a PY on 29.000 I'll listen again at 20:30Z if you are around - Paul KW7Y From w5jo at brightok.net Sun Oct 9 17:04:57 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 16:04:57 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 Message-ID: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. Jim W5JO From k4kyv at charter.net Sun Oct 9 17:09:44 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 16:09:44 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> Message-ID: <001601d22271$75f03110$61d09330$@charter.net> > The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing > on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. > > Jim > W5JO Didn't they use to identify as World Harvest Radio International, and broadcast religious programming on short wave? I don't remember them being in SC though. Indiana maybe? Don k4kyv From ars.w5omr at gmail.com Sun Oct 9 17:33:03 2016 From: ars.w5omr at gmail.com (Geoff) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 16:33:03 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] 10M is open also 15m In-Reply-To: <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> References: <001201d22012$cc533130$64f99390$@charter.net> <20161009192523.55CE4F4B9C@filter02.roch.ny.frontiernet.net> Message-ID: <76005806-f258-909e-c1d4-10eb183bba4a@gmail.com> On 10/09/2016 02:25 PM, Paul Baldock wrote: > 10M is open from W7 to East Coast and South America (1930Z) 29.000MHz > I could only hear a CA7 on 10m in the novice slopbucket area. Worked a special event station in Connecticut on 15m ssb who was -strong- down here in SE Texas, so moved on up to 21.425 and worked N2MHI/Dave there in New Jersey. He wasn't nearly as strong, and kept missing words, here and there. But, the band -is- open! Still monitoring there. 73 = Best Regards, -Geoff/W5OMR From w5jo at brightok.net Sun Oct 9 17:48:41 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 16:48:41 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> Message-ID: <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> I looked them up on a radio station finder and found the same thing. The web site lists 1340 and an FM frequency but I saw nothing about being a SW station. I feel sure then are not assigned 28.947 and will see what I can find that could be causing a mix product around me. No telling and I don?t have a spectrum analyzer. Tnx. Jim From: Dexter McIntyre W4DEX Jim, I'm not far from Rock Hill SC. When I saw your first post I tuned to 28.947 and heard nothing. The link below indicated that call is a shortwave broadcaster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Harvest_Radio_International W4DEX On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 5:04 PM, wrote: The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. Jim W5JO ______________________________________________________________ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Post: 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. This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to w4dex at arrl.net From bguyger at yahoo.com Sun Oct 9 18:32:46 2016 From: bguyger at yahoo.com (Bill Guyger) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 17:32:46 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> Message-ID: <70FBD45C-9972-425A-8989-FBB293303621@yahoo.com> They may have a "unofficial" SW station. You'd be surprised at how many religious entities try to get away with under the table operations. Or maybe not..... There was a group here in Dallas that was supposed to be operating a FM booster, low gain antenna and 200 Watts (IIRC). They were running 2000 Watts with a 6 bay (again IIRC) antenna. The Feds finally shut them down. And there was a Spanish operation on the tower that KTCK FM is on just North of Decatur, TX. again 200 W. and a single bay antenna. They put up 2 bays and were also running 2 kW. Their operation in Houston was busted and the transmitter up here mysteriously disappeared over night. They just cut the feed line and the power wiring, grabbed their equipment and disappeared back into the wood work. Bill AD5OL Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 9, 2016, at 4:04 PM, wrote: > > The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. > > Jim > W5JO > ______________________________________________________________ > Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net > AMRadio mailing list > Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Post: 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. > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to bguyger at yahoo.com From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Sun Oct 9 18:47:25 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 17:47:25 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> Message-ID: Last winter I kept hearing strange transmissions on 1980 kc. CW, music, lots of nonsense. I didn't know what to make of it but eventually figured out that two AM bc stations, one on 1160 running 50 KW and one on 820 running 5 KW were mixing and I was getting the product of their groundwaves in my preamp, because I had no matching networks or filters, just a random length wire. a filter ahead of the preamp solved the problem. If I had been out in the country this probably wouldn't have happened. Anyway, maybe you are hearing some sort of product Jim. Take the licensed sw frequency of that station and subtract it from 28947 then tune to the difference and see what's there. Rob K5UJ From w5jo at brightok.net Sun Oct 9 21:11:47 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 20:11:47 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> Message-ID: The problem is they have several licensed frequencies and I don't know which one is mixing and cannot tell because it may be anywhere on any of their SW frequencies. I do wish it were that simple. Jim -----Original Message----- . Take the licensed sw frequency of that station and subtract it from 28947 then tune to the difference and see what's there. From bguyger at yahoo.com Sun Oct 9 22:38:32 2016 From: bguyger at yahoo.com (Bill Guyger) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 02:38:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> Message-ID: <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> Guys Here's something interesting. I queried the FCC data base for WHRI as an AM station, no such license. I then checked all the AM stations in S.C. and there is only one AM in Rock Hill, S.C.?and it is WAVO on 1150 kHz. 5 kW. day , .059 kW. night -?yes 59 Watts. It is owned by WHVN, Inc. which sounds like a contraction of Heaven............ I then queried the WHRI call and found it is assigned to the International Bureau. So it may be a legitimate SW?station. I have no idea how to search the International Bureau data base, I can't even see a listing under "Search FCC Data Bases". FWIW?there is no FM licensed as WHRI either. Bill AD5OL From: Rob Atkinson To: Jim Wilhite Cc: AM Radio List Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 Last winter I kept hearing strange transmissions on 1980 kc.? CW, music, lots of nonsense.? I didn't know what to make of it but eventually figured out that two AM bc stations, one on 1160 running 50 KW and one on 820 running 5 KW were mixing and I was getting the product of their groundwaves in my preamp, because I had no matching networks or filters, just a random length wire.? a filter ahead of the preamp solved the problem.? If I had been out in the country this probably wouldn't have happened.? Anyway, maybe you are hearing some sort of product Jim.? Take the licensed sw frequency of that station and subtract it from 28947 then tune to the difference and see what's there. Rob K5UJ ______________________________________________________________ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Post: 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. This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to bguyger at yahoo.com From k4kyv at charter.net Sun Oct 9 23:13:29 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 22:13:29 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> Message-ID: <001e01d222a4$469beb10$d3d3c130$@charter.net> > The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing > on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. > > Jim > W5JO World Harvest Radio International (WHRI) is a shortwave radio station in the United States, broadcasting conservative religious programming worldwide in the English language on a number of frequencies. Part of the LeSEA Christian broadcasting group, WHRI is based in Cypress Creek, South Carolina, with its signal rebroadcast on its sister stations, WHRA in Greenbush, Maine and T8WH in Palau. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Harvest_Radio_International Here is a list of frequencies dated 2016. Plenty on short wave. Maybe mixing products of some of those transmissions, or spurious images in the receiver. http://lesea.com/whr/frequencies/ From k4kyv at charter.net Sun Oct 9 23:25:40 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 22:25:40 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002201d222a5$f9cb3c80$ed61b580$@charter.net> They list 9605; the 3rd harmonic would be 28.815, and 9625; the 3rd harmonic would be 28.875. 28.947 would be the 3rd harmonic of 9649, an unlikely frequency, but 9650 would be close. Don k4kyv From w5jo at brightok.net Sun Oct 9 23:38:10 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 22:38:10 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <002201d222a5$f9cb3c80$ed61b580$@charter.net> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> <002201d222a5$f9cb3c80$ed61b580$@charter.net> Message-ID: <4A3A3859526F4F05918BE9D93A570E46@JimPC> All of their stations are a very long way from me so I question the strength to be mixing products in the receiver. Possible but highly unlikely and it is an IC-7300. Having looked at all the possibilities earlier, the only option I can imagine is mixing with the one local AM station near me, a 1 KW station about 35 miles away. It is 1240. Jim W5JO -----Original Message----- They list 9605; the 3rd harmonic would be 28.815, and 9625; the 3rd harmonic would be 28.875. 28.947 would be the 3rd harmonic of 9649, an unlikely frequency, but 9650 would be close. Don k4kyv From mjcal77 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 10 00:05:42 2016 From: mjcal77 at yahoo.com (CL in NC) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 04:05:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Bootleggin' a SW BC may be the only way to go References: <503518251.1054721.1476072342984.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <503518251.1054721.1476072342984@mail.yahoo.com> There is an SWL site that lists pirate broadcasters and their freqs and skeds, another thing to search for when you run out of counties I guess. I was intrigued by their operation, and wanted to know what it would take to be legal. I did some research into getting a bonafide SW broadcaster license several years ago, including contacting the FCC. Talk about government intervention, they have a rule, regulation, blue print for everything. Initial outlay just to get started with the paper work was over $200K. Don't forget the paved parking lot with handicap spots too. I don't think it is possible for the common man to legally get that BC610 up and running in the Tropical Bands and give the world some Hank Williams, Faron Young, and blast the Saudis with Ray Steven's 'Ahab the Arab". Charlie, W4MEC in NC From W2xj at w2xj.net Mon Oct 10 00:21:09 2016 From: W2xj at w2xj.net (W2XJ) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 00:21:09 -0400 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here is the WHRI transmission schedule. http://lesea.com/whr/frequencies/ You'll have to match to time of day. It is not AM station related as the highest frequency in their schedule is around 7 MHz removed. It could be a mix of two of their transmitters as 2 have an ERP of about 25 megawatts. Sent from my iPad > On Oct 9, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Bill Guyger via AMRadio wrote: > > Guys > Here's something interesting. I queried the FCC data base for WHRI as an AM station, no such license. I then checked all the AM stations in S.C. and there is only one AM in Rock Hill, S.C. and it is WAVO on 1150 kHz. 5 kW. day , .059 kW. night - yes 59 Watts. It is owned by WHVN, Inc. which sounds like a contraction of Heaven............ > I then queried the WHRI call and found it is assigned to the International Bureau. So it may be a legitimate SW station. I have no idea how to search the International Bureau data base, I can't even see a listing under "Search FCC Data Bases". FWIW there is no FM licensed as WHRI either. > Bill AD5OL > > From: Rob Atkinson > To: Jim Wilhite > Cc: AM Radio List > Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 5:47 PM > Subject: Re: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 > > Last winter I kept hearing strange transmissions on 1980 kc. CW, > music, lots of nonsense. I didn't know what to make of it but > eventually figured out that two AM bc stations, one on 1160 running 50 > KW and one on 820 running 5 KW were mixing and I was getting the > product of their groundwaves in my preamp, because I had no matching > networks or filters, just a random length wire. a filter ahead of the > preamp solved the problem. If I had been out in the country this > probably wouldn't have happened. Anyway, maybe you are hearing some > sort of product Jim. Take the licensed sw frequency of that station > and subtract it from 28947 then tune to the difference and see what's > there. > > Rob > K5UJ > ______________________________________________________________ > Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net > AMRadio mailing list > Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Post: 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. > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to bguyger at yahoo.com > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net > AMRadio mailing list > Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Post: 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. > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to w2xj at w2xj.net From donroden at hiwaay.net Mon Oct 10 00:48:21 2016 From: donroden at hiwaay.net (donroden at hiwaay.net) Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2016 23:48:21 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <66BA390923634706B28FFCCF1085F6CA@JimPC> <1113363456.991832.1476067112414@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20161009234821.Horde.5aQ8_bEg4BcAmQag_4k6N22@webmail.hiwaay.net> Unless the interference was heard on the same frequency on several different radios with several different first intermediate frequencies, I am leaning towards INTERNAL overload ( regardless of the $$$ of the radio ). Second possibility... the local 1KW AM was creating a diode mix on a rusty wire some distance south of the receiver ( per beam heading ). With RF .... things happen. Don W4DNR Quoting W2XJ : > Here is the WHRI transmission schedule. > > http://lesea.com/whr/frequencies/ From w5jo at brightok.net Mon Oct 10 08:12:08 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 07:12:08 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <001601d22271$75f03110$61d09330$@charter.net> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <001601d22271$75f03110$61d09330$@charter.net> Message-ID: <5A8893C904A64E81AA211EFEDD6FE703@JimPC> -----Original Message----- > The station identified and it is WHRI in Rock Hill, South Carolina. I see nothing > on their web site about shortwave broadcasting. > > Jim > W5JO Didn't they use to identify as World Harvest Radio International, and broadcast religious programming on short wave? I don't remember them being in SC though. Indiana maybe? Don k4kyv What I heard, the signal was just above the noise and fading in and out, was the call and a city name plus South Carolina. I had the sensitivity set to low to see if the signal would disappear, but it did not. I did hear the announcer say World Harvest Radio. No telling were the transmitter was because of their multiple locations but the identification could have been their headquarters information and I missed the transmitter location on a fade down. Jim W5JO From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Mon Oct 10 13:10:47 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 12:10:47 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: <5A8893C904A64E81AA211EFEDD6FE703@JimPC> References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <001601d22271$75f03110$61d09330$@charter.net> <5A8893C904A64E81AA211EFEDD6FE703@JimPC> Message-ID: I'm inclined to agree with Don Roden--I think something more local is going on. Also, I've heard that new IC-7300 is prone to overload. Rob K5UJ From w5jo at brightok.net Mon Oct 10 13:58:36 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 12:58:36 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 In-Reply-To: References: <4396D0882D76496398C22EBB324E0E4D@JimPC> <001601d22271$75f03110$61d09330$@charter.net> <5A8893C904A64E81AA211EFEDD6FE703@JimPC> Message-ID: <9787DDC66D9941F8BB8F5C08748AAD7C@JimPC> I have not experience any overload problems here with my radio. I live too far from any significant source of strong RF and have not experienced overload in the ham bands either the radio has an attenuator plus another feature to preclude overload by reducing sensitivity. I do have an external attenuator that I use for that possibility but have never had to use it here. In an RF rich environment, yes, but I live in the sticks. This signal is not there today. Jim W5JO Subject: Re: [AMRadio] SW station on 28.947 I'm inclined to agree with Don Roden--I think something more local is going on. Also, I've heard that new IC-7300 is prone to overload. Rob K5UJ From w5jo at brightok.net Mon Oct 10 14:22:10 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:22:10 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] WHRI Message-ID: <9A5AD5103CC147FAB9C910D3A58DB738@JimPC> They have an interesting transmitter in Cypress Creek, SC. Here is a link to the manufacturer web page on it. http://www.transmitter.be/bbc-sk55.html 500 KW is serious RF. A lot of new equipment is now on the market since I quit the business. Jim W5JO From mjcal77 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 13 09:56:33 2016 From: mjcal77 at yahoo.com (CL in NC) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:56:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Condx capacitors References: <454465411.179889.1476366993711.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> You know, I have done, or attempted to, recondition electrolytics and pretty much decided the results are mixed at best. Most of the time they seem to recover only to fail completely after a while. I have had a Halli S40 receiver on the side of the bench and have been working on it's filter for a week now. It's a 10/10/30 all at 450, at first, the 10uf sections would take the 450 without incident, the 30uf though, as you raised the volts, current would increase slowly, then take off up scale. All sections take the full 450VDC with no problems now, It takes the charge and holds it but here is the question. A good or new electrolytic will hold a charge for an extended time, I charged the cap to 450 on this unit, (no loads) and came back after a bit, one section had 345, one had 165, and the 30uf section had 7 volts, measured with a VTVM. I hit it with a charge again and it responded like a good cap when looking at the current draw as it was charged. Under full voltage, all three sections together when under 450 draw less than 1ma. To those who have had good luck reconditioning caps like this, has your experience given you certain signs to look for in determining whether the reconditioning is worth it? Does a reconditioned cap that looks good on a meter, but does not maintain it's charge, indicate imminent failure? Charlie, W4MEC in NC From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Thu Oct 13 10:01:02 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:01:02 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Condx capacitors In-Reply-To: <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> References: <454465411.179889.1476366993711.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Replace all old electrolytic caps. Save time and frustration. Just shotgun and get on with life, but avoid chinese replacements. 73 Rob K5UJ From w5jo at brightok.net Thu Oct 13 10:19:35 2016 From: w5jo at brightok.net (w5jo at brightok.net) Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:19:35 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Condx capacitors In-Reply-To: <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> References: <454465411.179889.1476366993711.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I would bet that if you checked the leakage of them now, you would find it to be excessive which puts a load on the transformer which will cause it to overheat Charlie. I have had the same experience, they form good then after a period of time in operation they dry more and develop excessive leakage. Jim W5JO -----Original Message----- You know, I have done, or attempted to, recondition electrolytics and pretty much decided the results are mixed at best. Most of the time they seem to recover only to fail completely after a while. I have had a Halli S40 receiver on the side of the bench and have been working on it's filter for a week now. It's a 10/10/30 all at 450, at first, the 10uf sections would take the 450 without incident, the 30uf though, as you raised the volts, current would increase slowly, then take off up scale. All sections take the full 450VDC with no problems now, It takes the charge and holds it but here is the question. A good or new electrolytic will hold a charge for an extended time, I charged the cap to 450 on this unit, (no loads) and came back after a bit, one section had 345, one had 165, and the 30uf section had 7 volts, measured with a VTVM. I hit it with a charge again and it responded like a good cap when looking at the current draw as it was charged. Under full voltag e, all three sections together when under 450 draw less than 1ma. To those who have had good luck reconditioning caps like this, has your experience given you certain signs to look for in determining whether the reconditioning is worth it? Does a reconditioned cap that looks good on a meter, but does not maintain it's charge, indicate imminent failure? Charlie, W4MEC in NC From k9cox at charter.net Fri Oct 14 03:23:02 2016 From: k9cox at charter.net (Ross Stenberg) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:23:02 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Condx capacitors In-Reply-To: References: <454465411.179889.1476366993711.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <454465411.179889.1476366993711@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Those electrolytics are old like most of us?change them out 73 Ross K9COX Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From mjcal77 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 14 08:42:51 2016 From: mjcal77 at yahoo.com (CL in NC) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Condx caps References: <867684748.256575.1476448971548.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <867684748.256575.1476448971548@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks for all who gave input on this question. I did leave it uncharged for a day and tried it again, the 10uf sections did fine but that 30 drew about 10ma at 450 for a while before it came down to less than 1ma. That section will probably makes its weakness known with a short to ground some time soon. I did look in my 'box-o-caps' and pulled out an old 3 section can that had the square terminals with the wire wrap connections still on it, and tested it just to see. All 3 - 450V sections took voltage and held it like it was brand new. That cap is probably 40 years old at least, something I scavenged from an old TV, and has been sitting there for that long. Too bad it wouldn't fit. Charlie From mjcal77 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 18 23:02:27 2016 From: mjcal77 at yahoo.com (CL in NC) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 03:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [AMRadio] Condx. caps References: <103942242.539109.1476846147906.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <103942242.539109.1476846147906@mail.yahoo.com> Well, add this one to the pile of unsuccessful reconditioning attempts. Continuing recondx work on the Halli S-40 RCVR PS filter, while the 2 - 10uf sections work just fine, was wary of the 30uf and have been charging and discharging it over the last several days, convincing myself it had healed. While in QSO tonight on our 6 meter AM net, I was letting it cook on the bench supply at 450VDC and it drawing about 0.8ma while I tinkered with other stuff, after a time, glanced at the MA meter and it was pinned on the 100ma range. Yikes! Cap was hot as a 2 dollar pistol. So, after a week of incremental voltage increase, rest time and cycle it again, TLC'ing it back to life, it looked like it might make it OK, only to quit in glorious fashion. Glad I saved my prepared Newark order, now I just have to click 'buy'. de W4MEC in NC From ranchorobbo at gmail.com Wed Oct 19 05:47:36 2016 From: ranchorobbo at gmail.com (Rob Atkinson) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 04:47:36 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Condx. caps In-Reply-To: <103942242.539109.1476846147906@mail.yahoo.com> References: <103942242.539109.1476846147906.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <103942242.539109.1476846147906@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: We go through this every year or so with some ham trying to "recondition" old electrolytics and it never works. when you have a rig to work on, or anything else, shotgun out all the old electrolytics, clip off the leads on the can caps, and leave them in place, ditto for the black beauties, and replace all with new electrolytics, polypropylene film, disc ceramics, etc. Those paper wrapped jobs, and the ones dipped in wax are the first to go. 73 Rob K5UJ On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:02 PM, CL in NC via AMRadio wrote: > Well, add this one to the pile of unsuccessful reconditioning attempts. Continuing recondx work on the Halli S-40 RCVR PS filter, while the 2 - 10uf sections work just fine, was wary of the 30uf and have been charging and discharging it over the last several days, convincing myself it had healed. While in QSO tonight on our 6 meter AM net, I was letting it cook on the bench supply at 450VDC and it drawing about 0.8ma while I tinkered with other stuff, after a time, glanced at the MA meter and it was pinned on the 100ma range. Yikes! Cap was hot as a 2 dollar pistol. So, after a week of incremental voltage increase, rest time and cycle it again, TLC'ing it back to life, it looked like it might make it OK, only to quit in glorious fashion. Glad I saved my prepared Newark order, now I just have to click 'buy'. > > de W4MEC in NC > ______________________________________________________________ > Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net > AMRadio mailing list > Archives: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/amradio/ > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Post: 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. > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to ranchorobbo at gmail.com From k4kyv at charter.net Wed Oct 19 13:08:18 2016 From: k4kyv at charter.net (Donald Chester) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:08:18 -0500 Subject: [AMRadio] Condx. caps In-Reply-To: <103942242.539109.1476846147906@mail.yahoo.com> References: <103942242.539109.1476846147906.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <103942242.539109.1476846147906@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002901d22a2b$6374b940$2a5e2bc0$@charter.net> > So, after a week of > incremental voltage increase, rest time and cycle it again, TLC'ing it back to > life, it looked like it might make it OK, only to quit in glorious fashion. Glad I > saved my prepared Newark order, now I just have to click 'buy'. I have an old Heathkit capacitor checker (dumpster find) that works pretty well for checking leakage, but the capacitance bridge is so inaccurate that it's useless. It has 0-600 volts DC output, using a magic eye tube to indicate leakage current. It can be used to recondition electrolytics by attaching the capacitor, turning up the voltage until it shows leakage. Let it sit, and the leakage current gradually drops down until it is close to normal. Then I turn the voltage up until it shows excessive leakage current again, and repeat the process. Keep going until it reads normal at full rated test voltage. If it takes more than an hour or so for the leakage current to approach normal, I discard the capacitor. After an apparently successful re-condition, I discharge the capacitor and let it sit overnight or maybe for a day or two. Then, if it still checks good with no more than maybe a slight rebound of leakage current, I'll re-use the capacitor. If significant leakage has returned, I discard it, since with any piece of equipment it may sit idle for weeks or even months without being turned on. I have found that even brand new electrolytics tend to show a slight leakage before the rated voltage is reached but they re-form easily, so I run the procedure on every capacitor before I use it. I have caught a couple of brand new but bad capacitors that way. I rarely use an ancient electrolytic for a project even if it appears to recondition OK, unless that's the only one I have and don't want to wait for a new order to arrive, but I'll make note of the capacitor and make sure it gets wired into the circuit in a fashion that would make it easy to replace. With non-electrolytics, even if they check prefect on the checker, once I know for sure I can apply full voltage without the capacitor drawing excessive current or shorting and destroying the meter, I then measure the actual leakage with full test voltage applied using my DVM set to the microamp range. I suppose a capacitor could short unexpectedly just the instant I was taking the measurement; that's just a crap shoot that I have taken for years and so far never damaged the meter, although I seem to be prone to just exactly that kind of Murphy's Law event. The Heathkit checker has a series resistor that would limit the current in the event of a short. I don't know how much current it would take to damage a DVM set to microamps, but I know it wouldn't take much to destroy a regular moving coil meter. A have a junk box where I save old wax capacitors, just in case I might ever decide to re-stuff one for a vintage restoration or replica, something I have only actually done once or twice. Don k4kyv

This page last updated 14 Dec 2017.