Jeff:
as far as tubes go, if those old receivers have some really odd ball tube
that was only availible from military surplus, then maybe...but in that, we
are talking probably 1940 to 1950 erra when those kinds of tubes were
readily availible.
Generally speaking, you can get nearly any kind of tube needed from either
new old stock or from companies that have remodeled the tubes or are
reproducing the older types of tubes for a fraction of the going cost for
the military surplus tubes that can still be found occasionally.
Most of the military or industrial grade tubes are sought after because they
tend to exhibit more stable characteristics, but in a receiver type
application, it isn't as vital to have that maximum stability.
So, my point to all this is that tubes are not necesarily an arm and a leg
unless you just have to have the industrial/military versions or the
original erra tubes. Or, unless the receiver takes some crazy odd ball tube
that was only made for 8 years in the philips factory in the UK.
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Kenyon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: off topic, question about older receiver
> Hi, I have heard that just tubes for those older units can sometimes be an
> arm and a leg.
> I remember too those short-wave boomboxes that came out in the
> early 80's. The few units I have seen detachable speakers, and AM/FM and
> tape, and a a couple of short-wave bands. Many people didn't know they
> had the capability of short-wave until I pointed it out. My parents are
> two of those people, and I still have an early Phisher unit from 1982! I
> don't know if you all are familiar with these, but the unit I have has the
> flashing LED that flashes on and off in time to recordings or whatever you
> are playing at the time. The tape machine doesn't have the best design on
> it with regard to mechanics, but it has one good recording quality. What
> were people hoping to market these units for?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Walt Smith wrote:
>
> > Expensive is right! I bought one new somewhere around (just a guess)
1964 or
> > so and I think it was something close to $300. Mine was the solid state
> > model, but didn't have the ability to copy SSB, as it didn't yet have
the
> > USB/LSB switch--I think that came along within a year or so of my having
> > bought mine and I wasn't real happy. While not true general coverage
(that
> > is, 0-30 kHz), it had very wide coverage and as I recall now, an
excellent
> > AM and at least above average FM capabilities. The front of the radio
folded
> > down in two sections and inside the front was a small book (forget what
was
> > in it, but think it was time zones and maybe some maps) and a little
metal
> > wheel that allowed you to calculate the current time anywhere in the
world
> > based on your local time. The radio used standard D cells (either eight
or
> > nine of them, as I recall) and when loaded up with a full complement of
> > batteries, weighed a lot more than you really wanted to carry on a
picnic. I
> > was one of the few I knew at the time with that radio who'd bought the
> > optional plug-in AC power supply. The built-in telescoping antenna was
part
> > of the carrying handle and there were provisions inside the back of the
> > radio for an external antenna with, as I recall now, RCA jacks. There
was a
> > separate ferrite rod for AM reception.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Butch Bussen" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: off topic, question about older receiver
> >
> >
> > They made several models of the transoceanic. I have a couple, one old
> > tube one, and a solid state one, probably the kind you saw. They are a
> > very nic radio, although not general coverage. They were also very
> > expensive in their day.
> > 73s
> > Butch Bussen
> > wa0vjr
> >
>
|
