BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
colin McDonald <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:27:58 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (75 lines)
well, you were in hog heaven so to speak, since you were a "ham" *groan*
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David R. Basden" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: Upper and Lower side band


> My first SSB rig was a second-hand Central Electronics 20A with a BC
> whatever as the VFO.  I drove a Globe Electronics LA-1 linear with it
> and paired that with a Hammarlund HQ-170.  I thought I was in hog heaven!
>
> 73,
>
> Dave, W7OQ
>
> At 02:21 PM 10/14/2010, you wrote:
>>To expand that a bit; many of the early SSB users used the military
>>surplus BC459 as their VFO.  Central Electronics used this unit in a
>>nice cabinet and most poor folks bought them for five bucks from
>>radio military surplus stores.  in the mid and late fifties we had
>>several blocks of those stores on the near South Side and what a
>>bonanza they were for a kid with no money to speak of!!
>>I remember that the BC459 ran in the five megacycle range and as
>>Butch described the output was used in such a way to generate
>>sideband signals.  For sure the Central Electronics 10A,  10B and 20A
>>SSB exciters all used this principle.  Those rigs ran ten and twenty
>>watts respectively, came as kits or factory wired and weere pretty
>>inexpensive.  They were "phasing" rigs and their unwanted sideband
>>suppression wasn't terriffic but they got a lot of hams on sideband.
>>i got licensed in 1957 and my first band of operation was 160
>>meters.  Then there were only 25 khz.of space and SSB and A M guys
>>were really peeing all over one another about the space!!  Guess
>>sideband ultimately won.
>>Sorry for the length of this!!
>>Pat, K9JAUAt 09:28 AM 10/14/2010, you wrote:
>> >I'm not sure, it is kind of like which came first the chicken or the 
>> >egg.
>> >   Many early radios were designed in such a way that the 80 and 40 
>> > meter
>> >bands were derived by the difference frequencies between the vfo and
>> >mixer and the 20 15 and ten meter bands used the sum of the vfo plus
>> >oscillator.  Hope that makes sense.  If you remember theory, when you 
>> >mix
>> >frequencies, such as a vfo plus oscillator you get on the output, both
>> >original frequencies plus sum and difference.  In my national ncx 200
>> >which was my first radio, the if as I recall was 5.2020 and the vfo was
>> >somewhere around 9 mhz.  Anyhow, when your mixing a signal and one of
>> >them is ssb, if you use the sum, the sideband stays the same, and if you
>> >use the difference such as my national did for 80 and 40, you get the
>> >opposite side band.
>> >73
>> >Butch Bussen
>> >wa0vjr
>> >open Node 3148
>> >Las Vegas
>> >
>> >
>> >On Wed, 13 Oct 2010, Phil Scovell wrote:
>> >
>> > > I think I heard once but I can't remember so does anyone know why the 
>> > > =
>> > > various bands are used for upper and lower side band?  Just curious. 
>> > > =
>> > > There's got to be a reason why it is different based upon the band 
>> > > you =
>> > > are using.
>> > >
>> > > Phil.
>> > > K0NX
>> > >
>> > > 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2