Subject: GLOWBUGS digest 38

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 20:44:22 -0600 (CST)

GLOWBUGS Digest 38

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) A Good Home
	by [email-masked] (Joseph Cooper)
  2) Re: 6146 transmitter
	by Bruce Robertson <[email-masked]>
  3) Re: 6146 transmitter
	by "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
  4) Re: 6146 transmitter
	by [email-masked] (michael silva)
  5) Coil forms and 2E24s...
	by [email-masked] (Ralph Hartwell)
  6) Re: A Good Home
	by "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
  7) Re: A Good Home
	by Steve Ellington <[email-masked]>
  8) Identifying Audio Stage Transformers
	by [email-masked]
  9) Re: A Good Home
	by "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
 10) Re: 6146 transmitter
	by [email-masked] (Henry Silvia)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Dec 95 22:37 EST
From: [email-masked] (Joseph Cooper)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: A Good Home
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

This is a bit off topic, but it is somthing that has been becomming a
concern to me and I wanted to see if any of you out there felt the same way.
I think that given the interests of the group there may be an interest here.

I have become increasingly aware of the increasing number of estate sales
that have been happening lately as many of our ranks become 'silent keys'. I
don't have numbers, but I have a feeling that a significant number of hams
in North America got their licences in the 1940's and 1950's and are now
into their 60's and 70's in age.

Now my point here is this:

I have had the occation to make two recent purchases of equipment from two
estate sales. The equipment in question were older rigs that been very well
taken care of and had afforded the owners many hours of pleasure. The
important point here was that families did not want to have the equipment
sit and do nothing, but wanted to sell it in order to keep it in use. In
general the amount being asked for was really only a token amount as they
did not want to 'profit' from the sale. The key here in both cases the
reason why I was able to purchase the equipment was that I promised to give
the equipment a 'good home', that is that I would treat the equipment with
the same respect as the previous owner and not just use it for parts for the
junk box. This made the family feel better about what they were doing.

Frankly I have seen some emails from people gloating over the 'great deal'
that they got from some estate sale. I'll fully accept anyone out their
saying that I'm being over sensitive on this, but some how I don't think so.

The other day I was to thinking about an old Laffette regen SW kit called a
'Span Master' that me and my father had built back in 1961. It had got lost
over time and frankly I was sorry to have had that happen. I sent out an
email asking for info and got back a very nice response from a fellow who
had also built one at the same time and still had it (and still working). He
will probably keep that old kit for the rest of his life as part of his
personal history.

Anyway, all of this is to say that I have been wondering about how to work
this into somthing worth while. It is obvious that for some their ham radio
equipment is more that a collection of radio parts, but comes part of their
life. In many cases the family has come to associate those radios (even if
they do not understand them) as part of their partner's personality and
happiness.

What do you fellows think of this:

A 'good home' program where the family who is trying to dispose of a 'silent
key's' equipment can be assured that the equipment will be used 'properly'
and 'productivly' in the way that would reflect well on the previous owner.
This could be simply a set of ideals layed out and understood, and agreed
upon by the person purchasing the equipment. Frankly, given our hobbies love
for certificates, why not have some ham group take up the cause and sponsor it. 

Personally I would not mind even having a small sticker that could be placed
on the back of the unit saying 'This is a 'good home' radio previously owned
by (name and dates). The idea would be that if you encountered it later you
would be 'encouraged' to keep it restored and in good order. The benefit
would be the preservation of our heritage and a show of fraternal respect
for our members.

Anyway, am I off base here ? If not and if it appears to be a good idea I'll
start writting letters to the different ham mags and organizations and try
and get broad support for it.  

===================================================================
* Joseph Cooper-VE3FMQ  QTH-East York-near Toronto Ontario Canada *
* Interests are:-Lowfer/VLF/BCB Radio-Woodworking-Steam Railroads *
* -Nikola Tesla-Antique Radios-Crystal Radios-Travel-Burmese Cats *
* FAX (416) 423-7782  9:00pm to 5:00pm EDST Monday To Friday Only *
===================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 23:31:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Bruce Robertson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: 6146 transmitter
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

> > I've finally found the tube project for my tastes. Its from the 
> > 1969 Arrl manual. One tube transmitter using a 6146.  I hope to get the
> > socket and anode cap from AES here within the week so be forewarned.....
> >   More to come.......

Does the Manual have a reference to a QST article from which the design 
was borrowed? I have access to old QSTs, but not to the manuals. (Except 
my 1953 and 1993 copies.)

73, VE3UWL

Bruce G. Robertson Dept. of Classics, U. of T.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 23:50:21 -0500 (EST)
From: "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
To: Bruce Robertson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: 6146 transmitter
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

On Sun, 3 Dec 1995, Bruce Robertson wrote:

> > > I've finally found the tube project for my tastes. Its from the 
> > > 1969 Arrl manual. One tube transmitter using a 6146.  I hope to get the
> > > socket and anode cap from AES here within the week so be forewarned.....
> > >   More to come.......
> 
> Does the Manual have a reference to a QST article from which the design 
> was borrowed? I have access to old QSTs, but not to the manuals. (Except 
> my 1953 and 1993 copies.)

My 1957 ARRL Handbook makes reference to QST for August 1955.

73,
Tony
K4KYO
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 21:07:13 -0800
From: [email-masked] (michael silva)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: 6146 transmitter
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

Tony, K4KYO, wrote:

>> > >.... One tube transmitter using a 6146.

>> Does the Manual have a reference to a QST article from which the 
>>design was borrowed?

>My 1957 ARRL Handbook makes reference to QST for August 1955.

There's also one in the December 1958 issue.

73,
Mike, KK6GM

------------------------------

Date: Sun,  3 Dec 1995 20:01:00 GMT
From: [email-masked] (Ralph Hartwell)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Coil forms and 2E24s...
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

M>First (in reverse order), has anybody done anything with those $1 2E24s
M>that we all bought last summer?  I must admit I've never designed
M>around a filament tube before, so I haven't done anything with mine.

  I used to run a surplus military rig as a 2 Meter repeater, and it
used a pair of 2E24's in push-pull.  With a bit of tweaking, forced air
cooling and finger crossing, I was able to get close to 80 watts into
the pair of them, but I think that's pushing them.  I would get about
500 hours or so life out of them and then they would lose emission.
With 2E26's, I could get a good 120 watts input with them.  Generally
however, I'd suggest being a bit more conservative. <G>

M>Do you just always pick circuits that put the filament at RF ground, or
M>is there any benefit to actually isolating the filament with chokes?

   They are quite stable with the fils at RF ground.

M>Next, I've been thinking about plug-in coil forms, and I don't want to
M>pay AES prices for them.  I went out in the garage and got a piece of
M>1" PVC pipe (sch 40?) and stuck it in the microwave for a minute and it
M>came out cool as the proverbial cucumber.  This would make a fine coil
M>form mounted to the base of a defunct tube (or buy the bases from AES).
M>Is there any reason this shouldn't work?  Are there other simple tests
M>I can perform on the material?

  The white PVC pipe seems to work OK, but from my tests, the grey stuff
appears to have higher losses.  I melted a test coil form made out
of the grey PVC while running 500 watts at 21 MHz even though the wire
was fairly cool. I don't know what the loss tangent of the material is,
but I suspect it's pretty low at most of the HF freqs where you are
likely to use the PVC as a coil form. I've made up several loading could
for various loaded dipole HF antennas over the past few years and they
have all worked fine.  I haven't noticed and deterioration of the
material after several years of high power use.   You can also purchase
Polystyrene tube in various sizes and thicknesses from such suppliers as
Cadillac Plastic.  Don't forget those orange pill bottles from the local
pharmacy, they work pretty well, but are a bit flexible compared to PVC.

   Ralph W5JGV

---
 þ QMPro 1.53 þ Break up a relationship - buy a computer!!

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 09:47:21 -0500 (EST)
From: "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
To: Joseph Cooper <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: A Good Home
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

Joseph,

I've told this story before, so I'll just make reference to the local ham
who pounced on the widow of a local ham a few years back and offered the
widow $300 (quoting the widow) "to take this stuff off your hands".  The
"stuff"  included a Ten Tech Omni-D, and Atlas 210-X, a late model Kenwood
2 meter rig, a Hammarlund HQ-160, a tower/roatator/TA-33, and a good
number of other good items.  Two years afterwards, a used equipment dealer
offered about $2000 for the lot with a clear explanation that he was a
professional dealer and was offering her wholesale.  Of course this kind
of thing isn't restricted to amateur equipment as evidenced by a recent
ham's estate sale where the employee of a non-profit (non-ham)
organization allegedly took advantage of the situation by setting aside
the appraisals and classifying some valuable art objects as (typically)
"picture", "rug", etc. and bought the items herself at a tiny fraction of
the appraised value. 

As vice president and now president of the Vic Clark Chapter of the QCWA,
I have been directly involved with the Foundation for Amateur Radio's
"Survivor's Assistance Program" to prevent the vultures for "taking stuff
of widows' hands".  Even so, there are those who try to shortstop the 
process by getting to the widow first.  The "$300" guy was one of those 
people.

That being said, there are those families who could care less.  Someone 
told of coming on a site where the family had put out a dumpster and 
they found if full of apparently very nice vintage gear.  There are also 
situations where it is necessary to divest the estate ASAP, which was the 
case with Stu Meyer's (W2GHK) estate as he died without a will and 
Virginia's law required it.  There were some real bargains, but FAR 
Survivor Assistance Program people were there and saw to it that items 
were properly identified and appraised.

> What do you fellows think of this:
> 
> A 'good home' program where the family who is trying to dispose of a 'silent
> key's' equipment can be assured that the equipment will be used 'properly'
> and 'productivly' in the way that would reflect well on the previous owner.
> This could be simply a set of ideals layed out and understood, and agreed
> upon by the person purchasing the equipment. Frankly, given our hobbies love
> for certificates, why not have some ham group take up the cause and sponsor it. 
>
> Personally I would not mind even having a small sticker that could be placed
> on the back of the unit saying 'This is a 'good home' radio previously owned
> by (name and dates). The idea would be that if you encountered it later you
> would be 'encouraged' to keep it restored and in good order. The benefit
> would be the preservation of our heritage and a show of fraternal respect
> for our members.
> 
> Anyway, am I off base here ? If not and if it appears to be a good idea I'll
> start writting letters to the different ham mags and organizations and try
> and get broad support for it.  

I don't think you're off base at all.  One of the things I look for in 
vintage gear is some evidence of who owned it before.  I've contacted 
previous owners before, although with the vanity call signs coming, that 
will be more difficult, and have been pleasantly surprised to have gotten 
some good information back.  To me it's nice to know that a piece of gear 
had given pleasure to another member of the fraternity.

To me, people are what make amateur radio the wonderful hobby that it is
and the toys we all love are just a means of knowing them.  We do all
these things like restoring vintage gear, homebrewing, competing in
contests, or whatever, and get to know one another as people with varied
interests.  I have more lifetime friends who I've gotten to know through
amateur radio than by any other means.  That alone has made it all
worthwhile. 

Getting to your specific point, I think it's a great idea and believe that
the Foundation for Amateur Radio would be a good organization to write to. 
The ham magazines and ARRL are too big and to profit oriented (he said
cynically <g>) to take up anything like that.  FAR is a smaller national
organization that is known for its service to the whole amateur community. 
For example, among the things they've done recently, they awarded (as I
recall) 55 scholarships.  Write to FAR president Chuck Sommer, N4OSD.  (I
don't have his address handy, but I'ms sure it's available in the
callbook.)

Good for you!

73,
Tony
K4KYO
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 11:19:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Steve Ellington <[email-masked]>
To: Joseph Cooper <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: A Good Home
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951204110753.509B-100000@iglou>

> Anyway, all of this is to say that I have been wondering about how to work
> this into somthing worth while. It is obvious that for some their ham radio
> equipment is more that a collection of radio parts, but comes part of their
> life. In many cases the family has come to associate those radios (even if
> they do not understand them) as part of their partner's personality and
> happiness.
> What do you fellows think of this:

I enjoy Ham Radio, working on old BA's etc. but I wouldn't want my wife 
to be burdened with the thought that this junk is "part of my life". You 
talk as if these radios are almost human. A ham should never idolize his 
hobby or equipment. I've told my xyl to sell the stuff to the highest 
bidder and let it GO. To attach a sticker on a radio and expect someone 
to eternally honor, love and care for it is asking too much. If we start 
this, next thing you know, xyls will want stickers on their toasters, 
hair dryer and 200 pairs of shoes.

You had to ask. 

Steve Ellington [email-masked]  Louisville, Ky 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 16:35:21 -0500
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Identifying Audio Stage Transformers
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

This weekend while visiting the local surplus outlet I found a box full of
what look to be audio output transformers.  The price was right and so I took
a chance and bought a few.

The transformers were made by an outfit called Webcor and the newspaper
wrapping the transformers is dated 1958.  The winding that appears to be
primary is centertapped has an inductance of 7.4 H.  There are two
secondaries, one or which is centertapped, which have inductances of 8.4 mH
and 7.4 mH respectively.  Using an audio oscillator, I put a 10 Vp-p signal
on the primary and measured .3 Vp-p and .28 Vp-p on the secondaries.  Doing
the math this works out to a turns ratio of 33 and 36 to 1.

Never having designed a tube output stage before, I would like to ask a few
questions of the group.

1.  Before putting this transformer into service, are there any other
parameters I need to consider?  Based on the turns ratio (33:1) it looks like
this transformer would match a 8.9 K ohm load to an 8 ohm speaker.

2.  Why would there be two secondary windings with nearly the same turn
ratio?  The only thing I can imagine is that the nontapped winding is for the
speaker and the tapped winding is for a feedback network.

I would like to use one of these transformers in my next receiver if it will
work.  I've grown tired of being leashed to a radio via the headphone cord.
 Hi Hi

73's, Eric WD6DGX

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 13:07:42 -0500 (EST)
From: "Tony Stalls (K4KYO)" <[email-masked]>
To: Steve Ellington <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: A Good Home
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, Steve Ellington wrote:

> I enjoy Ham Radio, working on old BA's etc. but I wouldn't want my wife 
> to be burdened with the thought that this junk is "part of my life". You 
> talk as if these radios are almost human. A ham should never idolize his 
> hobby or equipment. I've told my xyl to sell the stuff to the highest 
> bidder and let it GO. To attach a sticker on a radio and expect someone 
> to eternally honor, love and care for it is asking too much. If we start 
> this, next thing you know, xyls will want stickers on their toasters, 
> hair dryer and 200 pairs of shoes.
> 
> You had to ask. 

Steve,

I have to take issue with you on this.  We're not talking about toasters,
hair driers, or shoes here.  We're talking about Johnson Viking, Collins,
Hammarlund, National, and any number of other marques that a lot of us
consider classics and worth preserving.  Personalizing it makes it all the
better. 

Consider the BC-375 tuning unit that I found a B-24G tail number stenciled
on it.  Dave Stinson researched it and found that it was assigned to a WW2
Navy patrol bomber.  That made it a lot more interesting than its just
being another of thousands of TU-(*) tuning units.  It had a history and
maybe knowing where a Hammarlund HQ-whatever had been would make it a lot
more interesting.  I know that I got a kick of opening up an HQ-120 and
finding that several previous owners had written their calls inside. 

However, I doubt that the Japanese appliance radios and belt-toys with
their built-in obsolescence will garner as much appreciation.  Anyway,
attitudes about amateur radio being a fraternity are changing too, so any
such preservation plan will probably go by the boards before long,
especially with all the "instant old-timers" that will be created by the
vanity call sign fiasco. 

Now, that being said, after I've joined the legion of SK's, what do I care
what happens to all this stuff?  However, I would like to think that
someone appreciates my admiration of these things enough to see that the
time and effort I've put forth to care for them after I'm gone is
continued.  I would prefer to think that it's not going to end up just
being hamfest fodder. 

I've decided that rather than sell to the highest bidder, I would rather
give the stuff away if I know the recipient will care as much about the
gizmo or whatever as much as I do.  When and if I get around to making a
will, the amateur gear is going to be in there so that at least I'll know
the first stop will be to a good home.  There won't a ham radio estate
sale at this QTH.  The toaster and hair drier will be up for grabs though. 

Anyway Steve, I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with your 
perspective.  It's just that mine, Joseph's, and probably some others is 
different.  Nobody is saying that anyone has to participate either.

73,
Tony
K4KYO

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 19:03:59 -0500
From: [email-masked] (Henry Silvia)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: 6146 transmitter
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

>To: [email-masked]
>From: [email-masked] (Henry Silvia)
>Subject: Re: 6146 transmitter
>
>>
>>
>>> > I've finally found the tube project for my tastes. Its from the 
>>> > 1969 Arrl manual. One tube transmitter using a 6146.  I hope to get the
>>> > socket and anode cap from AES here within the week so be forewarned.....
>>> >   More to come.......
>>
>>Does the Manual have a reference to a QST article from which the design 
>>was borrowed? I have access to old QSTs, but not to the manuals. (Except 
>>my 1953 and 1993 copies.)
>>
>>73, VE3UWL
>>
>>Bruce G. Robertson Dept. of Classics, U. of T.
>>
>>
>
>Bruce, I could not find any references to QST in the manual but I'll
happily pass on any information that I find on this trans.

------------------------------

End of GLOWBUGS Digest 38
*************************