[ARC5] CBY-46104 Receiver - Command Set Navigators

[D C *Mac* Macdonald]

I didn't use the 1.5-3.0 in the car.
I used it with the Morrow converter
as my station receiver in the house!
The Morrow converter had its output
around 1525 kHz IIRC.  If you had a
local BC station, you just moved off to
the other side.  You wouldn't have
both 1520 and 1530 in any local area.
Even if the local station were very
strong, you could move off 15 or
even 25 kHz and just touch up the
tuning a bit.

73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
Oklahoma City, OK



----Original Message Follows----
From: "Dennis Monticelli" <dennis.monticelli at gmail.com>
To: "D C *Mac* Macdonald" <k2gkk at hotmail.com>
CC: kk5f at arrl.net, ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARC5] CBY-46104 Receiver - Command Set Navigators
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 13:14:53 -0700

Thanks for the information, guys.  This really adds to my understanding.

Being a "communications" receiver, presumeably the 1.5 to 3.0 range filled a
gap in the overall freq coverage and was probably used more for its
compatibility with other ground-based HF systems vs use of a desireable freq
range for efficient air-to-air comm.

I have a BC-453-B I restored in 2005 that I use to listen to SWL beacons
and find that it performs nicely. I run it on only 60V and even then had to
replace several caps.  I also built a little 40/80M crystal converter to go
ahead of it, which I installed on the rear deck where the dyno normally
resides.  Providing you pull up the sticks on the IF coupling, the
selectivity is decent.

I didn't know about the ham use as a second converter in a vehicle.  I
wondered why a ham would buy this freq model back then....for parts?  160M
was not that popular after WWII; Loran put a big damper on activity.  The
selective second IF application makes good sense.  Why use an auto radio
with an outboard converter when you can use the 1.5 to 3.0 ARC-5 in lieu?
Better arrangement.  I guess you could sub 6V tubes and run it right off the
battery if wished.

On 4/8/07, D C *Mac* Macdonald <k2gkk at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I realize that today it is considered blasphemy,
>but the 1.5-3.0 receiver made a great 2nd I.F.
>for amateur band mobile converters.  While
>its I.F. was higher than that of the venerable
>BC-453/R-23 Q-5er, it offered considerably
>better selectivity (plus a BFO) than the typical
>automobile broadcast receiver.  I used mine
>with a Morrow 5BR-1 converter for quite a few
>years back in the late 1950s.  Thinking back on
>it, it did quite a bit better than any other receiver
>I had until I bought my first new receiver, a
>Hammarlund HQ-145X, in 1962.
>
>Mine got crushed in a tornado in May 1999 and
>its remains now rest in a huge landfill along with
>a bunch of other gear.
>
>73 - Mac, K2GKK/5
>Oklahoma City, OK