[ARC5] A rear plug for the receivers
Paddy Ryan
pei7cn at eircom.net
Wed Oct 17 08:03:54 EDT 2012
My solution is an adaption of the front adaptor box (no pun intended)..the
male internal plug fits the rear socket on my receiver..some of these plugs
have 8 pins (you would have to remove one) and some have 7..the 7 pin one
fits the 7 pin socket on the rear of the rx..I have not looked at the back
of all the rxs..some of them may have 8 pin sockets..the plug is a
reasonable fit but not perfect..all ham radio is a compromise and to hear
these receivers going fine after all these years with a bit of maintenance
is real joy..73 de Pat/EI7CN
-----Original Message-----
From: arc5-request at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:57 AM
To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: ARC5 Digest, Vol 105, Issue 78
Send ARC5 mailing list submissions to
arc5 at mailman.qth.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
arc5-request at mailman.qth.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
arc5-owner at mailman.qth.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARC5 digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Modifying the adapter box (Todd, KA1KAQ)
2. Re: On Hacking (hwhall at compuserve.com)
3. Re: Hacks and TVI: The "Cars" Analog (David Stinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:10:38 -0400
From: "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ARC5] Modifying the adapter box
To: ARC-5 Mail List <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID:
<CANCs6AUoXD9k0Z8cOL6PvC0s-oVuYvuDodLPWvsBthJC1Qo2yA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Kenneth G. Gordon <
kgordon2006 at frontier.com> wrote:
> On 16 Oct 2012 at 20:00, David Stinson wrote:
>
> > I missed this thread somehow.
> > Who needs a rear connector for a receiver?
>
> Most of us (?) Hee hee! ;-)
>
Along the same line, has anyone seen or does anyone own one of
those.....not sure the name, but it's a rear clip-on bracket with built in
rear connector for a single receiver and an extension cable meant for field
or bench servicing. Came across one in my 'stuff' as week or so back,
forgot I had it. Kinda neat, but without applying some tape around the
bracket, it looks like it would really tear up the back paint.
~ Todd/KAQ
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 00:46:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: hwhall at compuserve.com
Subject: Re: [ARC5] On Hacking
To: ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <8CF7A397441B7CA-1358-73B5 at webmail-d036.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> The 'improvement' was being able to get on the air vs. not.
Whether a change is an improvement sometimes has to be looked at in context
of use. I think I read that? "bandspreading" and some other changes
shouldn't be counted as improvements, just ham conveniences.? If they made
the equipment more ham-usable, when they being used by a ham, then I think
they were improvements in that context. Minor improvements, perhaps, but
improvements.
Wayne
WB4OGM
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd, KA1KAQ <ka1kaq at gmail.com>
To: ARC-5 Mail List <ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 10:06 pm
Subject: Re: [ARC5] On Hacking
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:39 PM, J. Forster <jfor at quikus.com> wrote:
> All right, you proponents of 'ham improvements' to ARC-5 gear
>
I don't recall anyone ever making that argument.
The overall argument is that surplus played a large role in giving new or
not-so-well-healed hams access to the airwaves and inspiration to learn
more, try more, take it further. They became the engineers, technicians and
so on who were part of the bigger picture of innovation and improvement,
not a bunch of idiots with pliers and hammers who set about smashing
pristine surplus daily for something to do.
And that this very surplus market is what we owe a debt of gratitude to,
for providing so much of what we have and still find today that is
untouched, NIB and so on.
The 'improvement' was being able to get on the air vs. not. Simple stuff,
really.
~ Todd/KAQ
______________________________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 05:57:28 -0500
From: "David Stinson" <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [ARC5] Hacks and TVI: The "Cars" Analog
To: "Todd, KA1KAQ" <ka1kaq at gmail.com>, "ARC-5 Mail List"
<ARC5 at mailman.qth.net>
Message-ID: <FD1F52AE1BD14AF9A1BC68CD319676BB at CompaqSR5710F>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Thank you for the kind words, Todd.
Don't know if I deserve to be in such good company ;-).
Decades of looking convince me that the second
group's vandalism wasn't early or isolated-
it was the general rule.
We'll just have to "agree to disagree."
73 Dave AB5S
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
End of ARC5 Digest, Vol 105, Issue 78
*************************************
More information about the ARC5
mailing list