[ARC5] Radios and the Canal

[D C _Mac_ Macdonald]

My NC-33 replaced my Walter Ashe 6SN7GT 
regen receiver. An S-20R followed the NC-33. 
Next came an S-40. Then a Harvey-Wells R9. 
 
When I received my USAF commission and went 
to Navigator School at Harlingen AFB, TX my 
newfound "wealth" of $455 a month was enough 
to afford my first ever NEW commercial gear, 
an HQ-145X. I added a product detector and 
SSB/CW AGC (circuits stolen from my National 
NCX transceivers) in 1963 and used it until 
1967 when I sold it because I had the NCX-5 
and NCX-3. 
 
That modified HQ-145X was perfectly stable 
enough for SSB work, even as high as 10m.
  
* * * * * * * * * * * 
* 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 * 
* (Since 30 Nov 53) * 
* k2gkk at hotmail.com * 
* Oklahoma City, OK * 
* USAF & FAA (Ret.) * 
* * * * * * * * * * * 
 
 
 


> From: 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com
> To: k2gkk at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] Radios and the Canal
> Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 14:25:27 -0700
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "D C _Mac_ Macdonald" <k2gkk at hotmail.com>
> To: "Robert Eleazer" <releazer at earthlink.net>; "ARC-5 Mail 
> List" <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
> Cc: "D C "Mac" Macdonald" <k2gkk at hotmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 1:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] Radios and the Canal
> 
> 
> >I am certain that my NC-33 was a far better receiver than 
> >it Halli S-38 competitor.
> > I have heard many times that the NC-57 was also greatly 
> > superior to the S-40s.
> >
> > 73 - Mac, K2GKK/5 (OKC)
> >
> Depends on who you talk to, some think the SW-54 was 
> inferior to the S-38B. My first short wave receiver was a 
> S-38B. An older neighbor (early teens) had an S-38B and I 
> kicked and screamed until my parents got me one. After I 
> got it, the neighbor got an SW-54. I now think I would have 
> done better for the money to have bought a used something, 
> even an S-20R at the time. But, of course, I didn't know 
> anything and had no mentor. The rich kid considered me a 
> nuisance. I still have the S-38B but its in storage and has 
> defied my trying to find it.
> The NC-33 was a somewhat more sophisticated receiver 
> than the SW-54 but not much. The SW-54 has miniature tubes 
> instead of octals, something Hallicrafters caught up with in 
> the S-38E. I think the main difference in these glorified 
> AA5 receivers was the quality of the parts, particularly the 
> RF coils, but both were ultimately limited by the circuit.
> I agree with the comparative quality of National and 
> Hallicrafters although Carl, K1mh, who worked for National 
> says that they began to lower the quality of the equipment 
> in later years.
> Hammarlund is the one that seems to have fallen off the 
> edge of the earth. The SP-600-JX is IMO the last well 
> designed receiver they made. Even that had some shortcomings 
> that were not addressed until the very last of the series. 
> The Pro-310, which looked sexy turned out to be a complete 
> flat tire and the later HQ- series receivers all seem to 
> have been drifty and to have other problems.
> TMC evidently had a couple of former Hallicrafters 
> designers although most of its staff seems to have come from 
> Press Wireless. The GPR-90 is in some ways reminiscent of 
> some Hallicrafters receivers although I see more resemblance 
> to a glorified HQ-129-X. It is an _almost_ world class 
> receiver.
> 
>