[ARC5] BC-348 LFLMF Coverage

[JAMES FALLS]

Has anyone run specs on a BC-314?I have a D version and it seems to do pretty well running on 90V reduced B+, Dave Stinson style.
73 DE JIM K6FWT 


     On Monday, November 9, 2015 8:29 PM, Mike Everette via ARC5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
   

 What is the approximate sensitivity of the 348 on the 200-500 range and how does it compare to the 453/R-23?
I'm planning to participate in the crossband event this weekend, along with a friend, and my job is to be the LF receiver provider/operator.  I'm trying to decide which to use.

The two finest LF receivers i have ever used were (1) the National RBL-4 -- a TRF set -- and (2) the RCA AR-88LF which seems (to me) only slightly less capable than the RBL.  I know for a fact that the RBL would run circles around a BC-348 in the 400-500 kc range (and yes, my 348 was well aligned), but never did a shoot-out with a 453 and 348.  The AR-88LF came into my laboratory much later, long after the RBL went to a new home (I NEVER should have let it go).
I'd use the AR-88LF for the event if it wasn't so darn heavy... and I'd have to carry it up a light of stairs.  NOT fun.

73
Mike
WA4DLF

      From: Robert Eleazer <releazer at earthlink.net>
 To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net 
 Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 7:21 AM
 Subject: [ARC5] BC-348 LFLMF Coverage
  
Having listened to both types, I assume that a BC-453, R-11A, R-511, or the LF receivers of the ARA and ARC-5 series would beat the pants off a BC-348 in LF reception and be even more superior to a BC-1206, Detrola Model 438, or Setchell Carlson Model 524 as well as virtually all of the more modern aircraft ADF receivers.  I do have an ARN-89 that I am interested in hooking up to see how it does.

Of course, the BC-348 has an IF of 915 KHZ, and the LF range is up converted to get to that IF.    On his website James Moorer wonders why they did not include BC band coverage with the BC-348, suggesting that they did not want the fly boys listening to AM radio and getting distracted.  I would assume the real reason is the difficulty in constructing an LO with the required characteristics.

Wayne  
______________________________________________________________
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


  
______________________________________________________________
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