[ARC5] Can yoiu say...

[Phillip Carpenter]

It is interesting to note that $79 in 1950 escalates to $801.55 in 2017 using inflation escalation factors.

Phillip W4RTX 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 12:38 PM, J Mcvey via ARC5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> 
> The thing is, the command set transmitters worked fine in their original state.
> So the question is WHY did they go so crazy on the thing.
> 
> I suspect it was a lack of information and those "converting surplus" books. 
> Did people know that they were designed for low Z capacitive loads back in the day? 
> Maybe they got frustrated trying to load into their 300 or 600 ohm ladder line, so they started hacking it up without really knowing what they were doing.
> However this guy went above and beyond the point of absurdity. 
> 
> 
> On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 11:23 AM, Kenneth G. Gordon <kgordon2006 at frontier.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13 Jun 2017 at 7:22, DSP3 wrote:
> 
> > have to agree with Robert, in part.  If one does a value of money 
> > comparison, the $79 BC-348 in 1950 could cost over $500 dollars in 
> > today's environment.  Exceptions, of course... the new 50-cent J-38 
> > would be about $10 today.  I wish.....  So, things weren't as cheap as 
> > they appear.
> 
> Absolutely correct. When we "correct for inflation", the cost of everything works out to be far 
> above what a 13 year old kid could afford.
> 
> I know I sure couldn't.
> 
> Thinking back on it, it amazes me that we did so much with what we had.
> 
> Like my first "good" receiver was a Hallicrafters S-41G which a sub-contractor for my 
> step-father's construction company found abandoned in the basement of the home he moved 
> into.
> 
> I worked the world with that thing,(after fixing it) and a DX-35 I bought after working all one 
> summer as a water-boy on one of my step-father's jobs.
> 
> I have an S-41G now and cannot understand how I did it. The thing is unstable, insensitive, 
> uncalibrated (the entire 20 meter band covers something like 1/8" on the dial) and essentially 
> a real piece of junk.
> 
> I would have been in ham heaven if I had had a BC-454 or BC-455.
> 
> Finally, my Mother took pity on me and managed to buy a very lightly modified (added power 
> supply) BC-348 very cheaply from one of my Elmers to which he had added a BC-946B 
> "Q-5er". Then I really WAS in ham heaven.
> 
> I eventually traded that back to my Elmer for a brand-new RAL-7 because I wanted to be able 
> to work 15 meters. I came to love that receiver.
> 
> I have at least 50 "ARC-5" receivers now, all of which have been "hacked" mostly to ribbons. 
> Yet every one of those I have "attacked" can be made to work at least as well as they 
> originally did, although none are, in my opinion, restorable to original condition.
> 
> The only transmitters I have, with one exception, have also been hacked to ribbons and I 
> cannot see how even one ever was used on the air.
> 
> The single exception is one of those ARC-5 transmitters which cover 2.1 - 3.0 MHz. I have no 
> idea where I got it. That one hasn't been touched, and it won't be touched by me.
> 
> Ken W7EKB
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20170613/2c3af0cf/attachment-0001.html>