[Boatanchors] Available Tube VLF Rcvrs

[rbethman]

Group,

I realize that it is NOT a tube based critter, however - a Frequency 
Selective Voltmeter such as an HP-312A or one of the other brands that 
are available, will most likely do as well or far better than trying to 
put a converter in front of the newer SS radios.

I even managed to pick up my HP-312A for a premium price of $0.00.  
Unless you want to add the fuel cost to drive there.

It is meant to be there, it has a nixie tube frequency readout, and you 
can determine the signal level in a calibrated manner.

That fact means more to me than some may consider, as it allows me to 
determine how "good" the antenna system is besides VSWR readings and 
Smith Charts.

Bob - N0DGN

Bill Stewart wrote:
> Roger, if you can find the converter info I would like to see it. I have a TS-440s and it goes down pretty low, but you are right about the poor performance down in that region...tnx, Bill K4JYS
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rodger" <wq9e at dtnspeed.net>
> To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr at embarqmail.com>
> Cc: boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
> Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2009 6:52:49 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] Available Tube VLF Rcvrs
>
> Bill,
>
> Probably the most practical is a low frequency converter in front of any 
> set you already own.  I have a construction article for a simple one 
> somewhere that I can find and email you.
>
> Most modern synthesized radios tune down to "near DC" but the 
> performance is very poor down there.
>
> I have an RAK-7 I use which tunes from 15 to 600 Khz. in multiple 
> bands.  These receivers definitely are not practical to ship and they 
> are early WWII regenerative sets but work extremely well at VLF in case 
> you find one nearby. 
>
> 73, Rodger WQ9E
>
> Bill Stewart wrote:
>   
>> Can anyone recommend a  tube type VLF rcvr which is still available at a reasonable cost. I'm not real sure what a practical low limit would be, but low enough for most beacons and up to 500kc plus. Would the SAQ 17.2kc freq be considered 'practical'.  Also, I expect the weight should be a consideration if shipping is involved. Tnx for your opinions. 
>> 73 de Bill K4JYS 
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Boatanchors mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>     
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>   

-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|             AM Amateur Radio Operator    NØDGN                   |   
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Bethman                \\\|///     " The absence of a danger |
|                           \\ ~ ~ //      signal does *NOT* mean  |
| rbethman at comcast.net      (/ @ @ /)      that everything is OK " |
+-------------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo----------------------------+