[Elecraft] Wha'ts Wrong With Our Radios (WAS:NewProducts, Building Demo, ...

[Alexandra Carter]

>

I think the influence may have been military. Pre-WWII radios are the  
long shallow model, some early 1930s mil rigs were, but as WWII got  
more serious, the rigs seemed to settle on the small panel-deep  
chassis form factor. It makes sense when you're cramming a lot of  
gear into an airplane, making a radio to fit in a backpack or Jeep,  
in a tank, etc. Since a lot of ham gear was actually ex-military gear  
following WWII, and since the US's warlike nature has supplied hams  
with a constant supply of military surplus stuff since, (this has  
only recently dried up, due to the classified/controlled nature of  
the modern mil gear) we seem to have radios these days that are about  
the same shape as military ones.

Frankly, if you're putting a radio in your car or RV or boat, taking  
one along in a backpack, etc. the military type of shape makes sense.  
I notice these days there are radios with the old prewar form factor,  
such as the FT-1000 series and the new $5000-$100000 rigs the makers  
have just come out with. Those are not meant to go into anyone's car  
or boat... or tank. And they are relatively wide and shallow. The  
megabuck rigs even allow for a computer screen to be added, making  
the total thing even wider and shallower overall. Just some thoughts,  
73 de Alex NS6Y.

>> On May 26, 2006, at 9:30 PM, N2EY at aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>  Whether the rig was simple or complex, the small panel/deep
>>> chassis idea became the most common, even for rigs that would
>>> obviously never be
>>> used mobile. It became electro-politically incorrect to build a ham
>>> rig any
>>> other way, even though the original reason for the form factor was
>>> gone (2). That
>>> influence continues to the present day.