From kf4tap at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  3 16:54:46 2006
From: kf4tap at yahoo.com (SGT Brian Ford)
Date: Sun Sep  3 16:55:55 2006
Subject: [HBR] Need octal socket contacts
Message-ID: <20060903205446.26328.qmail@web36613.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

  I need a quanity of contacts like those in an octal
tube socket.  Does anyone know of a source of these to
speed up the search?  Keith.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
From shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com  Mon Sep  4 06:05:21 2006
From: shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com (shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com)
Date: Mon Sep  4 06:06:42 2006
Subject: [HBR] Need octal socket contacts
In-Reply-To: <20060903205446.26328.qmail@web36613.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060903205446.26328.qmail@web36613.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20060904100521.481F6BA4163@mini-me.trailing-edge.com>

SGT Brian Ford <kf4tap@yahoo.com> wrote:
>   I need a quanity of contacts like those in an octal
> tube socket.  Does anyone know of a source of these to
> speed up the search?  Keith.

If you need them to be exactly alike, buy some cheap octal sockets,
crack them open, and take them out. This is especially true if you
need the ones with little tabs that lock them into the socket. Note
that the individual contacts for most sockets are designed to be
removable/insertable from the top in repair if you push the little
tab in.

Keystone Electronics has a wide variety of pins/sockets of various
diameters at http://www.keyelco.com/ which will be of most use if
you need PCB-mount stuff.

Tim.
From kf4tap at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  4 09:13:51 2006
From: kf4tap at yahoo.com (SGT Brian Ford)
Date: Mon Sep  4 09:15:16 2006
Subject: [HBR] Need octal socket contacts
In-Reply-To: <20060904100521.481F6BA4163@mini-me.trailing-edge.com>
Message-ID: <20060904131351.31674.qmail@web36606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Not exactly like just similiar enought to use.  I
robbed some old unusable sockets for the solder tabs. 
But i'll be needing a lot more ( hopefully ) in the
next couple of years.

Keith.

--- shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com wrote:

> SGT Brian Ford <kf4tap@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >   I need a quanity of contacts like those in an
> octal
> > tube socket.  Does anyone know of a source of
> these to
> > speed up the search?  Keith.
> 
> If you need them to be exactly alike, buy some cheap
> octal sockets,
> crack them open, and take them out. This is
> especially true if you
> need the ones with little tabs that lock them into
> the socket. Note
> that the individual contacts for most sockets are
> designed to be
> removable/insertable from the top in repair if you
> push the little
> tab in.
> 
> Keystone Electronics has a wide variety of
> pins/sockets of various
> diameters at http://www.keyelco.com/ which will be
> of most use if
> you need PCB-mount stuff.
> 
> Tim.
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100
> pictures of receivers and 
> construction notes...... via
> http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at
> http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>  
> 
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
From N2EY at aol.com  Mon Sep  4 08:30:04 2006
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Mon Sep  4 09:50:11 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-11/2000. Comments?
Message-ID: <c16.35ab586.322d764c@aol.com>

In a message dated 7/13/06 10:30:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
waltah@earthlink.net writes:


> I'm going to piggyback on Jim's comments on Barney's HBR 
> project.   Mileage may further vary ...

This is an old posting, but I'm not sure if I replied to it or not. I 
apologize for the delay...
> 
> >> After spending the last couple years collecting parts (including 
> >> the Eddystone 898 dial) I have decided to begin construction. 
> 
> > Congratulations!
> 
> YEP.   Just finding all the parts is an accomplishment.

It's often the main limitation. Long ago, I adopted the philosophy of 
designing around available parts because some once-popular parts had become 
unobtanium. Or appeared to be.
> 
> >> 2) 6ES8 Pullen mixer (ala 75A4 mod on the Web)
> 
> > Replacing the RF stage/pentode mixer with the Pullen may result in
> > loss of overall gain. I don't know exact numbers but you may want
> > to do some calculations and measurements before putting holes in
> > the aluminum. 
> 
> Overall gain, however, is not going to be a problem in this design.  
> 6EH7's have plenty to overcome the reduction in front end gain.   

Maybe. OTOH, 6EH7s at full gain can be hard to stabilize. And given the 
complexity and parts/time investment of the project, I would still highly recommend 
a few calculations and measurements before doing serious building.
> 
> A bigger issue is that Pullen mixer.   It's my impression that this is 
> an excellent weak signal mixer but not a remarkable performer with 
> strong signals.   (Jim, please correct if that's not so?) 

Not according to the literature.

I don't have any substantial experience with Pullen mixers, nor do I know of 
any published numbers for that design. 

There are excerpts from Keats Pullen's book online (see the glowbugs website) 
which detail the entire design process for the mixer, working from tube data. 


However, the big selling points for the Pullen were that it was reportedly 
both low-noise and good on big-signal performance, yet could be implemented with 
fairly common tubes and conventional single-ended high-Z "tube type" tuned 
circuits. And a wide variety of tubes could be used. 

Perhaps the best selling point of the Pullen mixer was that it was easily 
adapted to existing designs because there are so many dual triodes available. For 
example, in W2CVZ's mods to the 75A-4, he replaced the original 6BA7 first 
mixer with a 6ES8 Pullen, reportedly getting much lower noise and better 
big-signal performance without major surgery. And the mod is 100% reversible. Many 
existing receivers could benefit from similar no-holes modifications. (I've been 
thinking of seeing what a 6SL7 Pullen could do for my BC-342-N)

Whether a good Pullen is "better" than, say, a 7360 balanced beam-deflection 
mixer as used in the SS-1R I simply don't know.  I do know it's a lot easier 
to implement.

  Except 
> 
> possibly on 10M, low noise/weak signal performance (same thing) 
> is not the criterion for HF receiver design.   Atmospheric noise will 
> overcome any reasonable front end noise on the lower bands -- 
> only a 6K8 or 6BE6 will be limited by tube noise.  

I must add a big caveat here.

I say that in *most* HF receiver applications with a good antenna, there's a 
practical limit to noise figure/sensitivity, because the noise coming down the 
lead-in will totally override the receiver noise. However, whether a 
particular rx has enough low-noise performance depends on the band in question, the 
antenna in use, and the level of noise at the site. There's also the question of 
how the receiver is used.

If you have a big antenna and a noisy site, and operate mostly below 10 MHz, 
sensitivity isn't going to be a problem. 15 or even 20 meters with a small 
antenna in a quiet site is a whole different story.

 I'd use a more 
> 
> conventional triode mixer circuit, operatin g the mixing tube at 
> higher voltages to improve dynamic range -- in particular, 
> 'interference free dynamic range' -- the range of signals over which 
> strong signals do not mix to produce spurious signals.  
> 
> The 'strong signal' dual triode mixer using a 12AT7 with the 
> antenna signal on one grid, the oscillator on the other, cathodes 
> joined and to ground through 470 ohms, and IF take from paralleled 
> plates is an excellent first mixer for an HF set if used with high Q 
> coils -- you need those anyway.   The 6J6 also works well, a 6DJ8 
> would probably give you more gain.   Something around a couple 
> volts p-p injection.
> 

The nice thing about all this is that both that circuit and the Pullen could 
be tried without major changes to the design.



> Or you could try a push-pull triode mixer -- signal in push-pull on 
> the grids, LO in to the cathodes in parallel, IF signal out in push-
> pull from the plates.   I realize the issue with your plans for 
> bandswitching but that has its own issues.   
> 

Balanced designs (push-pull) really do complicate things, though. That's one 
reason the balanced beam-deflection mixers never caught on beyond the SS-1R.


> >> 3) 6DJ8 1st local oscillator, Vackar design
> 
> > I suggest two references before you finalize that idea:
> 
> > A two-part QST article called "VFO Stability - Recap and
> > Postscript" about 1966. Although a transmit VFO is described, the
> > issues discussed are right on for receivers. 
> 
> > A QST article called "Stability with Simplicity" by W2YM, about
> > 1961, and a following article "An Easy To Build VFO" by W1ICP. A
> > simple but very stable VFO circuit is described. I have used it
> > with excellent results. 
> 
> The Vackar is a good oscillator.   There is no magic circuit that's 
> more stable than the others -- the two issues are minimizing 
> coupling to the tube, which calls for a high gain tube, and achieving 
> a stable tank circuit.   The Vackar circuit gives you the easiest 
> control of coupling.  The 6DJ8 has about as much gain as you're 
> going to find.   

I agree there's no magic circuit, but the articles cited detail the problems 
involved. Many Vackar designs don't ground the tuning cap rotor, which makes 
things more complex.

I have often wondered why so many complex amateur receivers used very simple 
LO designs with no buffer stages. I suspect that stability issues in some 
designs are really the result of varying load on the LO.

> 
> > 4) Pair of Miller 1731 link coupled coils (diode DBM in between for noise 
> > blanking)
> 
> An interesting idea.  Though I hate to see solid state creep into an 
> otherwise perfectly sound design -- HI.
> 
> >>  5) 6AR8 sheet beam single balanced mixer (like the 7360)
> 
> > The 6AR8 is reportedly microphonic. That may or may not be a
> > problem. I don't recall any info about the 6AR8 as a receiving
> > mixer. 
> 
> The 6AR8 was the first effort at a controlled-cost beam deflection 
> tube.   The 6JH8 and 6ME8 are better tubes -- more stable and 
> less microphonic.   Run the deflection plates a few volts negative if 
> you want the greatest sensitivity for oscillator injection.
> 
> However I'm not sure a beam deflection mixer is worth the effort (or 
> even a good idea) for a second mixer.   You don't need anything 
> like that much gain and the sensitivity has been set in the first 
> mixer.    
> 

Agreed - mostly. The main reason to use a beam-deflection mixer is to get the 
combination of low noise and big-signal performance.

However, in a receiver with no RF stage, the second mixer noise may still be 
significant. This is where calculations are important - how much gain will 
there be from the antenna jack to the grid of the second mixer?

> Most hams figure the more gain the better.   The truth is closer to 
> the reverse: Use just enough gain to get over the noise of the 
> following stage.   
> 

But by how much? 



> >> 8) 6EH7 IF amplifier (lots of shielding)
> 
> > The 6EH7 is a really "hot" tube - lots of gain and low noise. The
> > Southgate Type 7 uses two of them. Be warned that they can be
> > difficult to stabilize, and at 100 kc you may be better off with a
> > 6BA6. If you allow room for a 9 pin socket, but use a 7 pin in the
> > space, you can convert later. 
> 
> One word -- shielding.  Oh, and good grounding and bypassing.   
> Just do everything right from the start and you'll have no trouble.  
> You do need a 100 ohm resistor right at the grid (1/8" lead) to kill 
> VHF parasitics -- this is needed for any of the modern high-gain 
> wideband tubes.   
> 

Maybe. Two stages of 6EH7 is a lot of gain! With only two stages, both of 
them mixers, before that IF, that gain may be needed.

> This is a superior IF tube, not just because of high gain/low noise 
> but more importantly for controlled intermodulation distortion.  I 
> wouldn't use anything else without a good reason.
> 
> Feeding a 6BN6 these tubes will only be loafing -- they can handle 
> tens of volts without distortion but you're limited to under one volt at 
> the output of the 2nd IF.
> 
> >> 12) 6BN6 product detector
> 
> > Shock mount it - that tube is microphonic too.
> 
> A fine choice for a product detector.   And simpler than using a 
> beam tube.
> 

Agreed. Also a pretty common tube. 

> > 14) 6xxx infinite impedance detector for AM
> 
> Consider a plate detector -- except for large signal handling ability 
> they have the same advantages as infinite impedance and give you 
> a better match to the gain of a 6BN6 as a product detector.   
> 
> You'll notice that receivers that use the lineup you propose have an 
> extra audio stage following the inf. impedance detector.   
> 
> Unless you copy an existing circuit exactly you'll have to tweek the 
> plate detector to get really good linearity.  At 100 Kcs you'll need 
> the 2.5 mH choke that most circuits show in the plate circuit.
> 
> You have to keep the signals down at the IF output anyhow 
> because the 6BN6 will take less than a volt before limiting sets in.
> 

That limiting can be a good thing in some cases. But you don't want the 
detector to limit on wanted signals!

> >> 15) AGC will be solid state - there is a lot of potential for creative 
> >>  design here
> 
> > Yes - but with all those bottles, why not hollow state?
> 
> Yeah ... why give up while you're ahead?   
> 
> It's hard to beat the AGC circuit of the Tempo ONE.  They use a 
> plate detector with the cathode biased negative so the plate runs at 
> ground level; signals pull the plate negative to generate the AGC 
> signal.  You do have to have a bias supply of negative 50-100 volts. 
> 

There's a number of easy ways to get a small negative bias voltage in a 
receiver. One way is a (cough) solid-state voltage multiplier off the heater 
circuit. Another is a half-wave off one side of the HV transformer, with suitable 
high resistance RC filter.

A third way, particularly if you have some extra heater power, is to run a 
small filament transformer backwards to get isolated 120 volts.

> IF-derived AGC for SSB gives you the challenge of keeping the 
> BFO out of the AGC.   If you don't want that challenge, then you 
> have to go audio-derived which has a different set of issues.
> 

Personally I don't see why AGC is such a "must have" to so many hams. 

> >> 16) 5879 low noise pentode 1st AF with lots of negative feedback
> 
> > 5879 is an audiophile tube - may be hard to get at reasonable
> > price. You don't need  or want a lot of audio gain. 
> 
> Any of the usual pentodes will do fine in this socket.   A com 
> receiver does not require the audio dynamic range of a 100 watt 
> high-fi amp (you don't need to hear the 3rd violin turning pages) and 
> you have that AGC loop getting rid of dynamic range, so extreme 
> low noise in the input stage is not worth the trouble.   
> 

The signal level at the start of the audio chain will be? I would guess over 
100 millivolts, in which case a much more common tube would do the job easily. 


> However you'll be surprised what using a low-distortion high-fi 
> circuit for your audio amp will do for voice clarity.  If everything up 
> to there is working correctly you WILL hear the difference.   That 
> means using feedback with enough loop gain that the feedback 
> eliminates distortion in your amplifier.   The high-fi amp circuits in 
> the RCA tube manual are a good starting point.  You must cut off 
> the amp frequency response much lower than for high-fi because 
> you won't have a transformer that will handle much over a few Kcs 
> without enough phase shift to lead to instability -- but for 
> communications use you don't want lots of highs anyway.
> 
> Use a two stage amp with feedback from the voice coil winding to 
> the cathode of the 1st stage.   Better yet, use push-pull output 
> stage with a phase inverter and do the same.  
> 

I found a noticeable improvement from all-triode audio. Pushpull triode 
output has much lower distortion (without feedback) than a single-ended pentode.


> >> 17) 6CW5 power amplifier (lots of audio power is important)
> 
> > Good. You can always bias the tube more to cut down on output, but
> > inadequate audio is hard to fix. 
> 
> The 6CW5 is overkill -- with a pentode 1st audio you've got plenty 
> of loop gain even with a triode output stage and something like a 
> 12BH7 is plenty.   Push pull lets you go class AB so you save 
> power while reducing the distortion so your feedback loop has less 
> work to do.   
> 
> Exception: If you want to drive true high-fi speakers the efficiency is 
> so low that you'll want more audio power.  In that case a pair of 
> 6CW5's wouldn't be out of line.   
> 
> Standard (modern) automotive 3" or 4" speakers are a good 
> compromise between 'fi' and efficiency.   The One Month HBR uses 
> a pair of 6AQ5's running at 150 volts and a 3" speaker and you can 
> listen to that one in the front yard when it's in the back.  And that's 
> with the volume just past the halfway point.   There's LOTS more 
> available, though it might be a bit much for the speaker.   
> 
> The R8040A uses half of a 12AU7 as an audio output stage driving 
> a 3" communications speaker.   Volume is ample for all but the 
> noisiest locations.   
> 

Some folks really like a lot of audio. Room acoustics can be an issue, too. I 
like big speakers because they are more efficient and usually roll off the 
highs naturally.

> >> 18) 190V 200mA power supply, the iron is Triad hermetic 
> >> isolation transformer  
> 
> Keeping the plate voltage down is an excellent idea.   The latest 
> tubes don't need it (in fact ratings may be exceeded) and lower 
> voltage means less dissipation with all the problems that go with 
> that.  
> 
> > Voltage regulation for the oscillators?
> 
> Probably a good idea for the 1st oscillator since it operates well 
> into the HF.   The crystal oscillators certainly shouldn't need it.
> 

Doesn't hurt, though.

> > Other comments:
> 
> > Reed-relay-switched toroids may not be the best for HF oscillator 
> > stability. The original HBR design coils and sockets are a big 
> > part of the stability. 
> 
> Bandswitching is a challenge.   It can be done, but I certainly 
> wouldn't start there unless you have some receiver experience.      
> 

I think one reason W6TC used plug-in coils was that he simply could not find 
a bandswitch that would do the job as well. The RF coils aren't hypercritical 
but the tunable LO is. 

Note that about 1960 or so, practically all 'serious' ham receiver designs 
got away from bandswitched LOs and went to other methods (such as tunable second 
IF) of getting multiple bands. Stability and dial calibration were the 
issues. 

73 de Jim, N2EY



From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Sep 15 08:41:41 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Sep 15 08:45:46 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>

Zowie, check this HBR-16 out  250029288947
Good Luck
Not mine

73 Kees K5BCQ
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Fri Sep 15 12:22:11 2006
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Fri Sep 15 12:30:10 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-16
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <000701c6d8e3$191acb40$6402a8c0@dailey>



> Zowie, check this HBR-16 out  250029288947

Wow... what a "pretty".  Looks like he was in the military, by the looks of
the labels on the chassis.

Mucho Nice - any bets on what it brings?

Tom - W?EAJ

From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Sep 15 14:02:04 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Sep 15 14:08:09 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>

I bet it goes for around $350-$450 .....some of the prices are just wild,
but it's definitely an original one. A real find would be one from the
magazine articles. An Ameco AC-1 just went to $400 (that's a cheap one
tube 6V6 CW Tx kit), which got the Ameco AC-1 group all excited. I'm glad
I was involved in the Ameglo GB-1 kit/decal for people to build a look
alike for a fraction of that. Another nice low end military unit is the
BC-1306 or GRC-9 but those are going for $250-$500 (BC-1306 at the high
end)  . An then there is the Knight Ocean Hopper. I guess it's an example
of the baby boomers with money wanting to get what they used to have "in
the beginning".

There certainly are some excellent examples of old and new homebrew out
there. Great !!

73 Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "TC Dailey" <daileyservices@qwest.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:22:11 -0600
Subject: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <000701c6d8e3$191acb40$6402a8c0@dailey>
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>



> Zowie, check this HBR-16 out  250029288947

Wow... what a "pretty".  Looks like he was in the military, by the looks
of
the labels on the chassis.

Mucho Nice - any bets on what it brings?

Tom - W?EAJ

************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From daileyservices at qwest.net  Fri Sep 15 15:44:19 2006
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Fri Sep 15 15:52:19 2006
Subject: [HBR] to anchor our childhood boats
References: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <003b01c6d8ff$5614c660$6402a8c0@dailey>

Hi Kees, et. al.

yep... must be why I buy & fix 'em.  All those wonderful radios I could only DREAM about when I was a kid.  What was worse, was that I lived in Kansas City, and often rode the streetcar down to the old Burstein-Applebee (B-A), where those wise and astute old boys would lend you a set of REALLY HARD 'earphones', and you could listen to such wonders as HRO's, Hammerlund Super-Pros, National NC-183D's, Halliscratchers of all descriptions, Morrows, Multi-Elmacs, and you-name-it.

NOW - I get to own 'em, touch 'em, and caress their knobs... My fave' (STILL),  [not counting the HBR-11] is the SX-62A Halli', and the NC-173 like Thor Hyerdahl had on the Kon Tiki.  Are we rich or what?

Tom - W?EAJ
From johnmb at nc.rr.com  Fri Sep 15 16:52:19 2006
From: johnmb at nc.rr.com (john)
Date: Fri Sep 15 16:54:22 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20060915165204.023aad90@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

Beautiful!

WHat's that assy that's loose?

John K5MO


At 08:41 AM 9/15/2006, windy10605@juno.com wrote:
>Zowie, check this HBR-16 out  250029288947
>Good Luck
>Not mine
>
>73 Kees K5BCQ
>************************************
>Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
>construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
>there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
>Retrieve reflector archived data via 
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>--
>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 - Release Date: 9/8/2006



-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 - Release Date: 9/8/2006

From windy10605 at juno.com  Fri Sep 15 16:51:05 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Fri Sep 15 16:55:41 2006
Subject: Fw: [HBR] to anchor our childhood boats
Message-ID: <20060915.155136.3120.11.windy10605@juno.com>

Aw Heck, I remember the Thor Hyerdahl article in QST ....what adventure
!!!

73 Kees K5BCQ


--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "TC Dailey" <daileyservices@qwest.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:44:19 -0600
Subject: [HBR] to anchor our childhood boats
Message-ID: <003b01c6d8ff$5614c660$6402a8c0@dailey>
References: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>

Hi Kees, et. al.

yep... must be why I buy & fix 'em.  All those wonderful radios I could
only DREAM about when I was a kid.  What was worse, was that I lived in
Kansas City, and often rode the streetcar down to the old
Burstein-Applebee (B-A), where those wise and astute old boys would lend
you a set of REALLY HARD 'earphones', and you could listen to such
wonders as HRO's, Hammerlund Super-Pros, National NC-183D's,
Halliscratchers of all descriptions, Morrows, Multi-Elmacs, and
you-name-it.

NOW - I get to own 'em, touch 'em, and caress their knobs... My fave'
(STILL),  [not counting the HBR-11] is the SX-62A Halli', and the NC-173
like Thor Hyerdahl had on the Kon Tiki.  Are we rich or what?

Tom - W?EAJ
************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From N2EY at aol.com  Fri Sep 15 17:52:50 2006
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Fri Sep 15 17:55:20 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-11/2000. Comments?
Message-ID: <be7.39d3543.323c7ab2@aol.com>

I don't know if I replied to this or not!

Please excuse the delay and possible redundancy.

In a message dated 7/16/06 10:11:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Tuchueh7@cs.com 
writes:

> I especially like the idea of doing the power 
> supply and audio amp on a separate chassis. This sounds like a good place to 
> 
> start.

It's worked for me...

> 1) Speaking of the amp, I am thinking of LC audio bandpass filters at the 
> input, outside of the feedback loop. I like to think of the effect of 
> negative 
> feedback as not really widening bandwidth but rather equalizing gain at all 
> frequencies. Plus you can use the feedback to shape response if you pay 
> careful 
> attention to phase margin.

All kinds of possibilities without using up lots of space in the rx nor 
making lots of heat.

> 2) Devil 6EH7. I notice that W6TC used the 6BJ6 in his IF. Tube manual 
> shows 
> this
> bottle has low Gm than 6BA6. Do you suppose he chose this on the basis of 
> stability
> and ease of application? 

Lots of reasons:

By the time the signal reaches the second IF, there's not much need for low 
noise or enormous gM. What's the point of using a hotshot tube if it never runs 
anywhere near flat out?

There *is* a need for low Cgp and an unfussy circuit.

W6TC was designing a receiver that could be duplicated easily. The HBRs are 
about as unfussy a design as could be done in their time while still meeting 
all the design and performance requirements.

The 6BJ6 uses much less heater and B+ power than the 6EH7. Less heat and less 
power supply.

The 6EH7 may not have even existed when the HBRs were designed. If it did, it 
was a premium tube made by one or two manufacturers, and not to be found in 
surplus or the junkbox. The 6BJ6 was everywhere.

His design distributes gain more evenly amongst all 
> 
> stages than my proposed line-up. I am still playing around with the little 
> 6EH7 breadboard
> (included a picture of same). Right now I am going to try the following to 
> tame it
> a. Resistive loading of input IF tran. and output IF tran.

This isn't good for selectivity.

 If no result then 
> 
> add:
> b. Grid damper resistor. If no result then add: If no result then add:
> c. Reduce gain with increased negative bias: 

Which means running a hotshot tube way below full throttle.

If no result then add:
> 
> c. Screen damper (resistor or choke) If no result then add:
> d. Plate to bottom of input IF tran. capacitive neutralization:
> 3) See attached pictures of tuning caps:
> #1. This is an interesting piece with the stator split (cant see from 
> picture)
> It also has some curious piston trimmers across the stator. Finally, each
> rotor section is insulated and and has no electrical connection.

Avoids ground loops.


> #2. This piece is fairly straightforward 12-108 mmf nice silver plate. Can 
> be 
> 
> padded down to correct value and has advantage of being able to pad out a 
> lot of stray capacitance.
> #3. Not pictured. I have three pieces of GenRad 10-130 mmf. These will 
> require 
> some metal work to gang. they are very nice parts.
> 
> Mucho gracias, amigo.... I really appreciate your consultation!!!! Barney 
> 
> PS The attached pictures were rejected by QTH.com so email me direct if you 
> want
> to see 'em.
> 
> PPS Today I fooled around with the test chassis and found that I could tame 
> the 6EH7 somewhat by loading the IF transformers with resistance (390K on 
> the 
> input and 68k on the plate side. Also reduced the cathode bypass from .1mf 
> to 
> .001mf.
> Now I can peak the IFs without oscillation. There is still some regeneration 
> 
> I think;
> nose selectivity is about 750 cycles and voltage gain for the 6AR8  and 6EH7 
> 
> is about
> 60 dB. 

That's regenerative all right!

73 de Jim, N2EY



> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
> 
> 
> Retrieve reflector archived data via 
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> 
> 

From bjtatum at ev1.net  Fri Sep 15 22:56:28 2006
From: bjtatum at ev1.net (Byron Tatum)
Date: Fri Sep 15 22:58:33 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>

Hello-
    I was studying using the clear styrene straight-sided jars as coil 
forms. Wanted to see if anyone had entertained this idea in past?
    My thoughts were to drill a hole in the bottom center to mount coil to 
chassis, etc. I found the Parkway Plastics website and the 38 MM OD by 2.7" 
tall jar { 1-1/2 OZ. 38 MM jar} looks pretty close to the 1-1/4" OD coil 
forms specified in a lot of the HBR articles.
    I have seen a few Millen coil forms that were very similiar to these 
plastic jars.
    I believe styrene has pretty good RF properties. Anyway, the jars are 
cheap, shipping and handling isn't unless you buy a case!
                CUL, Byron. 


From shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com  Sat Sep 16 07:39:49 2006
From: shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com (shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com)
Date: Sat Sep 16 07:42:21 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
In-Reply-To: <01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
	<01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>
Message-ID: <20060916113949.C0957BA4159@mini-me.trailing-edge.com>

"Byron Tatum" <bjtatum@ev1.net> wrote:
>     I have seen a few Millen coil forms that were very similiar to these 
> plastic jars.
>     I believe styrene has pretty good RF properties.

Indeed most of those old coil forms were styrene, or at least the
melting point was nearly identical because inevitably I always
did some slight gooeyfying in soldering on those pins :-).

When I do similar things today I always start with G-10 glass epoxy
which is just about impossible to burn or melt with a soldering
iron and it epoxies/drills/machines very well and of course it has
spectacularly good RF properties.

http://www.mcmaster.com/ has a very good selection and prices on
lots of plastic rods, tubes, sheets, etc., in reasonably small
quantities. Anything I order arrives next day and UPS shipping
is often just $4.

Tim.
From gswynar at durham.net  Sat Sep 16 08:41:38 2006
From: gswynar at durham.net (Ed Swynar)
Date: Sat Sep 16 07:44:28 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
	<01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>
Message-ID: <003501c6d98d$7c535510$f3305a45@CompaqS5000>

Hi Byron,

That'll work just fine for you, I'm sure  --- I did the very thing here some
time ago with my version of "The Mate for the Mighty Midget" receiver...

Two things:

(1) Do NOT overly tighten/over-torque the mounting screw at the base of the
syrene container, on risk of cracking same, and,

(2) Get a sewing needle: heat it in a candle flame, & then use it to make a
"pin" hole at the side of the form, where you want your coil to start (make
a "handle" for the needle with a few wraps of masking tape --- the body of
it WILL get hot to the touch!). If you can accurately guage the length of
the coil BEFORE winding it, you may wish to add a second pin hole further up
the styrene body, to that pont. When you feed an excess of wire through your
starting pin hole, you won't have to worry about the turns coming loose as
you're winding the coil...ditto, when you're finished winding the coil. By
slipping an ample amount of wire through that second pin hole, your turns
will remain secure and ready for "doping", which in my case amounted to
nothing more elaborate that two coats of clear nail polish.

The process is cheap, simple, & fairly fool-proof to all but the
"...manually dextrous" croed! Hi Hi

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ


----- Original Message -----
From: "Byron Tatum" <bjtatum@ev1.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:56 PM
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms


> Hello-
>     I was studying using the clear styrene straight-sided jars as coil
> forms. Wanted to see if anyone had entertained this idea in past?
>     My thoughts were to drill a hole in the bottom center to mount coil to
> chassis, etc. I found the Parkway Plastics website and the 38 MM OD by
2.7"
> tall jar { 1-1/2 OZ. 38 MM jar} looks pretty close to the 1-1/4" OD coil
> forms specified in a lot of the HBR articles.
>     I have seen a few Millen coil forms that were very similiar to these
> plastic jars.
>     I believe styrene has pretty good RF properties. Anyway, the jars are
> cheap, shipping and handling isn't unless you buy a case!
>                 CUL, Byron.
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From johnmb at nc.rr.com  Sat Sep 16 07:47:36 2006
From: johnmb at nc.rr.com (john)
Date: Sat Sep 16 07:49:40 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
In-Reply-To: <003501c6d98d$7c535510$f3305a45@CompaqS5000>
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com>
	<01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>
	<003501c6d98d$7c535510$f3305a45@CompaqS5000>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20060916074418.01e69f80@pop-server.nc.rr.com>

If you're interested in NOS Meissner coils (which can be stripped of the 
wire and rewound) made of black bakelite, I have some for sale. Price is $3 
ea plus actual cost of shipping.

I have 4, 5 and 6 pin versions available.

Shameless plug....I apologize...!

John K5MO



-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 - Release Date: 9/8/2006

From gswynar at durham.net  Sat Sep 16 08:47:47 2006
From: gswynar at durham.net (Ed Swynar)
Date: Sat Sep 16 07:50:35 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
References: <20060915.074141.2968.2.windy10605@juno.com><01ca01c6d93b$b588ff30$c1d6dacf@your6jnhhu0520>
	<003501c6d98d$7c535510$f3305a45@CompaqS5000>
Message-ID: <006201c6d98e$56b14780$f3305a45@CompaqS5000>

Hi Gang,

In the last line of my post, I met to say "...'manually dextrous'
challenged", and NOT "...'manually dextrous' croed" --- whatever THAT means!

Obviously I'm "...spelling-and-grammatically" (is there even such a word as
"grammatically"...?!) challenged before 8:00 AM on Saturday mornings!

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Swynar" <gswynar@durham.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>; <bjtatum@ev1.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: [HBR] Coil Forms


> Hi Byron,
>
> That'll work just fine for you, I'm sure  --- I did the very thing here
some
> time ago with my version of "The Mate for the Mighty Midget" receiver...
>
> Two things:
>
> (1) Do NOT overly tighten/over-torque the mounting screw at the base of
the
> syrene container, on risk of cracking same, and,
>
> (2) Get a sewing needle: heat it in a candle flame, & then use it to make
a
> "pin" hole at the side of the form, where you want your coil to start
(make
> a "handle" for the needle with a few wraps of masking tape --- the body of
> it WILL get hot to the touch!). If you can accurately guage the length of
> the coil BEFORE winding it, you may wish to add a second pin hole further
up
> the styrene body, to that pont. When you feed an excess of wire through
your
> starting pin hole, you won't have to worry about the turns coming loose as
> you're winding the coil...ditto, when you're finished winding the coil. By
> slipping an ample amount of wire through that second pin hole, your turns
> will remain secure and ready for "doping", which in my case amounted to
> nothing more elaborate that two coats of clear nail polish.
>
> The process is cheap, simple, & fairly fool-proof to all but the
> "...manually dextrous" croed! Hi Hi
>
> ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Byron Tatum" <bjtatum@ev1.net>
> To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:56 PM
> Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
>
>
> > Hello-
> >     I was studying using the clear styrene straight-sided jars as coil
> > forms. Wanted to see if anyone had entertained this idea in past?
> >     My thoughts were to drill a hole in the bottom center to mount coil
to
> > chassis, etc. I found the Parkway Plastics website and the 38 MM OD by
> 2.7"
> > tall jar { 1-1/2 OZ. 38 MM jar} looks pretty close to the 1-1/4" OD coil
> > forms specified in a lot of the HBR articles.
> >     I have seen a few Millen coil forms that were very similiar to these
> > plastic jars.
> >     I believe styrene has pretty good RF properties. Anyway, the jars
are
> > cheap, shipping and handling isn't unless you buy a case!
> >                 CUL, Byron.
> >
> >
> > ************************************
> > Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> > construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> > there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
> >
> >
> > Retrieve reflector archived data via
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
> >
>
>
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>


From N2EY at aol.com  Sat Sep 16 11:38:38 2006
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Sat Sep 16 11:41:14 2006
Subject: [HBR] Coil Forms
Message-ID: <3c0.b110dbe.323d747e@aol.com>

In a message dated 9/16/06 7:40:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com writes:


> Indeed most of those old coil forms were styrene, or at least the
> melting point was nearly identical because inevitably I always
> did some slight gooeyfying in soldering on those pins :-).
> 

There's a way to avoid that problem.

First, note that some of those forms have nickel-plated pins, which are 
difficult to solder. Use a small flat file to remove the nickel plating at the tips 
of the pins so you can solder direct to the brass underneath.

Second, do not try to use some dinky little iron for this job - you need 
serious thermal capacity.

Third, get an old wafer socket for each size of form. These are the sockets 
where you can see the pin ends when the tube or coil is plugged in. The cheap 
bakelites are best because they're so thin. Plug the form into the socket and 
then solder the pins - the socket will prevent the pins from moving, and the 
contacts act as a bit of a heatsink. 

If you are making more than one or two coils, you might want to mount the 
socket upside down in an old chassis or other bracket so it holds the coil 
solidly, and you have both hands free.

73 de Jim, N2EY
From waltah at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 16 21:51:03 2006
From: waltah at earthlink.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Sat Sep 16 22:01:25 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <450CAA07.8070705@earthlink.net>

Kees said:
> There certainly are some excellent examples of old and new homebrew out
> there.

Amen. And this looks like a nice one.

I think the loose assembly must be the Q-multiplier controls.  That's 
the only thing on the panel that would match the layout.

The chassis looks almost factory made -- very neat work. Looks like he 
discovered the need for shields between the sections later.  The 
craftsmanship there is very much like the Q-multiplier plate.

I THINK I have the metalwork done for the General Coverage HBR I've been 
working on all summer.  What a pain -- this is another one that there's 
no danger of anyone getting the urge to duplicate.  I'll post a photo 
when I get the major parts mounted, maybe in a week or so.

Walt
KJ4KV

From waltah at earthlink.net  Sun Sep 17 15:18:54 2006
From: waltah at earthlink.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Sun Sep 17 15:22:33 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <450CAA07.8070705@earthlink.net>
References: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>
	<450CAA07.8070705@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <450D9F9E.5010209@earthlink.net>

Looking at the pictures closely I almost wonder if this isn't the work
of two builders, one of whom did the layout, chassis, panel and so on,
and one of whom took over at some point, did the shields and
Q-multiplier sub-assembly but didn't quite finish the job.

The big question is, to what standard of workmanship was the wiring
done?  If it's as nice as the chassis then this is indeed 95% of a very
nice HBR-16.  If it's more like those shields, then it's a kit with the
metalwork and unique parts for a fine HBR, but encumbered by a lot of
wire that would have to be taken out without damaging those parts. 
That Q-multiplier sub-assembly isn't inspiring and it clearly WAS 
installed at some point -- then removed.  Why?

Looks like the panel and case would have to be repainted -- the 
splotches of white might come off but there are quite a few chips around 
the edges and some discoloration.  You'd probably wind up remarking the 
panel.

As a very nice nearly working radio I think it's probably worth $350-up
in today's market -- $174 as I write this, and hasn't made reserve yet! 
  As a kit, I don't know.  Having just finished a three-month metalwork 
exercise (very busy summer; this was for the GC-HBR project -- 116 
250-kc bands, 1.75-30.75 Mcs), I'd say a nicely made chassis is worth 
quite a bit!

The seller says in his listing "This one is built extremely well and
professional looking."  His feedback is excellent which makes that more
credible.  I've written to him to ask about the wiring and I'll post
what I get back.

Yeah, I'm thinking about bidding.  Pricey, but if the underside looks as
nice as the top, probably worth it.

Which leads me to ask -- does anyone else on the list have an HBR (any 
number) with nice metalwork and most of a set of coils that he's looking 
to send to a new home?  Other problems -- wiring, paint, incomplete, 
etc. -- I can deal with, at least in moderation, but I'm not looking to 
do another chassis and panel right now!

Walt
KJ4KV


From Tuchueh7 at cs.com  Mon Sep 18 21:31:13 2006
From: Tuchueh7 at cs.com (Tuchueh7@cs.com)
Date: Mon Sep 18 21:33:58 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR 2000/11 Comments?
Message-ID: <bbf.4473afd.3240a261@cs.com>

Things move mighty slow here at the KC8LTD workshop...Progress to date: A 
170vdc
at 200mA power supply has been built on a small chassis along with a 
5879/6CW5
audio amp. Used a 6.3v 3A fil. transformer for the output iron. Plenty of 
power to drive
a six inch commercial PA speaker in an open back cabinet and it is LOUD!! 
Sounds like a good old AA5 on steroids, complete with a little hum. The power 
supply is a 
full wave choke input, the choke is a trifle low inductance-wise and I had to 
add a little
cheat. An IRF820 hexfet in a capacitance multiplier configuration cuts down 
the excessive ripple and as a bonus, brings up the B+ slowly. The whole shebang 
is housed in a mitered solid walnut box. Looks great!!!
       Still thinking about the 100kc. IF strip. I was able to tame the 
455kc.6EH7 breadboard by capacitance bridge neutralization. The problem here is to 
find really
tiny fixed neutralization caps. 5-10mmf requires a gigantic variable (like 
2000mmf)
in the other leg. I just hardwired a bunch of large silver micas until I got 
it right. Looking through the junkbox, I found some of those old ceramic (?) 
low capacitance
parts that were found in 1950's FM tuners. They look like 1/2 watt resistors 
(only shorter) Does anybody know anything about these? Reading the color code? 
Note:
these are NOT the "dogbone" ceramic units that were ubiquitous in high 
frequency
gear a few decades ago.
       Also thinking about the plug-in coil situation. Admittedly, plug-in is 
the simplest
and most straight forward solution, but I like to skip from band to band and 
am apt
to operate at no particular time of day. Therefore the plug in coil is not 
very attractive.
Reed relays are going to require some real topological planning in order to 
avoid excessive lead length and stray capacitance. Attention to the materials 
used in the reeds is also in order. I will need to make up another test 
breadboard to evaluate
how they perform in an oscillator circuit. I will also need to isolate the DC 
coil control
signals with wire chokes. So thats the story from here so far. Thanks to all 
for the
comments
From Ejparagi at aol.com  Mon Sep 18 21:55:12 2006
From: Ejparagi at aol.com (Ejparagi@aol.com)
Date: Mon Sep 18 21:57:59 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR 2000/11 Comments?
Message-ID: <c31.36ff2b3.3240a800@aol.com>

To KC8LTD-

The capacitors you described are low cost axial lead ceramic types.  They 
were probably made by Quality Components of St. Marys, PA.  You would often find 
one in the convertor of an AA5.  I have used them in UHF transmitter circuits 
up to a watt at 400 MHz.  They came in values as low as 0.1 pF.  The largest I 
ever saw was something like 22 pF.  Don't know whether they are still made.

Ed
WB9RMA
From waltah at ntelos.net  Wed Sep 20 14:54:01 2006
From: waltah at ntelos.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Wed Sep 20 18:13:14 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <450D9F9E.5010209@earthlink.net>
References: <20060915.130233.3120.5.windy10605@juno.com>	<450CAA07.8070705@earthlink.net>
	<450D9F9E.5010209@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <45118E49.4000504@ntelos.net>

Well, I'm still awaiting an answer from the seller as to the wiring on 
this generally beautiful set.  I just asked him again -- I'm in the 
process of switching email addresses and it's slightly possible that 
something fell into a crack.

I'll probably bid but if I don't hear back I'll bid it as a very nice 
kit meaning that anyone who thinks it's an overall fine job except for 
the somewhat shopworn paintwork is likely to beat me out.

Currently at $174 with no bids since Sunday I think?

Interesting ... I sure wish I had a lot more time for home brew 
receivers, both HBRs and other projects.  Unfortunately our retirement 
is being eaten by the damn animal rights movement which would like to 
get rid of all the pets on the way to eliminating all domesticated 
animals, all hunting, use of animals for medical testing ...

Walt
KJ4KV

From windy10605 at juno.com  Wed Sep 20 19:49:45 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Wed Sep 20 19:53:41 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <20060920.184945.2204.4.windy10605@juno.com>

Well it's up to $350 right now which is about what I figure what it will
"should" sell for unless there is someone with deeper pockets. Dang, I
may be "economically forced" to sell one of my two HBR16s
....well....naaa.   

73 Kees K5BCQ 
From DAVEINBHAM at aol.com  Wed Sep 20 20:51:08 2006
From: DAVEINBHAM at aol.com (DAVEINBHAM@aol.com)
Date: Wed Sep 20 20:54:06 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com>

 
Walt,
This is, perhaps, a bit off topic, but you brought it up.
I am a supporter of animal rights. Even so, most animal rights movements  
want to do away 
( rightly so ) with animal medical testing and murdering ( hunting) small  
animals, but greatly support pets.
How can this possibly be occupying your time away from radio ?
 
Kindest regards,
Dave
******************************************************************************
********************

Unfortunately our retirement 
is being eaten by the damn animal  rights movement which would like to 
get rid of all the pets on the way to  eliminating all domesticated 
animals, all hunting, use of animals for  medical testing ...

Walt
KJ4KV




From daileyservices at qwest.net  Wed Sep 20 23:28:59 2006
From: daileyservices at qwest.net (TC Dailey)
Date: Wed Sep 20 23:37:41 2006
Subject: [HBR] animal rights
References: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000901c6dd2e$13c43e20$6402a8c0@dailey>

A "BIT" OFF TOPIC???????

Get a grip - The last time I looked, animals had rights... and lefts too.
You wear LEATHER shoes, she has LEATHER PURSES, and I don't think the cow
commited suicide.

I grew up on a farm, and if it were'nt for Bossie, you would have turned out
to be a beet.

Get off the damned animal rights, and get back to radio

From waltah at ntelos.net  Thu Sep 21 00:29:33 2006
From: waltah at ntelos.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Thu Sep 21 00:33:26 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com>
References: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4512152D.1070002@ntelos.net>

I've gotten the under-chassis pictures of the eBay HBR-16; it's very 
nice work.  Very point-to-point, but the builder clearly knew what he 
was doing and made no mistakes that I could see -- only a couple of 
soldering iron burns that I could see, no tacked on extensions to leads, 
good quality new parts were used, nice clean chassis with no corrosion, 
and so on.  He used machine screws to add reinforcements to the chassis 
corners, flat head screws and countersunk. On a quick look, I'd grade it 
as 'A' workmanship.  This builder was far from a beginner.

The seller hasn't yet put the pics on the listing and I don't know if he 
will.  If you want to see them, send me an email and I'll pass them 
along.  Closes tomorrow night.

Walt
KJ4KV
From roomberg at ptd.net  Thu Sep 21 04:25:42 2006
From: roomberg at ptd.net (rob)
Date: Thu Sep 21 04:15:23 2006
Subject: [HBR] animal rights  People Eating Tasty Animals 
In-Reply-To: <000901c6dd2e$13c43e20$6402a8c0@dailey>
References: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com>
	<000901c6dd2e$13c43e20$6402a8c0@dailey>
Message-ID: <45124C86.7030309@ptd.net>

Animal rights? What left field shot did this come from?
I support PETA, dont' you?

People Eating Tasty Animals


>  
>

From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Sep 21 09:13:48 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Sep 21 09:32:43 2006
Subject: [HBR] animal rights .....OT
Message-ID: <20060921.082802.2728.1.windy10605@juno.com>

This reflector was established to discuss HBR Receivers and like
equipment. We all have varying opinions on many items ...politics,
religion, etc. Please keep discussions to our common interest
..........HBR reflector related material.  

73 Kees K5BCQ
From wnichelson at snip.net  Thu Sep 21 11:17:07 2006
From: wnichelson at snip.net (William N)
Date: Thu Sep 21 11:20:46 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
References: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com> <4512152D.1070002@ntelos.net>
Message-ID: <001001c6dd91$0d8bcce0$277bccd1@Bill>

Hi Walt,
Yes, I would like very much to see the picture of the wiring of the
receiver. Of course this is only of academic interest since I have no
intention of bidding. Building one was enough!  I must have walked three
miles winding the coils...but I wouldn't trade the experience for anything!

Thanks for your efforts.
Bill W3KOC


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walt Hutchens" <waltah@ntelos.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:29 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16


> I've gotten the under-chassis pictures of the eBay HBR-16; it's very
> nice work.  Very point-to-point, but the builder clearly knew what he
> was doing and made no mistakes that I could see -- only a couple of
> soldering iron burns that I could see, no tacked on extensions to leads,
> good quality new parts were used, nice clean chassis with no corrosion,
> and so on.  He used machine screws to add reinforcements to the chassis
> corners, flat head screws and countersunk. On a quick look, I'd grade it
> as 'A' workmanship.  This builder was far from a beginner.
>
> The seller hasn't yet put the pics on the listing and I don't know if he
> will.  If you want to see them, send me an email and I'll pass them
> along.  Closes tomorrow night.
>
> Walt
> KJ4KV
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>



From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Sep 21 12:11:23 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Sep 21 12:16:07 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <20060921.111123.2728.8.windy10605@juno.com>

I would also like to see the pictures, Walt.

73 Kees K5BCQ

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "William N" <wnichelson@snip.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:17:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <001001c6dd91$0d8bcce0$277bccd1@bill>
References: <325.c067ebe.32433bfc@aol.com> <4512152D.1070002@ntelos.net>

Hi Walt,
Yes, I would like very much to see the picture of the wiring of the
receiver. Of course this is only of academic interest since I have no
intention of bidding. Building one was enough!  I must have walked three
miles winding the coils...but I wouldn't trade the experience for
anything!

Thanks for your efforts.
Bill W3KOC


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walt Hutchens" <waltah@ntelos.net>
To: "HBR Receiver List" <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:29 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16


> I've gotten the under-chassis pictures of the eBay HBR-16; it's very
> nice work.  Very point-to-point, but the builder clearly knew what he
> was doing and made no mistakes that I could see -- only a couple of
> soldering iron burns that I could see, no tacked on extensions to
leads,
> good quality new parts were used, nice clean chassis with no corrosion,
> and so on.  He used machine screws to add reinforcements to the chassis
> corners, flat head screws and countersunk. On a quick look, I'd grade
it
> as 'A' workmanship.  This builder was far from a beginner.
>
> The seller hasn't yet put the pics on the listing and I don't know if
he
> will.  If you want to see them, send me an email and I'll pass them
> along.  Closes tomorrow night.
>
> Walt
> KJ4KV
> ************************************
> Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and
> construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/
> there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/
>
>
> Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
>
>
>



************************************
Visit the HBR Receiver Web Site with over 100 pictures of receivers and 
construction notes...... via http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/ 
there is also a mirror (faster response)at http://k5bcq.edebris.com/


Retrieve reflector archived data via
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hbr
From waltah at ntelos.net  Thu Sep 21 16:44:16 2006
From: waltah at ntelos.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Thu Sep 21 16:48:06 2006
Subject: [HBR] Another project?
Message-ID: <4512F9A0.5080300@ntelos.net>

I actually have a sort-of HBR waiting for attention.  A year or two back
I bought a G3RKK homebrew receiver that needs its metalwork and wiring 
redone.

Like the G2DAF sets, the G3RKK design was published in the RSGB bulletin
and in the 3rd edition of the RSGB Radio Handbook.  It is said to have 
been constructed in considerable numbers.  I had never heard of it until 
I bought this example.

The G3RKK is similar to the W6TC designs in being double conversion
using fixed IFs of 1620 and 85 kcs.  The big difference is the use of a
bandswitching front end instead of plug in coils.   BUT the front end
assembly (separate subchassis about 7" x 7") was available as a
pre-wired assembly from Electroniques -- a UK company.

Buildability-wise this is not quite the equal of the HBRs -- there are
several shields under the chassis and other non-trivial work -- but the 
use of a prewired front end with no coils to wind probably made it even 
easier for some builders.

I suspect that both stability and performance were somewhat below the
HBR-series sets.  The coils are necessarily much smaller -- maybe 3/8" 
diameter? -- meaning lower Q.  They're on nylon forms -- excuse me, 
*formers.*  Drift could be better or worse than the HBRs, but probably 
not greatly better, in fact the Radio Handbook says there was a later 
version that (among other things) reduced the drift on the higher bands.

(The improved version is said to have been described in an issue of the 
RSGB Bulletin; I wonder if anyone has a lead to that article?)

The circuitry is 'very conventional' -- diode detector for AM, dual 
triode product detector for SSB, single ended audio, no Q-multiplier in 
the front end.

Except for the factory-built front end assembly which is in decent 
shape, the metalwork and wiring on my example are poor.  But all the 
critical parts are there, including a pre-calibrated Eddystone dial (I 
expect the printed dial scale came with the front end chassis), that 
bandswitching front end, the tuning cap and the IFTs.  So it could be 
turned into a kit with no more trouble than you'd expect.

With the current eBay HBR-16 standing at $350 with several hours to go, 
I suspect it won't be coming here, so that's one chunk of time that'll 
be free.

Gee ... a $350 reserve.  But the marketplace says that's realistic.  I
wonder what the guy's actual bid was?  $400?  $500?

Walt
KJ4KV

From windy10605 at juno.com  Thu Sep 21 21:33:17 2006
From: windy10605 at juno.com (windy10605@juno.com)
Date: Thu Sep 21 21:37:43 2006
Subject: Fw: Re: [HBR] HBR-16
Message-ID: <20060921.203317.1964.10.windy10605@juno.com>

$567.98 ............. pretty good. Wonder who "icom213" is ?


73 Kees K5BCQ
From waltah at ntelos.net  Thu Sep 21 22:16:41 2006
From: waltah at ntelos.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Thu Sep 21 22:20:29 2006
Subject: [HBR] HBR-16
In-Reply-To: <20060921.111123.2728.8.windy10605@juno.com>
References: <20060921.111123.2728.8.windy10605@juno.com>
Message-ID: <45134789.2090502@ntelos.net>

Well, it went for $568.  I had the second high bid.  It was a very nice 
receiver, but there'll be another, one of these days.

Meanwhile I'm chewing along with mounting parts on the GC-HBR project 
and looking at re-kitting the G3RKK receiver.  That one's almost a 
from-scratch, except for the really unique parts.  Even a lot of the 
standard items can't be recycled -- the builder used 6 mm extension 
shafts on 1/4" controls with 1/4" bushings in the panel.  The Eddystone 
dial is there, the front end assembly with coils and bandswitch, and the 
IFTs ... don't know about the 2nd oscillator crystal but the BFO coil is 
there.

It's an interesting radio -- a UK approach to the U.S. HBR-series 
(though I don't know which came first) -- and probably much rarer here 
than the HBRs.

I'll order the chassis and panel for it as a consolation prize, hi.

Walt
KJ4KV
From N2EY at aol.com  Fri Sep 22 06:21:39 2006
From: N2EY at aol.com (N2EY@aol.com)
Date: Fri Sep 22 06:24:51 2006
Subject: [HBR] Another project?
Message-ID: <bb9.56b8da3.32451333@aol.com>

In a message dated 9/21/06 4:53:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
waltah@ntelos.net writes:


> Like the G2DAF sets, the G3RKK design was published in the RSGB bulletin
> and in the 3rd edition of the RSGB Radio Handbook.  It is said to have 
> been constructed in considerable numbers.  I had never heard of it until 
> I bought this example.

It's shown in my 4th edition of the RSGB Handbook, too. It's definitely a 
simpler project than a G2DAF.

> 
> The G3RKK is similar to the W6TC designs in being double conversion
> using fixed IFs of 1620 and 85 kcs.  The big difference is the use of a
> bandswitching front end instead of plug in coils.   BUT the front end
> assembly (separate subchassis about 7" x 7") was available as a
> pre-wired assembly from Electroniques -- a UK company.
> 

I get the impression that Electroniques was the big name in GB homebrewing 
then - sort of a combination of Miller and B&W here.  Almost all of the Handbook 
projects use some of their components.

> Buildability-wise this is not quite the equal of the HBRs -- there are
> several shields

ahem...."screens"


 under the chassis and other non-trivial work -- but the 
> 
> use of a prewired front end with no coils to wind probably made it even 
> easier for some builders.
> 

In the back of my 4th edition is an advertisement - er..."advert"...from a 
metalworks that offers to supply completed sheet metal for the G2DAF and other 
projects. It looks like one could order a complete set of all the pieces, or 
just those that were hard to fabricate at home, like a heavy-gauge front panel 
with the special cutout for an 898 dial. No prices given. Lovely picture of a 
G2DAF rx, too.

Between the prewired front end and fabricated metalwork, the G3RKK could 
start to look like a semi-kit. 

> I suspect that both stability and performance were somewhat below the
> HBR-series sets.  The coils are necessarily much smaller -- maybe 3/8" 
> diameter? -- meaning lower Q.  They're on nylon forms -- excuse me, 
> *formers.* 

Quite right!

 Drift could be better or worse than the HBRs, but probably 
> 
> not greatly better, in fact the Radio Handbook says there was a later 
> version that (among other things) reduced the drift on the higher bands.
> 

The 4th edition specifies that the drift would be no worse than 500 Hz per 
hour after warmup, even on 10 meters. 


> (The improved version is said to have been described in an issue of the 
> RSGB Bulletin; I wonder if anyone has a lead to that article?)
> 

The 4th edition mentions it, but says the modifications are complex and 
sticks to the basic design. So it's not in the 4th edition either.


> The circuitry is 'very conventional' -- diode detector for AM, dual 
> triode product detector for SSB, single ended audio, no Q-multiplier in 
> the front end.
> 
> Except for the factory-built front end assembly which is in decent 
> shape, the metalwork and wiring on my example are poor.  But all the 
> critical parts are there, including a pre-calibrated Eddystone dial (I 
> expect the printed dial scale came with the front end chassis), that 
> bandswitching front end, the tuning cap and the IFTs.  So it could be 
> turned into a kit with no more trouble than you'd expect.


AMAZING! 

The Electroniques front end was described as coming pre-aligned from the 
factory, similar to what Heath did with the Mohawk.

The 85 kc IFTs aren't Command-set surplus - they were made by Electroniques, 
too. I suspect there may have been substitutions made, though.
> 
> 
> Gee ... a $350 reserve.  But the marketplace says that's realistic.  I
> wonder what the guy's actual bid was?  $400?  $500?
> 

When I think of the hamfest units I passed by 20-odd years ago, or sold for 
peanuts....sigh....

Then again, the reason such things bring high prices is in part due to their 
rarity. And that '16 is excellent.

I wonder what an HBR-16 cost to build 40-odd years ago - and what that 
equates to in today's dollars.

Also wonder what our homebrew projects will be selling for in 2046....

73 de Jim, N2EY

From shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com  Sat Sep 23 19:25:50 2006
From: shoppa_hbr at trailing-edge.com (shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com)
Date: Sat Sep 23 19:29:09 2006
Subject: [HBR] Another project?
In-Reply-To: <bb9.56b8da3.32451333@aol.com>
References: <bb9.56b8da3.32451333@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20060923232550.9BE20BA4130@mini-me.trailing-edge.com>

N2EY@aol.com wrote:
> I wonder what an HBR-16 cost to build 40-odd years ago - and what that 
> equates to in today's dollars.

My guesstimate is the $70-$150 range depending on how well stocked
the junkbox was etc.

Commercial multi-band SSB/CW ham receivers with SOME stability
in the 60's were typically $250 and up. (e.g. the Heath SB-300
was $250 in 65 or 66, some of the mid-line Hallicrafters were
$300, etc.) I think this is the best comparison even though many
of the commercial units had crystal filters, pretty slick bandswitching,
etc., features that the HBR's generally didn't have.

In today's dollars, that $250 is (adjusted by the CPI) $1450, and
$70 would today be like $400.

Tim.
From amargosaent at iscweb.com  Thu Sep 28 18:48:38 2006
From: amargosaent at iscweb.com (Amargosa Enterprises)
Date: Thu Sep 28 18:47:54 2006
Subject: [HBR] Another project?
References: <bb9.56b8da3.32451333@aol.com>
	<20060923232550.9BE20BA4130@mini-me.trailing-edge.com>
Message-ID: <USER_ANONYMOUS$69.85.158.79$.001e01c6e350$3d9c9a80$4f9e5545@vucppqlj>


----- Original Message -----
From: <shoppa_hbr@trailing-edge.com>
To: <hbr@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: [HBR] Another project?


> N2EY@aol.com wrote:
> > I wonder what an HBR-16 cost to build 40-odd years ago - and what that
> > equates to in today's dollars.
>
> My guesstimate is the $70-$150 range depending on how well stocked
> the junkbox was etc.
>
> Commercial multi-band SSB/CW ham receivers with SOME stability
> in the 60's were typically $250 and up. (e.g. the Heath SB-300
> was $250 in 65 or 66, some of the mid-line Hallicrafters were
> $300, etc.) I think this is the best comparison even though many
> of the commercial units had crystal filters, pretty slick bandswitching,
> etc., features that the HBR's generally didn't have.
>
> In today's dollars, that $250 is (adjusted by the CPI) $1450, and
> $70 would today be like $400.
>
> Tim.
>
My 1967/68 experience building a Crosby HBR20 design (see Feb 69 QST) had an
actual itemized parts cost of $ 150 plus my estimated additional $75 for
T-notch filter parts that I know were used but never got put on the basic
parts list.  Total out-of-pocket cost for a 20 tube HBR with switchable
broad/sharp 100 kHz IF and 100 kHz T-notch was then $225.  I had a pretty
good "stash" of parts and hardware, so we can probably add another $50 for
an all-in cost of $275.  Keep in mind this is for a receiver more complex
than the HBR16, and logically more expensive to build than the HBR16.

Biggest cost was the Eddystone 898 dial at $21.95, next biggest the main
tuning cap at around $9.

You can compare the $275 HBR20 cost to a 1966 monthly salary of about $1750
for a senior
development engineer at Cal Tech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, or of about
$1200 for a senior transmission engineer at Pacific Telephone and Telegraph.
These were EE degree jobs that paid well for the time and place.

You can also compare this cost to the following prices (thanks to my
1956/1957 ARRL
Handbook advertisements) -

    Hammarlund HQ150 $294; HQ110 $229; HQ 100 $169
    National HRO 60T $533; NC183 $399

Most of those successful with the HBR13C/HBR16 compared at the time very
favorably its performance vis-a-vis the Drake TR4 and Collins 75A.  I could
not find in my old documents any ads giving pricing for those receivers.  I
sort of vaguely recall a Collins 75A ran somewhere between $700 and $1000,
but I am relying on my memory alone and we all know that is the second thing
that goes !

After construction, I felt (and still do today) that performance of my $225
(out-of-pocket cost) HBR was extremely competitive with the $300/$400
receivers used by others given the CW service I have always preferred.  I
liked the receiver so much that I still have it (in working condition !) all
these years later.  I was successful in temperature stabilizing the
receiver, and never found the absence of bandswitching, crystal filters, or
exotic AGC capability a hinderance to anything I really wanted to do.

Jay

From cx1ddo at gmail.com  Fri Sep 29 08:31:34 2006
From: cx1ddo at gmail.com (Amador Iannino)
Date: Fri Sep 29 08:35:22 2006
Subject: [HBR] ok!
Message-ID: <aa986440609290531y4030a631v3e24770f91010c65@mail.gmail.com>

Tnx
-- 
CX1DDO - GF15XD
SMIRK #4960-SIX CLUB #424
From waltah at ntelos.net  Fri Sep 29 23:21:46 2006
From: waltah at ntelos.net (Walt Hutchens)
Date: Fri Sep 29 23:26:32 2006
Subject: [HBR] That General Coverage HBR Project ...
In-Reply-To: <4512F9A0.5080300@ntelos.net>
References: <4512F9A0.5080300@ntelos.net>
Message-ID: <451DE2CA.2080801@ntelos.net>

is inching toward the end of the parts mounting phase.  However, there's 
still one part I'd like to find.  It's a long shot, but ...

Anyone have a filter choke, hermetically sealed, about 1-1/2" square x 
1-3/4" high, inductance 1.4H, rated 125 mA, marked L-132.  This is from 
the BC-788 radio altimeter.  Lots of junk to trade (including slightly 
bigger similar chokes) or ... whatever.

Walt
KJ4KV
