[Lowfer] Re: 600MRG> Boat Anchor Receiver Test

[Lee Mushel]

Ya know, you guys, I guess I never warned Fritz when I told him that I was
interested in this stuff that I have the habit of, from time to time,
slipping into a story telling mode.  Sometimes I am even guilty of slipping
off topic.   If you are a person averse to such activity and you don't have
a sense of humor I suggest you reach for your delete button right now.
Anyway, I do still have my novice station from 1959 or so and I have taken
note of what I consider to be marginal performance by some very expensive
asian equipment.   And the fact that the latest copy of QEX discusses
receiver performance made me sit up and take notice of the boat anchor
discussion on this reflector.  To digress slightly I want to point out that
the same issue of QEX has an article on crystal sets.   Some might question
why such a topic would be included in that magazine but  I can trace my own
interest in ham radio to such a thing given to me when I was four or five by
my grandfather who explained in great detail what a  marvelous a thing it
was.   And this was followed by a school science club where I learned the
code and then built a crystal set with O1A amplifier!

Anyway, when I learned of the existence of the lowfer project I thought it
would be a fun thing for me and I immediately contacted Fritz.  I explained
to him that I liked and could build my own equipment but even more
importantly, since I have some of the most leading edge ham gear available
right now I was certain that I could contribute to the effort without
difficulty!

>From time to time, maybe daily, the XYL says I get confused.  You have no
idea how shocked I was when I first hooked this highly esteemed piece of
gear to a 1,500 ft. beverage and found nothing that I could identify as a
ham-originated signal.   Certainly no CW anyway.   There was nothing but
very strong images from the broadcast band.   In discussion with the owner
of the company who manufactured the radio I learned that the extremely broad
front end----I think 100khz to 54 mhz with no tuned circuits was going to
require some sort of low pass filter.   After much effort and money expended
on my part I only recently learned that sensitivity is also deliberately
reduced to minimize the image problems  and even the 160 meter band is
affected by this!   This is something I learned on Monday of this week.
Yesterday I won an auction on Ebay for what I hope will prove to be a low
frequency boat anchor-type receiver.

Now, am I upset with my high tech radio?   Absolutely not!   It has simply
remarkable characteristics and if I was a 40, 80 and twenty meter contester
I would find its capabilities amazing!  But the designers never anticipated
that some old duck educated in a school heated with a wood stove (but only
until the third grade when the oil burner appeared) would come along and
actually test the limits of coverage!

Surely, these are the most exciting times for ham radio!

73

Lee   K9WRU


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jrusgrove at comcast.net>
To: "shmrg at piobaire.mines.uida" <shmrg at piobaire.mines.uidaho.edu>;
<lowfer at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 12:34 PM
Subject: 600MRG> Boat Anchor Receiver Test


> Somewhat LF and MF related...
>
> I've always been curious how boat anchor receivers stacked up in terms of
> minimum discernable signal (MDS), blocking and two-tone dynamic range so I
> made  measurements on some of the highly prized receivers 'of the day'.
> Turns out they did pretty well!
>
> http://www.w1vd.com/BAreceivertest.html
>
> Jay W1VD
>
>
>
> *********** The Primary 600MRG E-mail List Website is: **********
> ******************* http://www.500kc.com/ ***********************
> ******* Secondary is: http://www.mines.uidaho.edu/~SHMRG/ *******
> *** Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to this address: ****
> ************** majordomo at piobaire.mines.uidaho.edu **************
>
>