[Milsurplus] MAB vs BC-611

Mike Morrow kk5f at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 11 08:47:14 EDT 2005


I wrote:

>The RF design of the the BC-611 seems better.  It seems to do a more
>efficient job of using its stages in both receive and transmit mode,
>possibly because it had a long multi-section PTT switch that the MAB did
>not.  It had an RF stage in the receiver, which could be a significant
>performance enhancer.

Additional design info:  The MAB uses *seven* tubes, only one of which is
used in both transmit and receive mode, IIRC.  As stated earlier, it lacks a
receiver RF stage.  Just to emphasize the design efficiency of the BC-611,
it has only *five* tubes, four of which are used in both transmit and
receive modes, and it has a receiver RF stage.  Technically, the BC-611 is
pretty impressive for its era.

Mike / KK5F





More information about the Milsurplus mailing list