[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