[Milsurplus] RE: RAL receiver

[howard holden]

I can't fathom why it would need any "conversion". It works just fine AS IS, 
and is quite suitable for amateur use. As long as one has an LM to calibrate 
it, and becomes familiar with the peculiarities of tuning a regen, it does 
rather well for most comms. We use one regularly aboard the USS Ling for CW, 
and have even used it for SSB, where it provides generally equal or superior 
reception to a Yaesu FT-101ZD.

Howqie WB2AWQ/NX2ND


>From: "Robert Flory" <robandpj at earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: robandpj at earthlink.net
>To: "milsurplus" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>, "Bill W2YKG" <W2ykg at cs.com>, 
>"Brown Beezer" <w1nzr at amsat.org>,    "Chris Nardi" 
><curator at battleshipcove.com>, "Bill kn2x" <kn2x at verizon.net>, "George 
>W2rbk" <W2rbk at aol.com>,    "Howie Holden" <holden7471 at msn.com>, "navrad" 
><navrad at ptd.net>, "Ray Becuna W2RM" <w2rm at arrl.net>,    "tom horsfall" 
><wa6ope at hotmail.com>, "William Donzelli" <toober at bestweb.net>
>Subject: RAL receiver
>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:47:10 -0400
>
>I thought you would like this quote from one of the old Surplus Conversion
>Manuals.  I don't know which, I think I got this on BAMA or another
>schematic download page:
>
>"While it is possible to use the RAL for amateur communications, it is an
>almost hopeless antique and certainly not worthy of any conversion 
>efforts."
>
>Quite a contrast to the article in September CQ, HI
>
>Good thing that it was not worthy of any perversion efforts.
>
>Rob Flory
>robandpj at earthlink.net
>www.home.earthlink.net/~navyradio  WWII Navy Radio
>www.home.earthlink.net/~robandpj    Les Flory Television and Electronics
>
>
>