[Milsurplus] Multiple Front End receiver
Tom Dawson
wb3akd at earthlink.net
Mon Aug 23 11:05:07 EDT 2010
Mike,
Sounds like you want to listen to multiple channels simultaneously so the
single IF idea won't work as there is more chance of you successfully
performing brain surgery than all those planes being within 20 Hz or so of
the channel frequency (assuming your multiple LO's were sufficiently
accurate) so it would definitely be heterodyne city.
Something like the ARC Receivers for VHF then another batch of ARC Receivers
stack with a TV-10 converter or something similar for UHF. A Stack of
PRO-2005/PRO-2006 scanners would fit the bill with no converter , if you can
find some to fit your budget. Even thought they're scanners they work
pretty well for what you're looking to do and the price seems to be
declining with the increasing use of trunking. They are still more than
R-19's seem to be going for but the scanners are lighter than the ARC
receivers. Kind of depends on whether you just want to get the signals or
play with the ARC radios more. I can see the entertainment value in both
approaches.
Given the frequency Coverage of the R-13/R-19 radios, you'd need more than
one converter to cover all the UHF Aviation Freqs in your area. ( Did a
QRZ search to see what island you were on.) (Non-sequitur: Let Google maps
find directions between Honolulu and my QTH. Directions included "Kayak
across the pacific ocean-2756 Miles to WA.")
Benefit of the block down converter for UHF is that one converter can feed
multiple receivers. If you go the Shelf full of ARC receivers route, be
sure to post a picture.
73
Tom
WB3AKD
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael" <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>; <mrca at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Multiple Front End receiver
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Fantini [mailto:RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu]
> They are expensive but one of the advantages of the URC-101 or 110 family
of radios is
> they cover both VHF and UHF AM and FM and have the ability to scan or
store multiple
> channels in memory, also they are relatively small for all they do.
I'd have to have multiple units since scanning is not a favored path. I
have a scanner which is why I'm on a quest for individual receivers. :-)
> The only disadvantage is that you cannot mix AM and FM together.
I only care about AM since that's what aircraft use. FM is covered by the
ham equipment on hand so it's not an issue.
> combining multiple mixer output into one IF may have some nasty
heterodynes as a
> byproduct.
This seems to be an issue. While the individual frequencies are several MCs
apart, I never really looked at the products of mixing them together - or at
least the LO frequencies. Each front end would be in its own individual box
with a common antenna connection at one end and a common IF out at the
other, grouped together within each band.
The way it's going now, I may as well just use my A.R.C. equipment for VHF
for now and noodle around for UHF equipment to go with it. A set of
AN/ARC-73 receivers with the frequencies hardwired at the connectors would
be nice for VHF but that has about as much chance of happening as my
performing neurosurgery. Successfully.
Best regards,
Michael, WH7HG BL01xh
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/chapters/NTH/index.aspx
http://wh7hg.blogspot.com/
http://kludges-other-blog.blogspot.com
Hiki Nô!
______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
More information about the Milsurplus
mailing list