[Milsurplus] Multiple Front End receiver

Fri Aug 27 05:43:40 EDT 2010

John,

True, but there are MIL Receivers with inputs > 9 Mcs.

73

Tom
WB3AKD

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quik.com>
To: "Tom Dawson" <wb3akd at earthlink.net>
Cc: "Kludge" <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>; <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Multiple Front End receiver

>I am not aware of any Nems-Clarke / DEI / Vitro / ACL / W-J telemetry
> receivers with IF BW > 10 MHz.
>
> -John
>
> =============
>
>
>>
>> Mike,
>>
>> ARC TV-10 /CV whatever it is:  beyond being less than optimal as far as
>> sensitivity, it does not cover the whole band.
>>
>> I checked local craigslist for the PRO-200(4,5,6) series and there is one
>> for only $50.00 so they would seem to fall within your budget.
>>
>> The kayak ride from the mainland would might stretch delivery times,
>> though.
>> I know that the 2005 and 2006 will definitely cover 225 to 400 MHz band.
>> Also the old Regency MX-5000 covers both V/U ac bands.  The Regency 
>> should
>> be even cheaper since it tops out at 512 MHz.
>>
>> (MIL Radio Content follows)
>> A technically feasible but, perhaps,  less practical approach to the UHF
>> problem might be to use an old Nems-Clarke telemetry receiver that covers
>> a
>> portion of the UHF band and feed the IF output to a batch of MIL Short
>> Wave
>> receivers.  Send pictures (prior to building collapse) if you choose this
>> approach.
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Tom
>> WB3AKD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kludge" <wh7hg.hi at gmail.com>
>> To: <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 7:39 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Multiple Front End receiver
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tom Dawson [mailto:wb3akd at earthlink.net]
>>> 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 LOs were sufficiently
>>> accurate) so it would definitely be heterodyne city.
>>
>> Yeah, so I've heard.  :-)
>>
>> Bill, KU8H, allowed as how a single LO with multiple IF et al chains all
>> tied to a single audio stage could be a better approach.   Where a 
>> problem
>> comes in with this is in the frequency spread.  The frequencies of
>> interest
>> (as requested by someone else) are as follows (all in MCs):
>>
>> HNL approach/departure  118.3  269.0
>> HNL clearance delivery  121.4  281.4
>> HJR tower  132.6  340.2
>> HJR ground  123.8  336.4
>> HJR clearance delivery  121.7  380.5
>>
>> I know there are five pairs rather than four.  I don't know if I'll be
>> able
>> to hear HNL's clearance delivery although I may be able to hear the read
>> back.  I know I'll hear read back to HJR's clearance delivery and should
>> hear both sides dependent on the transmitter antenna site.  (That may 
>> also
>> come out of HNL.)
>>
>> If I choose a LO frequency wisely for each [sub-]band (or get lucky with
>> the
>> crystals I have on hand which is more likely), I should be able to use HF
>> coil sets for the IF transformers also several different frequencies will
>> be
>> needed to achieve that.
>>
>>> Something like the ARC Receivers for VHF then another batch of ARC
>> Receivers
>>> stack with a TV-10 converter or something similar for UHF.
>>
>> Using R-13s and/or R-34s has the advantage that I can rack them in
>> slightly
>> altered 2 or 3 Rx command set racks (Pre-hacked ones would be good for
>> this.) then tune them as needed.  Once tuned, they can be disconnected
>> from
>> a normal control head and routed to a fairly conventional aircraft audio
>> panel for mixing et al.
>>
>>> A Stack of PRO-2005/PRO-2006 scanners would fit the bill with no
>>> converter
>> , if you can
>>> find some to fit your budget.
>>
>> Will these cover the UHF aircraft band as well?  With the amount of local
>> and "just passing through" military traffic, that is almost a necessity.
>> (Because of that traffic, I might add Kaneohe MCAS (HNG)
>> approach/departure
>> at 125.0 & 263.5 MCs even though it's on the other end of the island.) 
>> If
>> they do, I may do a split - A.R.C. for VHF and scanners for UHF. - if I
>> can
>> find the space.
>>
>>> (Non-sequitur: Let Google maps find directions between Honolulu and my
>> QTH.
>>> Directions included "Kayak across the pacific ocean-2756 Miles to WA.")
>>
>> So *that* is how UPS & FedEx get ground shipments here.  :-D
>>
>>> If you go the Shelf full of ARC receivers route, be sure to post a
>> picture.
>>
>> What about Collins 51X-2Bs (R-1123/ARC-73s) or even 618M-1s for the VHF
>> side?  Since I don't have to get finer than .1 MCs, I can use either one.
>> (Before I get cards & letters, I know the AN/ARC-73 is good to .05 MCs.)
>> They're a heck of a lot more expensive than scanners or A.R.C. equipment
>> but
>> they'd be sooo cool looking, especially if I can find racks to fit them.
>> :-)
>>
>> Seriously, I'll see what I can do.  :-)
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> 