[Milsurplus] [MMRCG] "Radio Prepares for War"

Ray Fantini RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu
Mon Apr 27 21:43:36 EDT 2020


Before long this turns into Chevy vs. Ford.



Superior in quite a number of ways:



  * Band-switched with calibrated dial displaying the band-in-use.



With plug in coils you don’t need a pointer, illuminated or otherwise.



  * Two RF stages for better image rejection on the higher frequencies.



What’s the addition of a stage for better image rejection in comparison to what the addition is to the noise floor? The HRO is a very quiet receiver. That’s still my number one thing in rating a receiver. How much noise you get with both AF and RF gain cranked all the way open. It makes a big difference on the higher bands. But then again the Hammerland craps out at 20 MHz.





  * Variable IF selectivity.  Not just a crystal phasing arrangement,

    but variable coupling in IF the transformers.

  * More tuned circuits in the IF for better skirt selectivity.



Very true, overly complex mechanical system to allow some variation of the IF bandwidth that’s carried thru all three IF transformers, funny how you see that system of shafts, cams and other weird mechanical stuff only used in that receiver and everyone else just using one stage of filtering after the mixer. But if you love the complex that systems of gears, cams and other mechanical components are just the thing.



  * An extremely low distortion audio amp, (Triode connected 6F6's).

    This make signals in the noise more copyable.



I always thought the big audio amplifiers were for connecting up your turntable and playing your favorite 78s Ok so you do have a flock of 6F6 tubes in there as a driver and P/P output but I never found excessive audio power necessary for communications and don’t see a real advantage to the added heat load. But then again you can drive a huge speaker or maybe a string of speakers; have to wonder why they did not have a 70 volt tap for driving a large speaker system?



At the end of the day it all comes down to personal preferences. The world is full of people that would rather push a Chevy then drive a Ford.



Ray F/KA3EKH

________________________________
From: MMRCG at groups.io <MMRCG at groups.io> on behalf of Al Klase via groups.io <ark=ar88.net at groups.io>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 8:16 PM
To: MMRCG at groups.io <MMRCG at groups.io>; milsurplus at mailman <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MMRCG] "Radio Prepares for War"

Ray,

Comments below:

On 4/27/2020 1:45 PM, Ray Fantini wrote:

It’s kind of the pot calling the kettle black. Yes the mechanical dial assembly on the HRO Can be an issue but the Band spread dial on the HQ-120 is just as bad. I have never liked receivers with two tuning dials to the extent that I was unable to determine where the receiver was. The reduction drive on the HRO allows the operator plenty of fine tuning without having to resort to two different and almost never aligning tuning dials but maybe that’s just me, as many will tell you I am not the sharpest tool in the shed.

There's a lot to be said in favor of one dial with geared tuning and an accurate logging scale.  It make it possible to return to a previously logged freq. with good precision.  That the pattern the better receivers, like the RCA products fell into.

The two-dial arrangement might actually be better for the average ham.  You set the band-spread dial to your TX crystal freq.  then zero-beat with the main dial.  Sucks for SWL.

Think when most receivers were used in military service the BC-221 was never far away and that’s how you set frequency.

That's a problem that doesn't get solved until Collins shows up with the 51-J's in the 1950's.  A crystal controlled converter in front of a carefully calibrated variable IF.

As far as the plug in coil assemblies that’s one of the best parts, no issues with dirty band switches and buckets of isolation, maybe not in the day but know that after years band switch issues are often a problem, isn’t that the reason that they went to the big drum in the SP-600 in order to get the isolation and mechanical stability of the HRO without plug in coils?

Yes, but I hate to  have to rummage around for the coil I want.

Al



Ray F/KA3EKH

________________________________
From: MMRCG at groups.io<mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> <MMRCG at groups.io><mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> on behalf of Al Klase via groups.io <ark=ar88.net at groups.io><mailto:ark=ar88.net at groups.io>
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 12:15 PM
To: MMRCG at groups.io<mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> <MMRCG at groups.io><mailto:MMRCG at groups.io>; milsurplus at mailman <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net><mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MMRCG] "Radio Prepares for War"

I should have said "state of the art" - Al

On 4/27/2020 12:11 PM, Al Klase wrote:
Hi Ray,

The things you say are true, but my point of view focuses on "the state of the ."  James Millen had hams believing that the HRO was the best receiver in the world, when the truth was it was the best receiver they could afford.  (Well, for a lot of hams that might have been an SW-3 or FB-7, both National products.)

The HRO may have led the industry for a short time, but was completely out classed by the Hammarlund Super-Pro.  From my vantage point, as an all-wave SWL kinda guy, the HRO's uncalibrated dial and plug-in coils are an unacceptable PITA.  As to affordability , the Hammarlund HQ-120 was the best pre-war ham set.

Meanwhile, RCA was the 700-pound gorilla of SW receiver design, but most of that was high-buck stuff for the military..

I feel the HRO design persisted as long as it did, through HRO-50 and HRO-60, because the interchangeable coils, and LF coverage made it a desirable receiver in the lab.

My further two cents,
Al

On 4/27/2020 11:24 AM, Ray Fantini wrote:

Come on man, give me a brake.

The HRO receivers were a pre war product that has excellent performance, low noise, selective and most important of all a simple efficient clean design. Remember we are talking about pre war design so a fair comparison would be something like the RCA AR-60 a good receiver but cost almost three times as much and was more complex and harder to build. The AR-88 did not appear until 1940 and it’s a fine radio but looking at it you can see it was produced with how to build something faster and cheaper then the radios of the late thirties. Don’t know the sale price of the AR-88 but suspect it was more then the HRO.

Don’t want to get into comparison with the way over built and overweight RAK/RAL TRF monsters or the RBA/RBB and RBC that demonstrate just how complex, heavy and large you can make a receiver. Ok, before anyone gets offended I understand that on a war ship you need mass for stability and to counter act the effect of gun fire and poor voltage regulation but who will not admit that those are all really heavy radios.



The HRO family including the striped down RAS was pound for pound and dollar for dollar the best value and level of performance in any radio of its price class imagine you were able to buy at least four or five complete HRO sets for the cost of one RBB or RBC.

 And as far as Hammarlund goes what receiver are you referring to? Maybe Hallicrafters and the SX-28 but its not easy to find may items like the National HRO that was able to make the transition from the Ham Commercial market to the military world with a minimum of changes, radios like the National HRO and others like the Hallicrafters family of transmitters including the HT-1, HT-14 and the HT-4, BC-610 demonstrated how some of the best of the Ham world like the HRO served almost as well as the over designed and over priced hardware produced just for military applications.



My 1939 HRO RAS despite its image problem is still one of my favorite receivers to use for AM, and I will stand up for it any day of the week!





Ray F/KA3EKH
________________________________
From: MMRCG at groups.io<mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> <MMRCG at groups.io><mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> on behalf of Al Klase via groups.io <ark=ar88.net at groups.io><mailto:ark=ar88.net at groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 7:42 PM
To: MMRCG at groups.io<mailto:MMRCG at groups.io> <MMRCG at groups.io><mailto:MMRCG at groups.io>; milsurplus at mailman <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net><mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [MMRCG] "Radio Prepares for War"

Interesting articles, but HORSE FEATHERS!  The real leaders in military short-wave were RCA and Hammarlund.
See my page.<http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/commrx/Receiver_Time_Line.html>
The HRO was a big hit with the Britts,  because they were available.  Hammarlund and RCA already had the US government contracts.

Al

On 4/26/2020 3:43 PM, David Stinson wrote:
I was surprised to see a PBS station produce this.
Think you'll like it.

https://www.wshu.org/post/radio-prepares-war-part-1
https://www.wshu.org/post/radio-prepares-war-part-2#stream/0




--
Al Klase – N3FRQ
Jersey City, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/




--
Al Klase – N3FRQ
Jersey City, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/




--
Al Klase – N3FRQ
Jersey City, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/




--
Al Klase – N3FRQ
Jersey City, NJ
http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/



_._,_._,_
________________________________
Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#1523)<https://groups.io/g/MMRCG/message/1523> | Reply To Group<mailto:MMRCG at groups.io?subject=Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BMMRCG%5D%20%22Radio%20Prepares%20for%20War%22> | Reply To Sender<mailto:ark at ar88.net?subject=Private:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BMMRCG%5D%20%22Radio%20Prepares%20for%20War%22> | Mute This Topic<https://groups.io/mt/73289895/1043670> | New Topic<https://groups.io/g/MMRCG/post>

Your Subscription<https://groups.io/g/MMRCG/editsub/1043670> | Contact Group Owner<mailto:MMRCG+owner at groups.io> | Unsubscribe<https://groups.io/g/MMRCG/leave/2381741/1260982536/xyzzy> [RAFANTINI at salisbury.edu]

_._,_._,_
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20200428/7acc268b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Milsurplus mailing list