[NJARC] Re: NJARC Digest, Vol 22, Issue 24
rckchp at comcast.net
rckchp at comcast.net
Wed Feb 22 07:53:46 EST 2006
Hello Fred,
I just checked at Barnes & Noble and Amazon (online) and there are
several used copies available, as little as $10.95 at Amazon. I've
bought several books from both and the shipping is usually $3.94.
Just google Barnes & Noble or Amazon and then click their "used & out of
print link", then enter title or author in the search box.
Regards,
Rich k2cpe
njarc-request at mailman.qth.net wrote:
>Send NJARC mailing list submissions to
> njarc at mailman.qth.net
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/njarc
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> njarc-request at mailman.qth.net
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> njarc-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of NJARC digest..."
>
>
>Visit our web site - See http://www.njarc.org
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. 6 & 2 AM (StephenTetorka at cs.com)
> 2. tube testing (StephenTetorka at cs.com)
> 3. Re: tube testing (Scott Roberts)
> 4. Re: 6 & 2 AM (Rob Flory)
> 5. Re: 6 & 2 AM (Peter Markavage)
> 6. Re: tube testing (Billoradio at aol.com)
> 7. RE: 6 & 2 AM (Bob Kulow)
> 8. Re: 6 & 2 AM (Peter Markavage)
> 9. Book-Who Really Invented Radio - 1972 (Fred Carl)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:00:41 EST
>From: StephenTetorka at cs.com
>Subject: [NJARC] 6 & 2 AM
>To: njarc at mailman.qth.net
>Message-ID: <2b2.4f867cc.312c68f9 at cs.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>You better get it while you can...word is ARRL proposed changes for AM on 6
>and 2...I'm waiting to hear back from them on just what the changes are...will
>get back...
>
>The Antique Wireless Assn. just had their AM event....very Big
>success...reports are that 'they hadn't heard that many AM'er in a l o n g time..."
>
>The DX 100 ala GTO worked an Italian station on 20...last time I did AM-DX
>was 1965...even scored a few points with my 1920's rig on 80....knew that I'd
>need those knife switches sooner or later...have to use two to go from receive
>to xmit...
>
>R,
>Steve
>WA2TAK
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:08:54 EST
>From: StephenTetorka at cs.com
>Subject: [NJARC] tube testing
>To: njarc at mailman.qth.net
>Message-ID: <e4.7a7239ad.312c6ae6 at cs.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Consider this please for my situation:
>
>1. only a few tube types are involved..on only a few occasions...
>2. transconductance is the main 'number'...no good number - no good bugger.
>3 got "juice" to power the tubes
>4 got plenty of clip-leads
>5 meters available
>
>Shouldn't I simply breadboard a 'tube tester'?
>
>Heck...if they test good...I'll can just keep going...add resistors,
>capacitors, variables, chassis...heck...who knows where it'll end once I get
>rolllling...hihi
>
>Count UR Blessings guys,
>Steve
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:24:57 -0800 (PST)
>From: Scott Roberts <ng19delta at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [NJARC] tube testing
>To: New Jersey Antique Radio Club <njarc at mailman.qth.net>
>Message-ID: <20060221132457.8523.qmail at web30011.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Sent my reply to Stephen to the group by mistake-
>Apologies! Scott
>
>--- StephenTetorka at cs.com wrote:
>
>
>
>>Visit our web site - See http://www.njarc.org
>>_______________________________________________
>>Consider this please for my situation:
>>
>>1. only a few tube types are involved..on only a
>>few occasions...
>>2. transconductance is the main 'number'...no good
>>number - no good bugger.
>>3 got "juice" to power the tubes
>>4 got plenty of clip-leads
>>5 meters available
>>
>>Shouldn't I simply breadboard a 'tube tester'?
>>
>>Heck...if they test good...I'll can just keep
>>going...add resistors,
>>capacitors, variables, chassis...heck...who knows
>>where it'll end once I get
>>rolllling...hihi
>>
>>Count UR Blessings guys,
>>Steve
>>_______________________________________________
>>NJARC mailing list
>>NJARC at mailman.qth.net
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/njarc
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:58:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
>From: Rob Flory <robandpj at earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: [NJARC] 6 & 2 AM
>To: New Jersey Antique Radio Club <njarc at mailman.qth.net>
>Message-ID:
> <9555140.1140541081610.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>ARRL Shmay RRL. I'll run my 6m AM rig like I want to, and it won't bother anyone.
>
>AWA Shmay WA. Closing their events to non-members sounds like a recipe for boredom.
>
>Rant rant rant....
>
>Rob
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:37:19 -0500
>From: Peter Markavage <manualman at juno.com>
>Subject: Re: [NJARC] 6 & 2 AM
>To: njarc at mailman.qth.net
>Message-ID: <20060221.123741.2388.0.manualman at juno.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Proposal says:
>50.0 - 50.1 MHz 200 kHz max bandwidth
>50.1 - 50.3 MHz 3.5 kHz max bandwidth
>50.3 - 54.0 Mhz 100 kHz max bandwidth
>
>144.0 - 144.1 MHz 200 kHz max bandwidth
>144.1 - 144.3 MHz 3.5 kHz max bandwidth
>144.3 - 148.0 MHz 100 kHz max bandwidth
>
>Where's the beef? Looks like if you want to operate with an AM bandwidth
>of 6, 8, 15, 20, 30 kHz, etc., there will be no legal rule that says you
>can't. I can't see where any AM operation on 6 and 2 meters will suffer
>from this proposal.
>
>Pete, wa2cwa
>
>On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:00:41 EST StephenTetorka at cs.com writes:
>
>
>>Visit our web site - See http://www.njarc.org
>>_______________________________________________
>>You better get it while you can...word is ARRL proposed changes for
>>AM on 6
>>and 2...I'm waiting to hear back from them on just what the changes
>>are...will
>>get back...
>>
>>The Antique Wireless Assn. just had their AM event....very Big
>>success...reports are that 'they hadn't heard that many AM'er in a l
>>o n g time..."
>>
>>The DX 100 ala GTO worked an Italian station on 20...last time I did
>>AM-DX
>>was 1965...even scored a few points with my 1920's rig on 80....knew
>>that I'd
>>need those knife switches sooner or later...have to use two to go
>>from receive
>>to xmit...
>>
>>R,
>>Steve
>>WA2TAK
>>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:32:16 EST
>From: Billoradio at aol.com
>Subject: Re: [NJARC] tube testing
>To: njarc at mailman.qth.net
>Message-ID: <2c7.3df398b.312cb6b0 at aol.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>
>In a message dated 2/21/2006 8:09:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>StephenTetorka at cs.com writes:
>
>Consider this please for my situation:
>
>1. only a few tube types are involved..on only a few occasions...
>2. transconductance is the main 'number'...no good number - no good bugger.
>3 got "juice" to power the tubes
>4 got plenty of clip-leads
>5 meters available
>
>Shouldn't I simply breadboard a 'tube tester'?
>
>Heck...if they test good...I'll can just keep going...add resistors,
>capacitors, variables, chassis...heck...who knows where it'll end once I get
>rolllling...hihi
>
>
>
>
>Eventualy you will end up inventing the tube tester.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:58:23 -0500
>From: "Bob Kulow" <kulow at epix.net>
>Subject: RE: [NJARC] 6 & 2 AM
>To: "'New Jersey Antique Radio Club'" <njarc at mailman.qth.net>
>Message-ID: <001b01c63721$2c27eba0$01fea8c0 at deepthought>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250"
>
>
>
>>Proposal says:
>>50.0 - 50.1 MHz 200 kHz max bandwidth
>>50.1 - 50.3 MHz 3.5 kHz max bandwidth
>>50.3 - 54.0 Mhz 100 kHz max bandwidth
>>
>>144.0 - 144.1 MHz 200 kHz max bandwidth
>>144.1 - 144.3 MHz 3.5 kHz max bandwidth
>>144.3 - 148.0 MHz 100 kHz max bandwidth
>>
>>
>
>How can you have a 200 kHz wide signal in a sub band
>only 100 kHz wide?
>Should that be 100 Hz bandwidth?
>
>73
>Bob WA2UEH
>
>
>
More information about the NJARC
mailing list