Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15280 invoked from network); 18 May 2000 20:28:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by teachers.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 18 May 2000 20:28:08 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12sWnM-0008Dy-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 18 May 2000 21:21:24 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from smtper.inrete.it ([212.110.32.184] helo=mailer.inrete.it) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12sWnK-0008Dt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 18 May 2000 21:21:22 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from cel266 (ppp-20-72-215.libero.it [151.20.72.215]) by mailer.inrete.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA31837 for ; Thu, 18 May 2000 22:20:56 +0200 Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 22:20:56 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <4.1.20000518204626.020e5020@mailer.inrete.it> X-Sender: spin@mailer.inrete.it X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Versione 4.1 Data: Thu, 18 May 2000 20:52:24 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M. Bruno" Subject: Re: LF: Re: LF receivers In-reply-to: <2000051810113968199@zetnet.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In 21.38 18/05/00 , hai scritto: >I am working on the Receiver chapter for the LF book. I have a good >introduction written by John 4GVC (with a description of the TS850, >which caused many of us, including myself, to go this route) but >would like to bring it up to date in the light of your collective >experience. While I was up at Crawley I found that Derek was using >the 990 to good effect. >What is your favorite receiver and how does it compare with others >that you might have tried? > > >-- >Regards, Peter, G3LDO > > > Racal 1792. - 1 Hz tuning step - high stability frequency reference, and all the synthesizers derived from the same 1 MHz signal - synthesized BFO - good AGC, excludible - good dynamic (abt 102 dB 3rd order IMD at 14 MHz, never measured at 137 kHz) - ample choice of filters - IF pass band tuning - no bells-and-whistles - easy to repair and/or modify [I'm not working for Racal, of course ...] 73, Marco IK1ODO