Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1169; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id s78BGiLZ026203 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 13:16:45 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1XFi6h-0004Ea-ND for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:11 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1XFi6h-0004ER-9a for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:11 +0100 Received: from smtpout1.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.29] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1XFi6f-0005Si-59 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:13:10 +0100 Received: from AGB ([95.145.231.179]) by mwinf5d03 with ME id cBD51o0083stc1b03BD5N0; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:13:08 +0200 X-ME-Helo: AGB X-ME-Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:13:08 +0200 X-ME-IP: 95.145.231.179 Message-ID: From: "Graham" To: References: <53E3983D.9050606@gmx.net> <776311A518F6F642962EC561A9184090D582E15B35@THSONEP02CMB01P.one-02-priv.grp> In-Reply-To: <776311A518F6F642962EC561A9184090D582E15B35@THSONEP02CMB01P.one-02-priv.grp> Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:13:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 X-Scan-Signature: 54f9a9b24d9d5f31a632377c3b90b222 Subject: Re: LF: Receivers for LF and MF 136 KHz @ 477KHz ??? Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 178 Hi Paul, Yes , the later version , may be the 117 or the fine tune version for the Navy used the 7360 , probably about as good as it gets , I spent some time on production test when the ra1771/2 was first produced , that was long ago , I have a ra1778 and ra6790gm , with the lf front end , the start this year , I sold all the ra17 set up , ra17, pan adaptor , lf adaptor [with rad-haz mixers] ssb adaptor , all of which , I had not used for decades, all had failed in one way or the other , working or not , seems little difference in the price , must of used 3 cubic yards of cardboard packing ! the sets are now all round the world . Noted on the SDR , yes , I assume thats needed due to lack of 'bits' , there was an idea to use a 24 bit a/d as a 0>1 MHz sdr , aimed at the low frequency bands , but as yet , waiting .. one of the £5 dongles would work as pan adaptor , showing the 2/3 MHz IF out , only problem, if the ra17 has the original IF amp , then the LO carrier also shows on the trace , 100KHz from the tune point , I fitter the modification , but the rx-noise increased , due to the second valve , Q Have you used the AFEDRIxx on 136 . 477 ? 73-Graham G0NBD -------------------------------------------------- From: "REEVES Paul" Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 7:49 AM To: Subject: RE: LF: Receivers for LF and MF 136 KHz @ 477KHz ??? > Hi Graham, > > RA17 with beam deflection mixer? Surely not....... > I would certainly agree with you about the RA1772 (and extended family) > but I like using both - and a (fairly) complete set of RA17/MA79 plus > accessories really beats anything else in terms of looks! And it glows in > the dark too:) > I use an AFEDRIxx too. Works fine but really needs a preselector on HF > unless used as a panadaptor (behind an RA17 perhaps....), fortunately > Racal made nice preselector units too. > > 73s > Paul G8GJA > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Graham > Sent: 07 August 2014 21:36 > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: Receivers for LF and MF 136 KHz @ 477KHz ??? > > Yes Tobias, > > All is not as it seems , but as you say , adding filtering , reduces > the > problems , and with direct conversion , the noise floor is the > lowest possible , stability is at maximum , having only 1 oscillator , > In > have good decode results on 477 using the £5 dongle , behind the > TX > atu and inv L ae > > For the £150 sdr , the description lists 80 msps , which , I assume > moves the image problems out side the HF spectrum ? at 12 bits , > that > starts to provide a reasonable , post processed dynamic range ? > > 12- bit 80 MSPS A/D conversion > > I would not link the barlow-wadley , too closely to lack dynamic > range , may be a lack of engineering integrity , the RA17 with > pentode > rf stage , then later cascode , with beam deflection mixer , was > reasonable , though there was a pre selector for use at close tx/rx > sites , the ra1771/1772 was the first to better the ra17 , but > again > that also tends to question the models before .. the ra1772/1 is > fitted with rf-pre selector , for those 'unexpected' situations , the > ra6790gm , with no pre-amp is the closest I have seen to a bullet > proof front end , that runs , where the ra1778 needs the > pre-selector > > But in terms of noise etc , one of these 'reasonable sdr's' may be > better .. I don't think I would recommend any one go down the racal > path these days ! > > 73-G, > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Tobias DG3LV" > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 4:16 PM > To: > Subject: Re: LF: Receivers for LF and MF 136 KHz @ 477KHz ??? > >> Hi Graham ! >> >> This type of device has a dynamic range of 48dB at maximum (8 Bit), so >> they need help from a narrow-band frontend plus input-attenuators to >> reduce the load to the A/D-converter. The conversion speed is variable >> from 1 to 3 Megasamples/second, leading to a Nyqist-frequency of 0.5 to >> 1.5 MHz. >> >> This filter should have a deep attenuation above the Nyqist-frequency to >> avoid unwanted reception at harmonics/aliases of the sampling frequency >> (= >> "undersampling"). >> >> The advertized usage of 100kHz to 30MHz (in direct-sampling method) is >> based on this normally unwanted harmonics/aliases, i.e. the receiver uses >> a method that has become "famous" with the ancient "Barlow-Wadley" >> all-band receivers. (at least equivalent to). Their >> (large-signal-)problems of the past are reborn at the direct-sampling >> method of these DVB-T sticks. Without narrow-band selective frontends >> this >> is just a "proof of concept" and not a usable receiver. >> >> For the use at 136 kHz and 475 kHz a steep lowpass-filter (7 to 9 pole >> Tscheby with toroids) at (e.g.) 500kHz would be mandatory. An actual >> bandpass may not be necessary. Equipped with such filters the lack of >> resolution (8 Bit) will become more acceptable. Using a pre-amplifier >> without using filters will do no good. >> >> When home-brewed, such filters will not cost much, but it takes time, >> measurement-tools and effort to build and tune them. >> >> 73 de dg3lv Tobias >> >> Am 07.08.2014 14:13, schrieb Graham: >>> Receivers for LF and MF136 KHz@ 477 KHz >>> >>> A question, >>> >>> Startingat the£5dongleriggedfordirectsample , as >>> acheapeffectivestartingpoint >>> >>> A pre amp and pre - selector [ band pass filter ] would help for >>> lf/mf >>> >>> Whatwouldbein a scaleofincreasingperformance[ notcost !] >>> >>> be seen asreasonable in terms ofconfigurationand hardware ? >>> >>> Any particular equipments stand out as good cost/performance >>> choices ? >>> >>> Tnx >>> >>> Graham >>> >>> G0NBD >>> >> > >