UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Powered By Google Custom Search Vintage Radio and TV Service Data

Go Back   UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Discussion Forum > Specific Vintage Equipment > Vintage Amateur and Military Radio

Notices

Vintage Amateur and Military Radio Amateur/military receivers and transmitters, morse, and any other related vintage comms equipment.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 20th Feb 2012, 4:35 pm   #1
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I am studying for my foundation level UK amateur radio test and am looking at radio gear. Whilst all the modern stuff from Icom, Kenwood et al looks nice, is small and efficient in its use of space, and is probably very reliable, I still hanker after something big and beautiful, that looks like something from a 50's or 60's film. I have the desk space, and have decided to ask if I am mad for considering old gear for this purpose? I have an inkling of electronics knowledge, but definitely not a vast amount, but I am keen to learn further. I have basic test gear. I have basic soldering and de-soldering gear. I am as much or more interested in the social side of chatting to different people around the world as I am in tearing the thing apart on a regular basis.

My questions are:

How much less efficient is vintage gear than the modern plastic box stuff?
I would value something of beauty as well as something of excellence. How much am I looking to spend on something that looks mint, works out of the box, has a classic pedigree and has the ability of still being repaired, and still has most common failure prone bits available?

I am in a low lying Shropshire hamlet, and feel working very high frequencies via repeaters is just like using my cellphone, but with more hassle and limitations, so am thinking of going HF bands to start with. I am lucky enough to have a lot of outdoor space so big aerial installations are not an issue, but I do not want the place to look too indiscreet to neighbours. I am not interested in portable usage, just home base station work.

What are people's views, I know this is a "vintage" forum, but please remain objective Thanks.
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 5:23 pm   #2
Hermit6345
Rest in Peace
 
Hermit6345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Wiltshire, UK.
Posts: 638
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Hi Chris,

Good luck with your Foundation course. Regarding your question about older gear vs modern gear, a couple of things come to mind.

(1) I don't think that with that class of licence you are allowed to make anything for use on the air.

(2) Apart from CW, most of the activity on the HF bands requires an SSB rig. The exception would be those enthusiasts who use AM mode on certain spot frequencies. Older SSB rigs such as Collins (expensive), KW (can drift a bit) are not so easy to obtain. That makes it much more difficult to use older gear as in the main it's not all that compatible with todays band operating conditions. You might be able to make a station using older equipment (70s) such as Yaesu FR/FT400 series but of course that range is now elderly and will probably require repair after 40 or more years. Some FR400s were fitted with converters for 2m and 6m and there were separate VFO FV400( I think) and 6m 50 watt transverter (FTV650)units as well. If you get all the addons,including the SP400 speaker andthe FL2000 linear you had wall to wall Yaesu!

I am sure that others will have some ideas. If you were to use CW, then the field is much wider.

Regards,

Ian
Hermit6345 is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 5:31 pm   #3
ex 2 Base
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Scarborough, North Yorkshire, UK.
Posts: 507
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Yasue FT 200 basic and reliable, must be loads around for £50 or less at bring at buy stalls at mobile rallies.Get the sellers home address, then go around with a knowable friend and have a test run.FT200 had separate power supply unit.I had one 35 years ago and it never gave any trouble whatso ever and so did several of my friends.I sure there other makes just a reliable.Ted
ex 2 Base is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 7:04 pm   #4
Bazz4CQJ
Dekatron
 
Bazz4CQJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxfordshire, UK.
Posts: 4,923
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

In the 1950's/60's many amateurs, and even the military to some extent, were still using equipment dating back to WWII. On the receive side, AR88 and HRO were widespread and still are today and still hold their own. Both recievers are evident in any films related to Blecthley Park. Alternatively, Eddystone made several fine receivers during that period and some models are much sought after.

In the era before Japanese black boxes, most amateur use was limited to AM, frequently using homebuilt transmitters. The KW brand equipment was an early entrant on the commercial side but I think you would have to be a devotee of KW to want too use it now. A lot of the equipment that was around then does not seem to have survived the test of time in terms of reliability. I would not be keen to get involved with anything older than an FT101 which appeared about 1970 and are still quite popular.
Bazz4CQJ is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 8:21 pm   #5
ex seismic
Heptode
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK.
Posts: 684
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I'd go along with the FT101 recommendation. If you can run to a ZD Mk3 then you have a nice looking vintage style set with valve output. The Mk3 will do all the current HF bands except 5 MHz, but at your level you can't use it anyway. Earlier 101s don't cover what are known as the WARC bands such as 17m.

The ZDs run off the mains (via a rather lethal plug by modern standards), but you will need an ATU to go with it, either the pukka Yaesu one or anything else.

They do USB, LSB, CW and either AM or FM depending on which option board it has. Loads of extras for them, and loads of internet knowledge and nothing approaching surface mount!

Regards
Gordon
G7KNS
ex seismic is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 8:24 pm   #6
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I hadn't really considered how modern bandwidth constraints may have affected using older communications gear, especially transmitters. That is indeed a shame. I have happy memories of my old school's amateur radio society and it's Collins receiver and a vast and hugely heavy transmitter whose make I can no longer recall. There's something very tactile about a receiver or transmitter that's as much mechanical engineering and metalwork as it is discrete components. There's something inherently wrong with a worldwide communications device that looks like a high end car radio and costs as much as a good used car


I am considering amateur radio as much for the social side as the electronics side, I don't think I could bring myself to have an enjoyable conversation by Morse, typing is enough of a constraint I welcome more comment though, but I fear my dreams of recreating the school radio room here in a north Shropshire attic may be about to face an early fate Thanks for the replies so far.
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 9:08 pm   #7
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ex seismic View Post
I'd go along with the FT101 recommendation. If you can run to a ZD Mk3 then you have a nice looking vintage style set with valve output. The Mk3 will do all the current HF bands except 5 MHz, but at your level you can't use it anyway. Earlier 101s don't cover what are known as the WARC bands such as 17m.

The ZDs run off the mains (via a rather lethal plug by modern standards), but you will need an ATU to go with it, either the pukka Yaesu one or anything else.

They do USB, LSB, CW and either AM or FM depending on which option board it has. Loads of extras for them, and loads of internet knowledge and nothing approaching surface mount!

Regards
Gordon
G7KNS

What's your opinion on the FT902? There seems a lot of info and parts available for these sets, and they look both beautifully made and to be relatively easy for an amateur to work on as they appear modular? Any idea how much one would have to pay for a nice one with no known issues? Thanks.
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 9:31 pm   #8
HamishBoxer
Dekatron
 
HamishBoxer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: W.Butterwick, near Doncaster UK.
Posts: 8,923
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Think you are limited to 10watts.

David GM8JET
HamishBoxer is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 9:34 pm   #9
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Can they not be "turned down"? Probably a naive question, apologies in advance!
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 10:00 pm   #10
Peter.N.
Dekatron
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Charmouth, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 3,601
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Yes they can but you need to monitor the output carefully. My first HF rig was an FT101ZD and I reckon it was as good as anything I have had since, very nice recieve audio and with the bonus that you can repair them yourself.

Peter
Peter.N. is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 10:13 pm   #11
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I am busy reading a huge amount of stuff on this series of Yaesu units, glad i posted, whilst not quite what I had in mind, which was more AR88D era, they do appeal, in fact they appeal a lot. They seem to have quality, practicality and a a certain indefinable something that only older gear seems to have. Did any f the other Japanese makers of that era make anything similar and comparable? Thanks again.

As an aside, and I may start a new thread, I am collecting a bit of test gear, and now have some scopes, from a modern 150 mHz USB digital, to a Philips / Fluke Combi Scope which is on the fly switch-able analogue to digital, a brand new out of military storage Tek 7633, to an in repair Tek 475 (which is proving a challenge, but that's why I bought it). I have a hand held multi meter, a couple of half decent Thurlby bench multimeters, a Peak semiconductor tester, and a matching ESR tester. I have a 2 mHz frequency counter / signal generator and some half decent soldering gear. I do not have anything specific to amateur radio gear though. What sort of test and calibration gear do you find useful as an amateur?
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2012, 11:34 pm   #12
Sean Williams
Dekatron
 
Sean Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St.Ippolyts, Hitchin, Hertfordshire QRA IO91UW
Posts: 3,517
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I think anything with valve finals is technically out for a foundation licensee - there isnt the ability to turn the wick down low enough.....

As boring as a Ricebox is to own and use, you really do not need the hassle of old gear to learn how to operate on the air effectively - get something modernish, learn with that, then go on to the old clunkers....

I've played with numerous radios including the FT101, 102, 200, 902, 301, 707, 757, as well as various KW radios, invariably they have been poor compared to modern stuff - the worst had to be the FT301, closely followed by the FT102 - probably all great radios when new, but hellishly unreliable 30+ years on, and not easy to get replacement parts for either.

If you really fancy something nice, and are up for a challenge go for an Elecraft K2, or K3 - not cheap, but you will not get a better radio for your money, and as an approved commercially available kit you can build one as a FL holder.

73 de Sean
M1ECY
__________________
Engineers make things work and have spare bits when finished
Sean Williams is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 1:36 am   #13
Hermit6345
Rest in Peace
 
Hermit6345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Wiltshire, UK.
Posts: 638
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Wilson View Post
.... What sort of test and calibration gear do you find useful as an amateur?
Not sure whether having equipment to measure your transmitting frequency is mandatory nowadays. It used to be a requirement. Maybe nowadays you can rely on the digital readout on the transmitter.

Something to measure your power out and VSWR might be useful to enable you to stay within the FL regulations. There are several good wideband units available. I used a Daiwa crossed needle unit which seemed to work OK and has low power range to suit the FL limits.

I only ever used data modes so others who use telephony might suggest more test gear suited to that mode.

I still have an AR88D and an Eddystone 504 but both require you to be able to "drive" them to resolve SSB satisfactorily. BFO but no product detector. Perfect for CW and AM though. In an ideal world you would need an amateur bands only radio with decent SB filters and a sensible IP figure for use on todays crowded bands. Practically speaking, the radios suggested by others would do just as well at 10 watts.

Anyway, I hae been QRT for years, so over to those still active.

Ian
Hermit6345 is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 1:40 am   #14
Skywave
Rest in Peace
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
Arrow Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Hi! I see that you keep referring to the AR88. So if it is the seperate transmitter and receiver path you want to take - as opposed to the more modern transceiver route - I can readily recommend an Eddystone as a receiver. The ones you'll be interested in will be newer than the AR88, and more straight-forward to maintain, smaller and lighter. Of course, a good one in working condition won't come cheaply (but then neither will a good AR88), but there is plenty of documentation about for the more common models.

Al.
Skywave is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 10:52 am   #15
James Duncan
Pentode
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wick, Scotland, UK.
Posts: 227
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Any of the old valve rigs from the 50's on will give good results, I quite often switch from a FT1000Mp to a FT301D, FT 101, Ft 200 and even National NX5 rig dating from the 50's
No one notices and usually get great reports on the audio quality.
The recieved audio from these old rigs is much nicer than the newer offerings.
I can work the same locations on any of these rigs and valve finals do not care about a bit of SWR miss match.
Most of the bells and whistles on modern rigs are never used and the DSP is there mostly to get rid of internal receiver noise.
So please remember the limitations of the Foundation but do not be put off buying an older rig these also have the advantage of being repairable cheaply with most components readily available.

cheers
James MM0HDW
James Duncan is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 7:08 pm   #16
dsergeant
Octode
 
dsergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bracknell, Berkshire,UK.
Posts: 1,168
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Another reminder that with the Foundation licence you are limited to 10W output, and you are not allowed to do repairs/modifications to the transmitter (but you can with separate receivers). Although the early valve rigs like the FT101ZD are simple to use and work reasonably well, it is quite hard to get them to run with a stable 10W - I used to have one, and realistically anything below 20W is difficult. And some of us DO care about Foundation licencees exceeding their licence conditions.

Older transmitters are fine on the bands, but with today's activity you really need a modern receiver with good filters.

For what it is worth, I use an Elecraft K2 at 5W and never exceed that. I now have worked 200 countries on CW (morse). You don't need high power...

73 Dave G3YMC
dsergeant is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 7:49 pm   #17
Sean Williams
Dekatron
 
Sean Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St.Ippolyts, Hitchin, Hertfordshire QRA IO91UW
Posts: 3,517
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

What Dave said!!!
__________________
Engineers make things work and have spare bits when finished
Sean Williams is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 8:29 pm   #18
Chris Wilson
Heptode
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK.
Posts: 612
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

What (pardon the pun) device is used by amateurs to accurately measure transmitter output? Can it not be attenuated independently of the transmitter? How does anyone know what power someone else is running, is it an honesty thing? Hope I am not touching on a raw nerve, just curious how this is effectively policed, and not, of course, wanting to fall foul myself of the legislation?
__________________
Best Regards,
CW. 2E0ILY
Chris Wilson is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 8:50 pm   #19
Keith
Heptode
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, UK.
Posts: 689
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

Hi Chris,

From your obviously fond memories of your school's amateur radio society, you might consider going back to AM! There is now a sizeable population of helpful and friendly enthusiasts who inhabit 3.615 MHz and new licensees are always made welcome. Certainly worth a listen to see what you think. As has been stated, a classic Eddystone receiver would be probably less of a challenge than an AR88. On the transmit side, my suggestion would be a Codar AT5. Easy to work on and, at 7W max ouptput, in accordance with the Foundation Licence, I believe.

Good luck,
__________________
Keith Yates - G3XGW
VMARS & BVWS member http://www.tibblestone.com/oldradios/Old_Radios.htm
Keith is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2012, 8:57 pm   #20
ex seismic
Heptode
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK.
Posts: 684
Default Re: "Proper" receiver and transmitter for new amateur radio enthusiast?

I suspect quite a few cannot measure their power output; a lot of people just have an SWR meter. There are plenty of adequate power meters out there as well as "proper" classic meters such as the Bird. A good bit of kit as reflected by the prices they fetch.
I personally have a Bird and in my M3 days (10w) used it to keep tabs on my 101ZD. I never had a problem keeping it down to 10w, but the power output control on the set is not calibrated so you do need external means of measuring it.
You could use a suitably high power attenuator to run the set at a high level but only put out you legal limit to the aerial.
It is not policed.
There are quite a few adjustments to be made to a 101 every time you change frequency which can make it tedious to "hunt and peck" across a band which you may want to do if you are looking for someone to talk to. I suggest you find someone to demonstrate such a set to see if it appeals.

Gordon
ex seismic is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 9:12 am.


All information and advice on this forum is subject to the WARNING AND DISCLAIMER located at https://www.vintage-radio.net/rules.html.
Failure to heed this warning may result in death or serious injury to yourself and/or others.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2002 - 2023, Paul Stenning.