6m qrp all mode
Alex
anyone come across any information about 6m homebrew or could someone point
me in the right direction web site wise
many thanks
Tim Wescott
there's all sorts of wireless semiconductors that cover VHF at their
absolute lower limit (we won't get into why there's no UHF homebrew
given that's where all the wireless chips are).
"QRP Classics" has a little bit of 6 meter stuff, as does "Solid-State
Design for the Radio Amateur", but I haven't seen much any where else.
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Gregg
> Alex wrote:
>> I have had a good search around but couln't find what i was after, has
>> anyone come across any information about 6m homebrew or could someone
>> point me in the right direction web site wise
>>
>> many thanks
>>
>>
>>
>>
> There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
commercially-made equipment for this.
<rant>
Our respective IC and FCC want all V/UHF HAM's to be glorified CB'ers
</rant>
--
Gregg
*It's probably useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
http://geek.scorpiorising.ca
Tim Wescott
> Behold, Tim Wescott signalled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
>
>
>>Alex wrote:
>>
>>>I have had a good search around but couln't find what i was after, has
>>>anyone come across any information about 6m homebrew or could someone
>>>point me in the right direction web site wise
>>>
>>>many thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
>
>
> IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
> commercially-made equipment for this.
>
> <rant>
> Our respective IC and FCC want all V/UHF HAM's to be glorified CB'ers
> </rant>
>
Now, without spending five hours of quality time with my local FCC rule
book, which could be more profitably spent working on the 6 meter R/C
receiver that I've got cooking, I can't say for sure that you're wrong.
But if you were here I _would_ bet you money (which I never do) that the
no code license does _not_ restrict you to commercially-made equipment
-- you're supposed to know your own limits, but with them you can go
like gangbusters. Can you point to a specific rule that shows that I'm
wrong?
As near as I can tell the vast majority of folk with a no-code tech
license are either disinclined or unable to build their own stuff, but
not forbidden -- which is worth it's own rant.
Troglodite
>IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
>commercially-made equipment for this.
How does the no-code license restrict you to commercial gear? I see nothing in
the rules that says this. After an absence from Amateur Radio of 38 years, I
bagged a no-code Tech at a hamfest in 1998 and proceeded to build myself a 2m
rig from a TenTec kit. Did I break the law? I don't think so. I have since
re-obtained my General but passing the code again didn't make me technically
smarter.
KB9TMY (Formerly K6HWY)
Phil
I found some interesting vhf HB stuff at JF1OZL's web site:
http://www.intio.or.jp/jf10zl/
He is a prolific builder and apparently very good at design.
Also, while not exactly what you asked about, Far Circuits
has a pc board for the Nor' Easter 6 meter AM transceiver.
Speaking of that, 6 meter AM was BOOMING into central Kentucky
from northern New York and else where this past weekend.
Copied many guys on AM (!!) with my handy-dandy Radio Shack
scanner and an attic mounted antenna. I couldn't believe it...
73,
phil
"Alex" <westcoa...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in
news:40f40...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com:
Michael Black
> Behold, Tim Wescott signalled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
>
>> Alex wrote:
>>> I have had a good search around but couln't find what i was after, has
>>> anyone come across any information about 6m homebrew or could someone
>>> point me in the right direction web site wise
>>>
>>> many thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
>
> IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
> commercially-made equipment for this.
>
> <rant>
> Our respective IC and FCC want all V/UHF HAM's to be glorified CB'ers
> </rant>
>
Canada. Most of the world won't have a clue what you are talking abnout.
And, the fact that in Canada one cannot use home made transmitters until
they pass the advanced test likely is not a significant factor here. Canada
is a small country, and over the years there's rarely been technical material
published in the few Canadian ham publications. So we look to the US and
the UK for technical material, and they don't have such limits on what
one can build.
Michael VE2BVW
Ian White, G3SEK
>Behold, Tim Wescott signalled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
>
>IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
>commercially-made equipment for this.
>
There is actually a lot of HB associated with VHF, but the effort just
doesn't happen to go into building QRP transceivers.
Code proficiency is totally irrelevant to that. Some of this country's
most advanced VHF homebrewers have held a no-code licence for over 30
years. The same is true in Germany, France and several other European
countries.
--
73 from Ian G3SEK
Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek
R J Carpenter
"Ian White, G3SEK" <G3...@ifwtech.co.uk> wrote in message
news:afn6awHY...@ifwtech.co.uk...
> Gregg wrote:
> >Behold, Tim Wescott signalled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
> >> There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
> >
> >IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
> >commercially-made equipment for this.
> >
>
> There is actually a lot of HB associated with VHF, but the effort just
> doesn't happen to go into building QRP transceivers.
>
> Code proficiency is totally irrelevant to that. Some of this country's
> most advanced VHF homebrewers have held a no-code licence for over 30
> years. The same is true in Germany, France and several other European
> countries.
Ah, but according to his URL Greg is in Canada, where IIRC the no-code
licence does NOT allow homebrew transmitters.
Tim Wescott
>>>There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
>
>
> To the writer of this: very true!
>
> Greg:
>
>>IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
>>commercially-made equipment for this.
>
>
> You are flat out wrong. I am nocode and an engineer that loves to
> homebrew VHF gear. Wander up to 6m and catch me running QRP SSB some
> time. I have five 6m rigs, only one is commercial.
>
>
>><rant>
>>Our respective IC and FCC want all V/UHF HAM's to be glorified CB'ers
>></rant>
>
>
> Watch that paint brush, you may smear a few people with muck that
> don't deserve it.
>
> Allison
>
Where can we find the designs?
Ian White, G3SEK
--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek
Highland Ham
> they pass the advanced test likely is not a significant factor here.
Canada
> is a small country, and over the years there's rarely been technical
material
> published in the few Canadian ham publications. So we look to the US and
> the UK for technical material, and they don't have such limits on what
> one can build.
In the UK a Foundation Licensee (entry level) is not permitted to operate a
homebrew transmitter except when it is an approved kit.
This means he/she can not build and operate a transmitter from a published
design with bought components ,but is allowed to build a transmitter with
design and all components supplied by a reputable 'kit-house'.
As so often with this type of rules ,proper policing is hardly possible .
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH
eh...@bellatlantic.net
Not strictly home brew - but Ten-Tec offers a transverter kit
for 20 meteres to 6 meters. The kit is readily and easily
modifiable for 10 meters to 6 meters - I did it, as have others.
And there are 10 meter all mode radios at hamfests typically
about 125 - 150 bucks. I got one that was broken for $50 -
all it needed was an electrolytic capacitor.
R J Carpenter
Yes and no. Agreed, code proficiency is not related to the ABILITY to do
homebrew.
If, as I think is true , the authorities (Canadian) forbid you to use a
homebrew transmitter with a no-code licence, it is wrong to say that code
proficiency doesn't come into it. OK, you could build the transmitter, but
it would be illegal to use it. As an aside, I wonder what happens to a US
no-code ham with a homebrew transmitter who operates in Canada....
73 de bob w3otc
Michael Black
No, code has nothing to do with it.
It's the written test that determines whether or not someone can build their
own transmitter, or rather use it.
Up till 1990, there were two licenses, amateur and advanced, and each had
a code test. (Oh, there was also the digital license, introduced in 1978,
that required no code test, but was limited to only some VHF/UHF bands,
and the focus was for digital work. It barely got noticed after it was
introduced.) But then restructuring came along. The code test was spun
out, and the test for the entry level license was apparently simplified.
I've never really seen the new test, but the whole point of the
restructuring was to make it easier for newcomers to the hobby. And for
the basic license, it was decided that few were interested in building,
so there was no sense making the test to deal with such details. The tradeoff
was that you cannot use a home made transmitter with that license.
The advanced test allows for building transmitters, and higher power (a
kilowatt instead of 250W), and I think it is needed to run a repeater.
The code test was not required for either license, but then you could not
operate below 30MHz. Hence, you could have an advanced license, but not
have passed the code test, and the result was you'd have full priviliges,
but only above 30MHz.
There were two levels of code test. 5wpm got you full privileges below
4MHz, ie 160 and 80 metres, but nothing else at HF. (I think that may have
been changed, for more HF useage, but I can't remember.)
The 12wpm code test gave in effect full priviliges, minus the bits the
advanced test allowed.
So it was rather a mix and match system.
Michael VE2BVW
Laura Halliday
Try Experimental Methods in RF Design. The ARRL position
it as the de facto 2nd edition of Solid State Design for the
Radio Amateur. I'm inclined to agree...there is tons of
stuff out there (my own library is growing steadily), but
people constantly complain of never being able to find
anything. I'm not sure where the disonnect is...
Reminds me of a conference I went to last year, where a
fellow walked by me with a copy of EMRFD under his arm.
I commented what a neat book it was, and when he turned
around I saw his name badge: "Rick KK7B".
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..."
ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Hospital/Shafte
Laura Halliday
Try Experimental Methods in RF Design. The ARRL position
it as the de facto 2nd edition of Solid State Design for the
Radio Amateur. I'm inclined to agree...there is tons of
stuff out there (my own library is growing steadily), but
people constantly complain of never being able to find
anything. I'm not sure where the disonnect is...
Reminds me of a conference I went to last year, where a
fellow walked by me with a copy of EMRFD under his arm.
I commented what a neat book it was, and when he turned
around I saw his name badge: "Rick KK7B".
In 2004 the obvious solution is a nice and stable LO
(easy), an I/Q baseband up/down-converter (ditto), and
some DSP code (also easy).
Gregg
Yeah, that *is* worth it's own rant.
However, when I went to go for my no-code class licence here (Canada), I
was told:
- without my 5WPM, I was restricted to:
1) 50MHz and above and
2) commercially made equipment
*shrug*
Sometimes, I wish I didn't let my VE4 lapse, which I did because of the
HAM attitudes in Winnipeg in 1982 when I did let it lapse. But now I do
see a use for it because I would love to help pioneer
experimentation....something sorely lacking in many new HAM's because
they can for easier/cheaper/less bother go to the store and buy an
antenna, rig, coax and for an extra $50, have someone install the lot for
you.
*sigh*
Gregg
Hi Michael,
I wish our leaders would get off their fat, beaurocratic butts and
actually *lead* in the area of communications again.
I say *again*, because we were "t3h pwnz0r" the US and UK until the
mid-60's, in the electronics field.
As for publications, yes, the US and UK do lead. As much as I hate the
ARRL's politics and attitude towards many policies, I have ARRL
publications and they are my bible :-)
Gregg
> Gregg wrote:
>>Behold, Tim Wescott signalled from keyed 4-1000A filament:
>>> There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
>>
>>IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
>>commercially-made equipment for this.
>>
>>
> There is actually a lot of HB associated with VHF, but the effort just
> doesn't happen to go into building QRP transceivers.
Too bad. HAM's were the communications pioneers, even the military used
them for R&D. Now with digital and satellites and stuff, who needs QRP?
Who really needs the HAM anymore?
Funny thing is, CB'ers regularily communicate globally with 4W AM, 12PEP
SSB and more R&D has been spent on "skip" antennas and other QRP aides for
CB, rather than HAM :-(
HELLLLLOOOOOOO! One does not need 2KW DC on a plate(s) to talk worldwide
on 21, 24 & 28 MHz.
I've been almost tempted to petition IC for a special "QRP" class
certificate "no-code" HF licence - the user *must* use homebrew equipment
and *must* keep DC input to the final at 5W or less. The catch is the regs
& theory the person must pass be at the advanced level.
Good Idea? No?
> Code proficiency is totally irrelevant to that. Some of this country's
> most advanced VHF homebrewers have held a no-code licence for over 30
> years. The same is true in Germany, France and several other European
> countries.
I have listened to 2 meter communications in BC and Manitoba for 25 years
and other than repeater ID's, I have yet to hear one QSO or even a call in
CW :-/
Gregg
>>> There's just not enough VHF homebrew out there!
>
> To the writer of this: very true!
>
> Greg:
>>IMHO, we can thank that no-code licence that restricts you to
>>commercially-made equipment for this.
>
> You are flat out wrong. I am nocode and an engineer that loves to
> homebrew VHF gear. Wander up to 6m and catch me running QRP SSB some
> time. I have five 6m rigs, only one is commercial.
>
>><rant>
>>Our respective IC and FCC want all V/UHF HAM's to be glorified CB'ers
>></rant>
>
> Watch that paint brush, you may smear a few people with muck that don't
> deserve it.
>
> Allison
Point taken. I was angry when I wrote. Apologies to the ones that don't
deserve the muck ;-)
Gregg
Kits are a GREAT way, IMO, a new person can learn. Hey, when I was 6, I
learned from Heathkit! :-)
Dieter Mayr
"Alex" <westcoa...@tiscali.co.uk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:40f40...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
Hello Alex
Have a look at http://www.qsl.net/7n3wvm/
There u will find a 6m Trancceiver.
Maybe thats what ur lookig for ?
72
Dieter OE2CDM
Gary S.
<rca...@erols.com> wrote:
>it would be illegal to use it. As an aside, I wonder what happens to a US
>no-code ham with a homebrew transmitter who operates in Canada....
>
There are reciprocal privileges, but my interpretation is when
operating in Canada, one is required to follow (and be aware of) all
of the Industry Canada (equivalent of FCC) regulations.
If you see <http://www.rac.ca/regulatory/rcip.htm>
you will find the following:
"Americans operating in Canada, must abide by Industry Canada RIC-2
- A US amateur who is qualified to send and receive in Morse code at
a speed of at least 5 wpm may operate an amateur station in Canada in
accordance with the provisions applicable to the holder of an Amateur
Operator's Certificate with Basic, Morse Code (5 wpm) and Advanced
Qualifications.
- A US amateur who is not qualified to send and receive in Morse code
may operate an amateur station in Canada in accordance with provisions
applicable to the holder of the Amateur Operator's Certificate with
Basic and Advanced Qualifications."
Again, RIC-2 would be equivalent to Part 97.
Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence
Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
R J Carpenter
Sorry for the top-post, but good that a Canadian who understands their
system straightens this out.
Thanks.
bob
"Michael Black" <et...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:cd28lq$dvh$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
Joe Bramblett, KD5NRH
> Funny thing is, CB'ers regularily communicate globally with 4W AM,
> 12PEP SSB
Since when? Speaking from experience in the field, if it comes from a CB
shop, it's not running 4W or less unless you bought it while wearing your
FCC Enforcement Division T-shirt. Most of the WalMart radio crowd isn't
DXing.
Gregg
> Gregg <nos...@unknown.org> wrote in news:Rm4Jc.43518$Rf.15803@edtnps84:
>
>> Funny thing is, CB'ers regularily communicate globally with 4W AM,
>> 12PEP SSB
>
> Since when? Speaking from experience in the field, if it comes from a CB
> shop, it's not running 4W or less unless you bought it..............
I think there is a 1/2 dozen "true" CB shops left in Canada. The one here
in Vancouver looks very low on those seeking their rig "Peaked", because
they view them as n00bs and not worth their time.
Those running "footwarmers" usually only do so in the mobile, because of
our mountains.
> ............while wearing your FCC Enforcement Division T-shirt.
Why does everyone automatically assume I'm an American?
Lookie my signature - ....scorpiorising.CA
*sigh*
Michael Black
>
> However, when I went to go for my no-code class licence here (Canada), I
> was told:
>
> - without my 5WPM, I was restricted to:
>
> 1) 50MHz and above and
> 2) commercially made equipment
>
> *shrug*
>
> Sometimes, I wish I didn't let my VE4 lapse, which I did because of the
> HAM attitudes in Winnipeg in 1982 when I did let it lapse.
You don't read the rules very carefully, do you?
Your certificate of proficiency is good for life. Unless you voluntarily
return it or the DOC or whatever it calls itself these days cancels it (and
you'd have to do something quite serious for that).
It's only the station license that you had to renew.
All you need to do is apply for a station license. And since everyone who
had a license was grandfathered (well maybe not the few holders of the
"Digital license"), you've got full priviliges even if you'd never gone
for the Advanced license years ago.
Of course, I'm not sure what happens these days, since one no longer pays
for a station license, and it's all one piece of paper. But I can't see
them forcing you to retest simly because you never renewed your callsigne.
As for what's what now, you'd want to read RIC-24 (unless they renumber it as
things change). My copy dates from July 1990, right after the restructuring.
It clearly shows that the Advanced test gives you the ability to build
transmitters, but code has nothing to do with it.
Michael VE2BVW
Roger Gt
"Gregg" <nos...@unknown.org> wrote in message
news:9n8Jc.43709$Rf.18469@edtnps84...
:
: Why does everyone automatically assume I'm an American?
Because of your intelligent comments!
Gregg
LOL! :-D
Tim Wescott
Yes, but we just take that 'ca' to mean that you're from California.
After all, if we weren't so US-centric we'd remember that there's more
countries on the American continents than the USA, and 'American' would
mean something a little more global.
Marty
news:40f50c9d$0$1194$61fe...@news.rcn.com...
>
> Sorry for the top-post, but good that a Canadian who understands their
> system straightens this out.
>
> Thanks.
>
> bob
Agree - I was starting to get confuddled!!! And here I was thinking the
Australian system was/is/maybe confusing ;-)
Martin, VK2UMJ
PS - Our proposed Foundation Licence which should come in next year will
only permit the use of "unmodified transmitting equipment of commercial
manufacture" with 10W PEP, however antenna experimentation will still be
permitted....
Airy R. Bean
"Marty" <NOSPAM...@yahoo.com.au_NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:40f7a...@news.iprimus.com.au...
Tim Wescott
Well, the difference in the US is that CB is now effectively
license-free (I think the legal side-stepping is that you have a license
by virtue of having the equipment). Makes it interesting when the FCC
wants to deal with a CB'er with a 1kW linear and "extra channels" up
into the VHF bands.
Martin
news:2lqcmlF...@uni-berlin.de...
> And the difference between that and a CB licence is......?
No CB licence in Australia!!!
Seriously, the Aus. Foundation Licence will require limited Regs and similar
theory as the UK Foundation licence. It will give access to 80m (less DX
window), 40m, 15m, 10m, 2m and 70cm, at 10W PEP, voice or hand sent CW only
(umm, with no CW test that is..), unmodified commercial equipment only.
And, for those taht haven't heard yet but are interested (for whatever
reason):
Then we'll step up to the 'Standard' licence, which is our current Novice...
Some slight reduction in theory and again, no CW exam, but all bands for
foundation PLUS 20m, top half of 6m, 2m, 70cm, 23cm, 13cm and 6cm, at 100W
PEP, may construct own equipment.
Last will be our Advanced, which will be our current full call, limited and
intermediate. Again no CW but full regs and slightly more theory, all
bands, 400W PEP, etc, etc, etc...
Cheers
Martin, VK2UMJ
Highland Ham
> And the difference between that and a CB licence is......?
That the Foundation licensee is permitted to operate on some or most of the
amateur radio bands..............and that is quite a difference.
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH