Posted by
Don Wilhelm on
Dec 19, 2018; 1:42am
URL: http://elecraft.85.s1.nabble.com/wire-for-random-wire-antenna-using-kx3-tp7647146p7647223.html
Skip,
That is "telling it like it was".
If you want to go back to those "good old days", build yourself a link
coupled tuner. It will likely use plug-in coils and perhaps a swinging
link.
Then you can tune it just like you did on your old transmitter/amplifier
- except you do not have to "dip the plate" and change the link coupling
to bring the plate current up to where you want. You adjust that tuner
so you have a low SWR at the input. If you can't get a low SWR, adjust
the transmission line taps on the coil and try again until you get it
right. Each antenna requires different coil taps and different tuning.
Tune up and band to band QSYs were not quick and easy in those days.
Those who wanted instant band hopping had multiple amplifiers each with
their dedicated antennas (rich hams) - now we can have that same
capability with a single multiband antenna and an ATU.
While I do have a couple of those tuners (with their wide spaced "bread
slicer" capacitors) in my collections, I prefer to use the newer ATUs -
push a button and it finds a match.
The old methods are not better or worse, but just different. Newer
stuff does it easier - but it is interesting to know what is happening
in the stuff that does the impedance transformation. Engineers know the
concepts, and older hams know what is involved even if they do not
understand the theory. It seems that many newer hams do not care - push
the button on the microphone and make a contact is the limit of their
interest.
Perhaps we need to launch a renewed effort in bringing newer hams into
the fold of understanding what is going on other than pushing the PTT
button on the microphone. I hate to see the ranks of ham radio descend
into the same category as CB operators, but I think we are headed that
way as far as understanding what is involved in RF transmission and
reception.
If you want a computer parallel (for those digitally inclined) it is the
difference between someone who only wants to do email and web surfing
and those who understand (or attempt to learn) networking and how all
that fits into the World Wide Web and Internet of Things.
We do not have to fully understand propagation, circuits, antenna theory
and such to push that PTT button and talk, but if that is all you do, it
is more akin to CB than it is to amateur radio.
OK, I will crawl off my soapbox for the time being.
73.
Don W3FPR
On 12/18/2018 8:00 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:
> Yep, the term was known when I became KN6DGW in 1953, but somehow no one
> cared. Standing waves were sort of benign, you ran your transmission
> line [often 300 ohm open-wire, or TV twinlead] to the 2 or 3 turn link
> and adjusted it inwards until your TX was "loaded" to rated input
> power. Standing waves formed the basis of "Lecher Lines" used to
> measure frequency [well ... wavelength] generally for VHF and above.
> Standing waves just didn't create the heartburn that they seem to
> today. Granted, today's TX are comfortable with 50 ohms and not much
> else but that's just impedance matching networks.
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp:
http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:
[hidden email]
This list hosted by:
http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list:
http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to
[hidden email]