Re: cw sidebands


From: Brad Mitchell (bmitchel@CBA.Kodak.COM)
Date: Tue May 03 1994 - 14:50:41 EDT

> People who design xcvrs w/o RIT ought to be shot. The confusion that has
> resulted throughout history because of the lack of this aid would have
> been enought to distroy any country. Rumor has it that the L.A. riots
> 2 years ago might have been triggered due to lack of RIT in many of
> the kits on the market then. ;)
> Jeff NH6IL

Now Now Jeff... That might be a little extreme.. Dave Benson's nn1g works
great.. :-) I have built 2 of them now..
lets run through a scenario with me on the lower end and you on the upper..
we have a sched on 7.040
I listen on 7.040 -700 Hz you transmit on 7.040 , I hear you..
I transmit on 7.040 , you hear me on 7.040 + 700hz..

No problem right? Right.
The point I was trying to make is that the transmitted freq is the tranmitted

Ok, here's something that is proof that not everybody understands this too well.
You guys know about the spider design right? January , 1973 73 mag...
Well, really nice xtal transceiver, I made 3 of them..
Well, in the article, the author said something like be careful of the bottom
of the band because if you have an xtal freq near the bottom, you are actually
700 Hz below that in transmit freq.. I read that over and over and over again,
and finally realized he's was just plain incorrect. Now if we had the
proverbial cw signal that started infinty ago, it would be exactly at 7.040
the transmitted signal freq. Your oscillator might have to be set 700 hz below
the transmitted freq to hear it, but you still are on 7040! Boy oh boy, this
is really a lot of b.s. for those that just got back from Dayton. Maybe we
better lighten up till their eyes get back in focus.

73 Brad

Search QRP-L Archives

[ QRP-L Archive | ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 ]


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 on Fri Jun 02 2000 - 11:26:46 EDT