If I see the rack mounting ears on a piece of test equipment I assume
that it was rack mounted
and acoustically sheltered from the user. I assess my bid to include a
new fan, usually 30-50$.
Yes, rack mounted test equipment was usually from a fixed location, and
has no "road rash".
Stan, W1LE
Roy Phillips wrote:
Nigel
I must say that much of what you have stated is right, I have a 53131A
counter and the basic time-base is a joke, but agreed, we mostly use a
common external reference with our instruments.
There are some exceptions, as I am finding with a very recently
purchased HP 8657A Sig. Gen. that has the option 001 oven oscillator.
This is a 1998 production (made in the US), the TCXO would seem to be
a very stable device with coarse and fine adjustment - after running
for 48 hours its holding 10 Mhz to ^10. In fact it would seem to be
somewhat better than the TCXO in my Marconi 2024 Sig. Gen. - - hence
my singing the praises of HP.
The large number of Racal 199# on the UK market in recent times are I
would suggest, ex UK military issue and as portable instruments have
probably had a rough life, and have frequently been stored for ten
years in somewhat poor environments. I would suggest that buying
equipment that has come from a commercial origin, and has been part of
a rack test set-up, have been better cared for and sometimes have had
very little use. What do you others think about this theory ?
Roy
----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] More Z3801/Tbolt comparisons
In a message dated 04/09/2009 11:18:07 GMT Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
Racal 19## Counters are something else - - I got rid of
mine some years back, not only the ongoing problems with the
key-pad, but
I
don't think they put much cost into the oven osc. Perhaps you should
consider moving on to an HP or other quality counter, "you deserve it"
--------------
Even the best counters can sometimes suffer from poor internal
oscillators.
The basic onboard oscillator in the HP53132A for example has no
practical
use whatsoever, other than to demonstrate that the counter is
functional,
but I suspect most, if not all, list members will generally be
operating
counters with external references anyway
Whilst I wouldn't even consider swapping my 53132A for a 199x I must
be a
glutton for punishment as I've just bought another 1991 after also
selling
my previous one some time ago.
Aside from the reported key pad problems, which haven't affected me
so far,
and the lesser resolution, it's a good solid workhorse and, something
not
to be sneezed at, this one in very good condition cost me at least
80% less
than I'd expect to pay for a similar condition 53132A:-)
Earlier 19xx counters also strike me as being underrated these days.
Although it's lacking in resolution for most of my current needs I've
still
got a 1905 I bought new in the late 70s/early 80s and that has
served me
very well as a general purpose counter.
I'd suggest that too as an excellent workhorse and more than adequate
for
such things as transmitter or receiver adjustment etc and, at the
give-away
prices the 1904 and 1905 often seem to fetch on Ebay, they can be
quite a
bargain.
regards
Nigel
GM8PZR
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
