David, That's not a bad price for two in good shape. They generally supply the connector with these, with the leads cut off at about 2 inches long. I just stripped them, and soldered new leads to them, and then used heat-shrink over the joints. After I got mine up and running, I calibrated it with my GPS referenced HP 5328B counter. Mine works fine, and I've had no problems with it. It was a pull on a PC board, like I mentioned earlier. Also, if you mount them in a good aluminum chassis, the chassis is enough for a heatsink, or so it seems on mine. All that's really in mine is the oscillator and a power supply, which is housed in an aluminum enclosure made with about a 0.060" thick aluminum sheet.
What I'm intending on doing, is making some rental calibration reference's like this, and renting them from eBay, or off the website I'm starting this fall. I'll calibrate them each time before sending them out. Amateur radio folks, and the small shops can't afford the high prices of cal labs, most of the time, and I'm doing this to save on the cost. After testing this first design, and ironing out any bugs, I'm ready to start building the first of these in about a month. Best, Will *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 7/13/2011 at 4:56 PM Dr. David Kirkby wrote: >On 07/11/11 01:25 AM, Will Matney wrote: >> David, >> >> The FE-5680A is always plentiful, and a lot of them are generally mounted >> on a PC board, from pulls, along with having a decent price. The main thing >> is availability, which means spare parts if you need them. I also know that >> I've seen these used as internal timebases for counters before on the >> larger HP types. > >I decided to get the FE-5680A in the end. I found a seller willing to accept >£75 (~$120) for a pair of them shipped to my house in the UK. At $60 each >(including shipping), I thought that was a fair price. > >If at a later date I decide I want something with higher performance, I'll >reevaluate the situation. > >I don't have a need for high absolute accuracy, but I'd like to have something >better than an HP10811A (or similar) that has not been calibrated for a decade >or two. > >I've got a Kenwood TS-940S transceiver with the rare SO-1 TCXO installed. >According to the spectrum analyser, that is about 40 Hz off, but I've no idea >how much of that difference is due to the transceiver or HP10811A oscillator in >the analyser. Logic would suggest the oven should be better, but that has not >been calibrated for years, so the crystal has no doubt aged. > >A non-disiplied rubidium is not state of the art, but I'd feel comfortable in >setting both the transceivers TCXO and the analyser's OCXO to the rubidium. > > >-- >A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. >Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? >A: Top-posting. >Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > >_______________________________________________ >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. > >__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5851 (20110206) __________ > >The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > >http://www.eset.com _______________________________________________ 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.
