### why doesn't somebody offer an amp in kit form these
days ??? That would be the ticket. The end user would have a
better idea how to repair it... since he built it in the 1st
place ???
**

Hmm, as someone who has lost his butt in every possible business known
to man except ham radio <smarter than that, stupid as I am> it took me
about 4 uS to see problems with his idea.. The price of metal
stampings and machined parts that have been drilled and tapped,
cleaned, powder coated and baked, then shipped to your plant, will
take your breath away...The cost of the components is 98% of the
finished amp.. So, you are going to offer a kit amplifier that is
within 2% of the price of an assembled one... Guess what your sales
will be? And the ones that do sell will, ala Heathkit, require that
you have a repair department to take in the crippled amps that the
buyer swears is defective design and components because he doesn't
make mistakes, and he did NOT run it key down, untuned for 4 hours...
Then your tech finds stripped threads, broken components, things
backwards, partially melted tubes, etc., and you have the joy of
calling the customer and explaining that HE broke it and now it is on
his nickel for repairs...
After he gets done cursing you out in 3 tongues and threatening your
unborn children, you realize that this business is, "just sooo much
fun."...

denny / k8do

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:57:52 -0000, "ad4hk2004" <ad4hk2004@...>
wrote:

The price of metal
stampings and machined parts that have been drilled and tapped,
cleaned, powder coated and baked, then shipped to your plant, will
take your breath away...

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

Perhaps it could be done with blank metal pieces and a paper template
for the builder to drill and finish himself?

Your other comments about "key down for four hours" etc, are well
taken. Everything considered, it's not likely to happen. If it were
cost-effective, Heathkit would still be in business.

The other part of the equation is that hams who are real technicians
are becoming a rare species. I hate the phrase "appliance operator"
but it often applies, I'm sorry to say. Not to this group, though. :-)

Bill, W6WRT

开云体育

There are a couple over here in Europe. So does that mean European hams are brighter! :-)

Linear Amp UK sell their 4 x 811 amp as a kit

And in Denmark Dan's amps

There are a couple over here in Europe. So does that mean European hams are brighter! :-)

Linear Amp UK sell their Ranger 811 HF amp as a kit and also make available parts like transformers, capacitors etc



And in Denmark Dan's amps have parts available for various models and say they will be selling a full kit soon



73 Paul G4DCV

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am amazed
at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with extra class
call signs. I am not an electronics engineer or anything like it but
I have built receivers, transmitters, amplifiers, and all sorts of
accessory items for them.

I have one of the old advanced class licenses and was never motivated
enough by the small bit of extra band width and bragging rights to
put in the effort to get my code up to 20 wpm.

At no time did I ever consider purchasing a linear amp, kit or
otherwise. When I wanted a new amp, I built it.

David
KC2JD

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., "Mike&#92;(W5UC&#92;) & Kathy&#92;(K5MWH&#92;)"
<w5uc@...> wrote:

Bill, how sad, but true. I am amazed at the number of new licensees

in the

local club, some Extra Class, who don't have the foggiest idea how to
calculate the length of a dipole, or how to put it up.

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am amazed
at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with extra class
call signs.

I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with
extra class call signs.

Rich Sez... I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

### I concur. Ohm's law, and it's derivatives [ohms 'wheel']

should be plastered on page 1 of all these books.

### The simple formulae for XC/XL/C/L are either not in most
books, or buried, or non existent... or strewn all over the map.

### or they give answers in farads + henry's + cps, etc.

### it's an easy tweak to the initial formula to fix that

eg; XC = 1,000,000 / 2 x pi x F x C Use mhz and pf
inserted into the formula... and it all comes out just right.....
in ohms. If u use the normal 1 / 2 x pi x f x c.... u gotta
insert freq as hz and C as farads. Why mess with
14,350,000.00 hz... when u can just use 14.35 in the 1st place...
[with the tweaked formula]

### Rich,,, ur PI spread sheet is like that... answers come out in
henry's and farads. Too easy to make an error.. when C1 comes
out to .00000000036. Then it's left to the end user to figure
out whether it's 3.6 pf 36 pf 360 pf 3600 pf....esp at 2
am !

### once one knows what XC is... then substitute XC in ohms law
to derive everything else... like VA power, v drop, current , etc.
THEN... u can size stuff up easier.

### If u want to know say... how much RF current flows through the
main tank coil..... and if u know the value of the load cap.. and
the power output.... it's easy. Calculate the XC of the load cap
at the given freq... then calculate the current throught it.. easy,
since you what the power output is... u can easily calculate the
rms/peak V across the cap [same as the ant, load cap is in parallel
with the 50 ohm coax]. Calculate the RF current going up the 50
ohm coax. Current coming outa the main tank coil is equal to
the square root of ..... the square of the load cap current + the
square of the antenna current.

Which comes out pretty close to just DC plate current x Loaded
Q.... this method described above comes out dead on.

Too bad you don't see this stuff in any ARRL hand book... heck it's
not even in Orr's books. No wonder fellow's are confused. Having
peak/rms currents and voltages across C1 L1 C2.. plate block caps
[esp high bands] plate RFC RF current, bypass caps at base of
plate choke, etc, etc.. would be the ultimate addition to any of the
current PI- spread sheets.[on a band per band basis] That plus,
you just have to be able to factor in stray L between the anode
and the input of the PI.... since usually a tiny bit of L is needed
b4 the main pi-net... so u don't have to run a sky high Q on the
higher bands......esp with tubes like YC-156/179's... that already
have 55 pf of stray anode to grid C. Sky high loaded Q means
it's gonna be narrow banded and critical tuning.. + cooked
bandswitch contacts, coils, etc. It's easy to transform the plate
load Z WAY down.... so the Pi net has something it can work
with... with a more normal Q.

later... Jim VE7RF

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:26 PM, pentalab wrote:

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with
extra class call signs.

Rich Sez... I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

### I concur. Ohm's law, and it's derivatives [ohms 'wheel']

should be plastered on page 1 of all these books.

### The simple formulae for XC/XL/C/L are either not in most
books, or buried, or non existent... or strewn all over the map.

### or they give answers in farads + henry's + cps, etc.

### it's an easy tweak to the initial formula to fix that

eg; XC = 1,000,000 / 2 x pi x F x C Use mhz and pf
inserted into the formula... and it all comes out just right.....
in ohms. If u use the normal 1 / 2 x pi x f x c.... u gotta
insert freq as hz and C as farads. Why mess with
14,350,000.00 hz... when u can just use 14.35 in the 1st place...
[with the tweaked formula]

### Rich,,, ur PI spread sheet is like that... answers come out in
henry's and farads. Too easy to make an error..

What me worry?

when C1 comes
out to .00000000036. Then it's left to the end user to figure
out whether it's 3.6 pf 36 pf 360 pf 3600 pf....esp at 2
am !

### once one knows what XC is... then substitute XC in ohms law
to derive everything else... like VA power, v drop, current , etc.
THEN... u can size stuff up easier.

### If u want to know say... how much RF current flows through the
main tank coil..... and if u know the value of the load cap.. and
the power output.... it's easy. Calculate the XC of the load cap
at the given freq... then calculate the current throught it.. easy,
since you what the power output is... u can easily calculate the
rms/peak V across the cap [same as the ant, load cap is in parallel
with the 50 ohm coax]. Calculate the RF current going up the 50
ohm coax. Current coming outa the main tank coil is equal to
the square root of ..... the square of the load cap current + the
square of the antenna current.

Which comes out pretty close to just DC plate current x Loaded
Q....

Correctomundo

...

R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed

at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with extra

class

call signs.

I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

Some of these are the very same ones who claim to be smarter than
CBr's, and somehow above them! I've heard a lot of name calling by
some Hams towards CBr's, and the very same ones turn around and ask
questions about things they should know to qualify for the license
they have in their hand. That's called irony in my humble opinion....

I know some kids talking on walkie-talkies who know ohms law. I also
know a bunch of CBr's who have more knowledge than some of the hams
in mention. Over these very hams is why those CBr's won't upgrade and
get an amateur license.

Now that computers are where they are, and the majority of young
folks use them for about all their long distant communications,
they'll never get them to get a license with the morse code
restrictions. They're not going to learn it when they can set down at
a computer and communicate to anyone in the world. Even if that
restriction is lifted, I don't see them flocking in droves to join
up. Today is not like it was before the PC and cell phones.

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

Best,

Will

On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:58 PM, craxd wrote:

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed

at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with extra

class

call signs.

I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

Some of these are the very same ones who claim to be smarter than
CBr's, and somehow above them! I've heard a lot of name calling by
some Hams towards CBr's,

In my experiences, those who use ad hominems either have something to hide or they are trying to hide from reality.

and the very same ones turn around and ask
questions about things they should know to qualify for the license
they have in their hand. That's called irony in my humble opinion....

I call it being smart enough to ask. At age 15, I built my first amplifier and I asked plenty of questions.

I know some kids talking on walkie-talkies who know ohms law. I also
know a bunch of CBr's who have more knowledge than some of the hams
in mention. Over these very hams is why those CBr's won't upgrade and
get an amateur license.

So a few schlub Hams are keeping them from upgrading? This smells a whole lot like taurine feces, Will.

Now that computers are where they are, and the majority of young
folks use them for about all their long distant communications,
they'll never get them to get a license with the morse code
restrictions.

My sister learned Morse in one evening.

They're not going to learn it when they can set down at
a computer and communicate to anyone in the world. Even if that
restriction is lifted, I don't see them flocking in droves to join
up. Today is not like it was before the PC and cell phones.

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

Best,

Will





Yahoo! Groups Links

R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:58 PM, craxd wrote:

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed

at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with extra

class

call signs.

I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

Some of these are the very same ones who claim to be smarter than
CBr's, and somehow above them! I've heard a lot of name calling by
some Hams towards CBr's,

In my experiences, those who use ad hominems either have something

to

hide or they are trying to hide from reality.

Agreed. I've seen this happen on the other list several times when
the mere mention of a CBr came up. A good 5-10 would chime in with
snide comments and saying how dumb or stupid they are.

and the very same ones turn around and ask
questions about things they should know to qualify for the license
they have in their hand. That's called irony in my humble

opinion....

I call it being smart enough to ask. At age 15, I built my first
amplifier and I asked plenty of questions.

Well of course it's smart to ask, but how did they get their license
not knowing some simple things? These things that are questions on
the tests? The very ones that asked some of those questions were the
ones talking about CBr's being a stupid bunch. Granted, some don't
deserve to have a radio, but that holds true for amateur radio also.

I know some kids talking on walkie-talkies who know ohms law. I

also

know a bunch of CBr's who have more knowledge than some of the

hams

in mention. Over these very hams is why those CBr's won't upgrade

and

get an amateur license.

So a few schlub Hams are keeping them from upgrading? This smells

a

whole lot like taurine feces, Will.

Rich, I can only speak for what several have told me over the years.
That's what they said, so I won't question their motives and say it
was something else as I don't know. A few years back I seen a huge
number talk about this very subject on a forum here on the net, and
about all was sour on the subject.

Now that computers are where they are, and the majority of young
folks use them for about all their long distant communications,
they'll never get them to get a license with the morse code
restrictions.

My sister learned Morse in one evening.

She may have, but I know of one guy here that is a design engineer at
a mining electrical equipment company who studied and never did get
it, or what he told me. He took the test at least two times I know
of, and he told me at one time he just got up and walked out after
starting the test as he knew he wasn't passing the morse part. Why, I
don't know. He was either too slow or made too many mistakes? On the
electrical portion though, he's smart as a tack. I've seen this from
working some with him.

I've had others tell me they wouldn't take the test over having to
learn the morse requirement period. I know I barley scraped by when I
took it when I was attending Vo-Tech, and doubt I could pass it now
as I haven't even thought about it in years. When I learned it, I was
never intending on using it to start with to be honest. PC's were
just getting out at the time, and I said then they would take over.

Right now, I use my PC for about everything and can see where a
younger person would not want to spend the time in studying to pass
the exam. These days, the younger generation lives on the computer,
and with e-mail, instant messaging, forums, etc they talk to whomever
they want. Heck now with some instant messaging, you have both voice
and video! With cell phones offering unlimited long distance at cheap
prices, the younger generation uses it for voice communications. Heck
my sister and bro-in-law use a cell phone for their main phone. They
don't have a phone line to talk on, they only to use for the net.

I know there's a lot who are still hard core morse users on the air,
but after my generation get's older and passes on (I'm 41), I think
you'll see it come to a dead end where nobody will use it. With the
net and everything being translated, there's increasingly no need for
it.

They're not going to learn it when they can set down at
a computer and communicate to anyone in the world. Even if that
restriction is lifted, I don't see them flocking in droves to join
up. Today is not like it was before the PC and cell phones.

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@, www.somis.org

Best,

Will





Yahoo! Groups Links

R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@..., www.somis.org

Best,

Will

Jim,

What I believe is that publishers assume everyone who reads their
book already know ohms law. I remember in V0-Tech we had to remember
Ohms law, XC and XL. That has stuck with me until this day. Of course
I was going to school for the very thing.

The problem is others who've never been to school, but want to learn
electricity and electronics. Some books are just plain terrible to
learn from, and some shown 1000 different formulas before the one you
need trying to explain how they got there. This does nothing but
confuse someone trying to learn. Most of that is not worth a dime
unless you want to be a philosopher on the subject. Books should be
educational and to the point is one is to learn from it.

I have probably 30 books on the subject of transformers here by
various authors. Out of all, there's only one that's really worth a
damn, and that one is called Practical Transformer Design by Eric
Lowden. He wrote the book in the manner I'm explaining instead of
shoving a bunch of theory and useless formulas down your throat. He
shows exactly what you need to know, and nothing more. Don't get me
wrong, it's a very technical book, but one can easily learn from it.
Some of the other writers just rattle on with pages of useless info
before writing anything worth reading.

Best,

Will


--- In ham_amplifiers@..., "pentalab" <jim.thomson@...>
wrote:

--- In ham_amplifiers@..., R L Measures <r@...> wrote:

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:22 AM, david6fl wrote:

I belong to several of these ham discussion groups and also am

amazed at some of the elemental questions asked by persons with
extra class call signs.

Rich Sez... I have found that few Extras know Ohm's Law.

### I concur. Ohm's law, and it's derivatives [ohms 'wheel']

should be plastered on page 1 of all these books.

### The simple formulae for XC/XL/C/L are either not in most
books, or buried, or non existent... or strewn all over the map.

### or they give answers in farads + henry's + cps, etc.

### it's an easy tweak to the initial formula to fix that

eg; XC = 1,000,000 / 2 x pi x F x C Use mhz and pf
inserted into the formula... and it all comes out just right.....
in ohms. If u use the normal 1 / 2 x pi x f x c.... u gotta
insert freq as hz and C as farads. Why mess with
14,350,000.00 hz... when u can just use 14.35 in the 1st place...
[with the tweaked formula]

### Rich,,, ur PI spread sheet is like that... answers come out

in

henry's and farads. Too easy to make an error.. when C1 comes
out to .00000000036. Then it's left to the end user to figure
out whether it's 3.6 pf 36 pf 360 pf 3600 pf....esp at 2
am !

### once one knows what XC is... then substitute XC in ohms law
to derive everything else... like VA power, v drop, current ,

etc.

THEN... u can size stuff up easier.

### If u want to know say... how much RF current flows through the
main tank coil..... and if u know the value of the load cap.. and
the power output.... it's easy. Calculate the XC of the load cap
at the given freq... then calculate the current throught it.. easy,
since you what the power output is... u can easily calculate the
rms/peak V across the cap [same as the ant, load cap is in

parallel

with the 50 ohm coax]. Calculate the RF current going up the

50

ohm coax. Current coming outa the main tank coil is equal to
the square root of ..... the square of the load cap current +

the

square of the antenna current.

Which comes out pretty close to just DC plate current x Loaded
Q.... this method described above comes out dead on.

Too bad you don't see this stuff in any ARRL hand book... heck

it's

not even in Orr's books. No wonder fellow's are confused.

Having

peak/rms currents and voltages across C1 L1 C2.. plate block caps
[esp high bands] plate RFC RF current, bypass caps at base of
plate choke, etc, etc.. would be the ultimate addition to any of

the

current PI- spread sheets.[on a band per band basis] That plus,
you just have to be able to factor in stray L between the anode
and the input of the PI.... since usually a tiny bit of L is

needed

b4 the main pi-net... so u don't have to run a sky high Q on the
higher bands......esp with tubes like YC-156/179's... that already
have 55 pf of stray anode to grid C. Sky high loaded Q means
it's gonna be narrow banded and critical tuning.. + cooked
bandswitch contacts, coils, etc. It's easy to transform the plate
load Z WAY down.... so the Pi net has something it can work
with... with a more normal Q.

later... Jim VE7RF

...
R L Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734
r@..., , rlm@, www.somis.org

We seem to be casting a lot of blame on individuals, but I believe the
underlying problem isn't people, it is the nature of electronic
equipment these days.

A lot of us got our start by being repairmen, and to do that kind of
work well, one must understand the fundamentals of electronics. These
days, you either change a PC board (if it is an expensive piece of
gear), or you just throw it out and buy another. So-called
"technicians" anymore are mostly just parts changers, not real
repairmen. I don't see that changing any time in the near future.

Of course there are some real technicians around, but any more they
are working mostly at the engineering level, not the field repair
level, and there are not a lot of them because not a lot are needed.
Once the bugs are worked out of a design, you just make 'em by the
millions and toss the bad ones.

Sad but true.

Bill, W6WRT

Bill,

That is exactly the truth. When I started in repair (radio and TV),
tube sets were still around. There, you replaced parts in a chassis
with point to point wiring. Next came addition of PC boards with
tubes, and then the hybrid sets came having both tubes and solid
state devices. After that came the modules. That was easy fixes,
however the power supplies power components like resistors, etc were
still mounted on tie strips, etc. Zenith modular sets were my
favorite with the upright chassis. Magnavox had one similar.
Motorola, soon to be Quasar had the "works in a drawer". Next came
the replacable chassis. No more modules, they wanted you to change
the whole chassis out. Then it was only one large flimsy PC board. I
repaired most of these anyhow and only changed a chassis after
lightning damage. First you had a chassis and a tuner. Finally, the
one board included both. I forgot to mention that hot chassis started
about this time or a little earlier. I was selling and servicing
Philco TV's at the time for North American Phillips. Phillips bought
Philco from GTE. Then, all Phillips did was run the same TV set down
the line and put 1 of 3 name tags on them, Philco, Magnavox, or
Sylvania. About this time is when the mass marketing of TV's began by
Lowes, K-Mart, and others large chain stores. They could sell a set
at the same price as what a private dealer could buy one for. That
closed a lot of repair shops including mine. Eventually, sets got so
cheap that you could throw them away as the cost of repair was at
least 50-76% of a new set. This especially true for 19 inch TV's on
down. VCR's did the same thing too. Now you can buy a new VCR for
about $50.

All that's taught for service anymore is replacing a chassis, and
most of it is building PC's. Vacuum tube technology is not taught
anywhere I know of. After some of us older folks are gone, I wonder
who will actually be able to do real repair work anymore?

Best,

Will


--- In ham_amplifiers@..., Bill Turner <dezrat@...> wrote:

We seem to be casting a lot of blame on individuals, but I believe

the

underlying problem isn't people, it is the nature of electronic
equipment these days.

A lot of us got our start by being repairmen, and to do that kind of
work well, one must understand the fundamentals of electronics.

These

days, you either change a PC board (if it is an expensive piece of
gear), or you just throw it out and buy another. So-called
"technicians" anymore are mostly just parts changers, not real
repairmen. I don't see that changing any time in the near future.

Of course there are some real technicians around, but any more they
are working mostly at the engineering level, not the field repair
level, and there are not a lot of them because not a lot are needed.
Once the bugs are worked out of a design, you just make 'em by the
millions and toss the bad ones.

Sad but true.

Bill, W6WRT

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 21:02:11 -0000, "craxd" <craxd1@...>
wrote:

All that's taught for service anymore is replacing a chassis, and
most of it is building PC's. Vacuum tube technology is not taught
anywhere I know of. After some of us older folks are gone, I wonder
who will actually be able to do real repair work anymore?

Best,

Will

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I'm sure there will be a few guys who know how to repair a tube radio
or TV but they will become a rare breed, much like people who can
repair an ancient painting or book.

Time marches on.

Bill, W6WRT

craxd wrote:

Bill,

That is exactly the truth. When I started in repair (radio and TV),
tube sets were still around. There, you replaced parts in a chassis
with point to point wiring. Next came addition of PC boards with
tubes, and then the hybrid sets came having both tubes and solid
state devices. After that came the modules. That was easy fixes,
however the power supplies power components like resistors, etc were
still mounted on tie strips, etc. Zenith modular sets were my
favorite with the upright chassis. Magnavox had one similar.
Motorola, soon to be Quasar had the "works in a drawer". Next came
the replacable chassis. No more modules, they wanted you to change
the whole chassis out. Then it was only one large flimsy PC board. I
repaired most of these anyhow and only changed a chassis after
lightning damage. First you had a chassis and a tuner. Finally, the
one board included both. I forgot to mention that hot chassis started
about this time or a little earlier. I was selling and servicing
Philco TV's at the time for North American Phillips. Phillips bought
Philco from GTE. Then, all Phillips did was run the same TV set down
the line and put 1 of 3 name tags on them, Philco, Magnavox, or
Sylvania. About this time is when the mass marketing of TV's began by
Lowes, K-Mart, and others large chain stores. They could sell a set
at the same price as what a private dealer could buy one for. That
closed a lot of repair shops including mine. Eventually, sets got so
cheap that you could throw them away as the cost of repair was at
least 50-76% of a new set. This especially true for 19 inch TV's on
down. VCR's did the same thing too. Now you can buy a new VCR for
about $50.

All that's taught for service anymore is replacing a chassis, and
most of it is building PC's. Vacuum tube technology is not taught
anywhere I know of. After some of us older folks are gone, I wonder
who will actually be able to do real repair work anymore?

Best,

Will

--- In ham_amplifiers@... <mailto:ham_amplifiers%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Turner <dezrat@...> wrote:

We seem to be casting a lot of blame on individuals, but I believe

the

underlying problem isn't people, it is the nature of electronic
equipment these days.

A lot of us got our start by being repairmen, and to do that kind of
work well, one must understand the fundamentals of electronics.

These

days, you either change a PC board (if it is an expensive piece of
gear), or you just throw it out and buy another. So-called
"technicians" anymore are mostly just parts changers, not real
repairmen. I don't see that changing any time in the near future.

Of course there are some real technicians around, but any more they
are working mostly at the engineering level, not the field repair
level, and there are not a lot of them because not a lot are needed.
Once the bugs are worked out of a design, you just make 'em by the
millions and toss the bad ones.

Sad but true.

Bill, W6WRT

Will,
Question? When did GTE own Philco? I've been with them (GTE/Verizon) for 43 years and I only know that they owned Sylvania.Was that before my time there. Just wondering.

Larry, W6LAR

Larry,


This bound to have been in the early 70's or so. I had a GTE/Philco
19" TV I took in as a trade in and I played it myself for about a
year before I sold it. I can't remember if it was all solid state or
if it was a hybrid. Seems to me they had an old paper type light
green colored PC board in them. I think they was about the first to
own the Philco name after Ford, maybe bought it from them? North
American Phillips ended up with all three names. As far as I know,
N.A.P. no longer is selling new Philcos, only Magnavox and Sylvania.

Philco was the set for a private dealer to get a franchise on as
Sylvania and Magnavox was being pushed by the large chain stores. It
was all that was available over Lowes and a few other large stores
starting to sell them in the early 80's. Lowes was who hurt me. Now,
I don't think Lowes even handles TV sets. RCA was bad to not protect
a teritory and set someone else up a mile away so I never looked at
them. I had the Quasar sales for a while also, but they got just too
hard to work with. Now they're all chain store items.

Best,

Will


--- In ham_amplifiers@..., Larry Anderson
<larryw6lar@...> wrote:

craxd wrote:

Bill,

That is exactly the truth. When I started in repair (radio and

TV),

tube sets were still around. There, you replaced parts in a

chassis

with point to point wiring. Next came addition of PC boards with
tubes, and then the hybrid sets came having both tubes and solid
state devices. After that came the modules. That was easy fixes,
however the power supplies power components like resistors, etc

were

still mounted on tie strips, etc. Zenith modular sets were my
favorite with the upright chassis. Magnavox had one similar.
Motorola, soon to be Quasar had the "works in a drawer". Next came
the replacable chassis. No more modules, they wanted you to change
the whole chassis out. Then it was only one large flimsy PC

board. I

repaired most of these anyhow and only changed a chassis after
lightning damage. First you had a chassis and a tuner. Finally,

the

one board included both. I forgot to mention that hot chassis

started

about this time or a little earlier. I was selling and servicing
Philco TV's at the time for North American Phillips. Phillips

bought

Philco from GTE. Then, all Phillips did was run the same TV set

down

the line and put 1 of 3 name tags on them, Philco, Magnavox, or
Sylvania. About this time is when the mass marketing of TV's

began by

Lowes, K-Mart, and others large chain stores. They could sell a

set

at the same price as what a private dealer could buy one for. That
closed a lot of repair shops including mine. Eventually, sets got

so

cheap that you could throw them away as the cost of repair was at
least 50-76% of a new set. This especially true for 19 inch TV's

on

down. VCR's did the same thing too. Now you can buy a new VCR for
about $50.

All that's taught for service anymore is replacing a chassis, and
most of it is building PC's. Vacuum tube technology is not taught
anywhere I know of. After some of us older folks are gone, I

wonder

who will actually be able to do real repair work anymore?

Best,

Will

--- In ham_amplifiers@...
<mailto:ham_amplifiers%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Turner <dezrat@>

wrote:

We seem to be casting a lot of blame on individuals, but I

believe

the

underlying problem isn't people, it is the nature of electronic
equipment these days.

A lot of us got our start by being repairmen, and to do that

kind of

work well, one must understand the fundamentals of electronics.

These

days, you either change a PC board (if it is an expensive piece

of

gear), or you just throw it out and buy another. So-called
"technicians" anymore are mostly just parts changers, not real
repairmen. I don't see that changing any time in the near

future.

Of course there are some real technicians around, but any more

they

are working mostly at the engineering level, not the field

repair

level, and there are not a lot of them because not a lot are

needed.

Once the bugs are worked out of a design, you just make 'em by

the

millions and toss the bad ones.

Sad but true.

Bill, W6WRT

Will,
Question? When did GTE own Philco? I've been with them (GTE/

Verizon) for

43 years and I only know that they owned Sylvania.Was that before

my

time there. Just wondering.

Larry, W6LAR

craxd wrote:

Larry,

This bound to have been in the early 70's or so. I had a GTE/Philco
19" TV I took in as a trade in and I played it myself for about a
year before I sold it. I can't remember if it was all solid state or
if it was a hybrid. Seems to me they had an old paper type light
green colored PC board in them. I think they was about the first to
own the Philco name after Ford, maybe bought it from them? North
American Phillips ended up with all three names. As far as I know,
N.A.P. no longer is selling new Philcos, only Magnavox and Sylvania.

Philco was the set for a private dealer to get a franchise on as
Sylvania and Magnavox was being pushed by the large chain stores. It
was all that was available over Lowes and a few other large stores
starting to sell them in the early 80's. Lowes was who hurt me. Now,
I don't think Lowes even handles TV sets. RCA was bad to not protect
a teritory and set someone else up a mile away so I never looked at
them. I had the Quasar sales for a while also, but they got just too
hard to work with. Now they're all chain store items.

Best,

Will

--- In ham_amplifiers@... <mailto:ham_amplifiers%40yahoogroups.com>, Larry Anderson
<larryw6lar@...> wrote:

craxd wrote:

Bill,

That is exactly the truth. When I started in repair (radio and

TV),

tube sets were still around. There, you replaced parts in a

chassis

with point to point wiring. Next came addition of PC boards with
tubes, and then the hybrid sets came having both tubes and solid
state devices. After that came the modules. That was easy fixes,
however the power supplies power components like resistors, etc

were

still mounted on tie strips, etc. Zenith modular sets were my
favorite with the upright chassis. Magnavox had one similar.
Motorola, soon to be Quasar had the "works in a drawer". Next came
the replacable chassis. No more modules, they wanted you to change
the whole chassis out. Then it was only one large flimsy PC

board. I

repaired most of these anyhow and only changed a chassis after
lightning damage. First you had a chassis and a tuner. Finally,

the

one board included both. I forgot to mention that hot chassis

started

about this time or a little earlier. I was selling and servicing
Philco TV's at the time for North American Phillips. Phillips

bought

Philco from GTE. Then, all Phillips did was run the same TV set

down

the line and put 1 of 3 name tags on them, Philco, Magnavox, or
Sylvania. About this time is when the mass marketing of TV's

began by

Lowes, K-Mart, and others large chain stores. They could sell a

set

at the same price as what a private dealer could buy one for. That
closed a lot of repair shops including mine. Eventually, sets got

so

cheap that you could throw them away as the cost of repair was at
least 50-76% of a new set. This especially true for 19 inch TV's

on

down. VCR's did the same thing too. Now you can buy a new VCR for
about $50.

All that's taught for service anymore is replacing a chassis, and
most of it is building PC's. Vacuum tube technology is not taught
anywhere I know of. After some of us older folks are gone, I

wonder

who will actually be able to do real repair work anymore?

Best,

Will

--- In ham_amplifiers@...

<mailto:ham_amplifiers%40yahoogroups.com>

<mailto:ham_amplifiers%40yahoogroups.com>, Bill Turner <dezrat@>

wrote:

We seem to be casting a lot of blame on individuals, but I

believe

the

underlying problem isn't people, it is the nature of electronic
equipment these days.

A lot of us got our start by being repairmen, and to do that

kind of

work well, one must understand the fundamentals of electronics.

These

days, you either change a PC board (if it is an expensive piece

of

gear), or you just throw it out and buy another. So-called
"technicians" anymore are mostly just parts changers, not real
repairmen. I don't see that changing any time in the near

future.

Of course there are some real technicians around, but any more

they

are working mostly at the engineering level, not the field

repair

level, and there are not a lot of them because not a lot are

needed.

Once the bugs are worked out of a design, you just make 'em by

the

millions and toss the bad ones.

Sad but true.

Bill, W6WRT

Will,
Question? When did GTE own Philco? I've been with them (GTE/

Verizon) for

43 years and I only know that they owned Sylvania.Was that before

my

time there. Just wondering.

Larry, W6LAR

Will,
I think you jogged my memory as after I ask the question I seemed to remember that just before GTE sold out the Sylvania line they did take on Philco from Ford. Boy! thats a long time ago. We used to have an "Employee Store" at selected company yards integrated with our supply department and all of the Sylvania products were offered and you could purchase on "time" payment through payroll deduction with no interest. Was a great deal for those of us just starting out to get some nice electronics. I still have a few items I purchased there. Thanks for the info Will.

Larry, W6LAR