Hmmmm . . . I 'attached a couple of pictures with my post earlier today but they do not appear to be visible . . . at least to me. I'm wondering if I did it wrong. This text entry box I'm using right now as a "paperclip" icon which brings up an "attachment" menu. I thought I figured it out but perhaps not. Are any other readers of this thread seeing the two shop photos?
Hmmm . . . okay, need to figure out the attachments thingy . . . here's links to the pictures posted elsewhere: http://tinyurl.com/3d3hovr http://tinyurl.com/3w99cot
I was in error with my estimate. 2954 miles in a Toaster loaded with about 1000 pounds of stuff including about 200 tubes, about 100 records, a 5KW RF amp (solid state), a planer (heavy) a bench top drill press, 8 yagi antennas, a collection of RF relays, attenuators, heat sinks, a telescope, 300 old computer games.....but NO test equipment. Traffic was light and people were driving rather fast. Dayton to Atlanta took 7 hours. The rest of the trip went slower due to a few stops to deliver some of the stuff and pick up more goodies.
Attachments
"here's links to the pictures posted elsewhere"
Nice and roomy, and I like the bin-on-shelf storage. What's really catching my eye is that scope for board work at bench center. Sure would like one for myself.
Nice and roomy, and I like the bin-on-shelf storage. What's really catching my eye is that scope for board work at bench center. Sure would like one for myself.
That's a Tek TDS2012 . . . and exceedingly capable 'scope for the money. Any of the TDS 2xx or 2xxx series are generally good buys on eBay too. Another individual expressed some doubts about eBay. I would advise that it's a VERY tight community of honorable individuals with a very low incidence of bad behaviors. My own satisfaction rating for nearly 1000 transactions is 100% and I intended to to my utmost to keep it there. I once sold a camera to a fellow who groused about some shortcomings on his reading of the description., I promptly refunded his money and let him keep the camera. The stature of my transactions are worth more to me than the value of any one transaction.
I've purchased some $high$ test equipment on eBay with great results. Be sure to handle the money thru PayPal. There are additional protections built in to your transactions if you do it all through eBay/PayPal.
Those storage bins are the byproduct of having built about a dozen shops in my lifetime and never seeming to have the places to classify and sort various components of important inventory.
About 5 years ago I discovered the 6qt 'shoe box' bins with lids offered by Rubbermaid, Stearlite and others. I crafted shelves from 1/4 plywood and 1x2 skirts. You can rip the sheet of plywood 11-3/4" and get 4 shelves. The 1x2's are glued and tacked with a Harbor Freight brad gun. You can attach these to stud-walls with 2-1/2" drywall screws through the back skirt of the shelf. Simple 1x3 uprights on the ends and one in the middle take care of front support. Assembly with dry-wall screws lets you take them apart and the stack the shelves for moving.
The nice thing is the price, I buy the bins for typically $1. Also the lids. In the wood shop, I have a whole wall covered with these bins. The lids keep the sawdust out. I don't use the lids in the e-shop. Between the three shops, I have about 300 of the bins. Get a 2" roll of yellow vinyl tape. Cut 6" chunks to stick to end of bin. Label with magic marker. The tape peels off cleanly to allow re-labeling.
Like I said, in 40 years and 12 shops of experiments, I've not found any faster or less expensive way to generate so much compartmentalized, dust tight storage. I do recommend you pick on style/supplier of bins so that all the lids will interchange with every bin in your storage system.
I've purchased some $high$ test equipment on eBay with great results. Be sure to handle the money thru PayPal. There are additional protections built in to your transactions if you do it all through eBay/PayPal.
Those storage bins are the byproduct of having built about a dozen shops in my lifetime and never seeming to have the places to classify and sort various components of important inventory.
About 5 years ago I discovered the 6qt 'shoe box' bins with lids offered by Rubbermaid, Stearlite and others. I crafted shelves from 1/4 plywood and 1x2 skirts. You can rip the sheet of plywood 11-3/4" and get 4 shelves. The 1x2's are glued and tacked with a Harbor Freight brad gun. You can attach these to stud-walls with 2-1/2" drywall screws through the back skirt of the shelf. Simple 1x3 uprights on the ends and one in the middle take care of front support. Assembly with dry-wall screws lets you take them apart and the stack the shelves for moving.
The nice thing is the price, I buy the bins for typically $1. Also the lids. In the wood shop, I have a whole wall covered with these bins. The lids keep the sawdust out. I don't use the lids in the e-shop. Between the three shops, I have about 300 of the bins. Get a 2" roll of yellow vinyl tape. Cut 6" chunks to stick to end of bin. Label with magic marker. The tape peels off cleanly to allow re-labeling.
Like I said, in 40 years and 12 shops of experiments, I've not found any faster or less expensive way to generate so much compartmentalized, dust tight storage. I do recommend you pick on style/supplier of bins so that all the lids will interchange with every bin in your storage system.
Reminiscing ... 1964 I spent a summer straightening parts fresh from the heat treat ovens @ Beech ($1.92 per hour / third shift).
Those were the days . . .
A friend of mine, now retired ATP captain, was at Beech about then. We could rent a Bonanza from the flying club for $9/hr wet. I was a tech writer at Cessna but with two kids and trying to get through college, couldn't afford their flying club. But I was at Cessna when for the first time, we produced 10,000 airplanes in one year. Those were heady days . . .
At that time, Beech had 4 or 5 electronics labs. Cessna that many too. We were just exploring the use of transistors for in-house developments. I think a colleague of mine at Cessna did the first solid-state intercom for a general aviation airplane. Used Raytheon CK-722 transistors. It worked well but I don't think it went to production. We weren't allowed to 'compete' with our sister subsidiary, Aircraft Radio Corporation out of Boonton, N.J.
Cessna still does in-house systems development . . . some projects with software in them! Beech does none.
A friend of mine, now retired ATP captain, was at Beech about then. We could rent a Bonanza from the flying club for $9/hr wet. I was a tech writer at Cessna but with two kids and trying to get through college, couldn't afford their flying club. But I was at Cessna when for the first time, we produced 10,000 airplanes in one year. Those were heady days . . .
At that time, Beech had 4 or 5 electronics labs. Cessna that many too. We were just exploring the use of transistors for in-house developments. I think a colleague of mine at Cessna did the first solid-state intercom for a general aviation airplane. Used Raytheon CK-722 transistors. It worked well but I don't think it went to production. We weren't allowed to 'compete' with our sister subsidiary, Aircraft Radio Corporation out of Boonton, N.J.
Cessna still does in-house systems development . . . some projects with software in them! Beech does none.
"I learned to fly in a 150. You don't get in that plane, you put it on."
That was a snug airplane. It almost didn't come into being. There was little interest in 100 hp, two seated airplanes for quite some time from C-140 phase-out in 1951 until about 1958 when the C-170 got its nose wheel and became the C172. Cessna folklore says management had an epiphany (probably based on sales of Luscombs and Cubs) that future owners of 172s would be more plentiful if they had another, more economical 'seed' airplane to train in that was also a Cessna. The C-140 got its nose wheel the same year and became the C-150.
http://www.jbaviation.com/assets/files/Cessna Genealogy Chart.pdf
The J-3 and C-120/140 were my favorite fleet of fun-ships for giving rides. They had very generous cabin loads for weight. If you could get the door closed, you could go fly. When the 150 came along, empty weights started to climb, the airplane's cabin loads suffered and never recovered. But we did build a boat load of those airplanes and a whole lot of folks learned to fly them.
I studied in a Beech Skipper . . . a derivation of some ideas Pug Piper brought to Beech from his earlier work on the Tomahawk. Nice and roomy but after the Beech design philosophies and appointments were added it was pretty heavy. I think the only airplane I've flown that was gross weight limited not for structural reasons but for rate-of-climb limitations. Like the Tomahawk, heavy on the controls. Students transitioned into larger Beech products very smoothly. But my first experiences in the C-150 were . . . uh . . . tense. I was all over the place until I figured out how to deal with the much lighter controls.
Got to fly a Texas Taildragger once (C-150 with 150 horse engine). Man, what a rocket! The owner visited an airport my wife and I owned for a short time back in '89. 1K1 at Benton, KS.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/23a.jpg
Bob . . .
That was a snug airplane. It almost didn't come into being. There was little interest in 100 hp, two seated airplanes for quite some time from C-140 phase-out in 1951 until about 1958 when the C-170 got its nose wheel and became the C172. Cessna folklore says management had an epiphany (probably based on sales of Luscombs and Cubs) that future owners of 172s would be more plentiful if they had another, more economical 'seed' airplane to train in that was also a Cessna. The C-140 got its nose wheel the same year and became the C-150.
http://www.jbaviation.com/assets/files/Cessna Genealogy Chart.pdf
The J-3 and C-120/140 were my favorite fleet of fun-ships for giving rides. They had very generous cabin loads for weight. If you could get the door closed, you could go fly. When the 150 came along, empty weights started to climb, the airplane's cabin loads suffered and never recovered. But we did build a boat load of those airplanes and a whole lot of folks learned to fly them.
I studied in a Beech Skipper . . . a derivation of some ideas Pug Piper brought to Beech from his earlier work on the Tomahawk. Nice and roomy but after the Beech design philosophies and appointments were added it was pretty heavy. I think the only airplane I've flown that was gross weight limited not for structural reasons but for rate-of-climb limitations. Like the Tomahawk, heavy on the controls. Students transitioned into larger Beech products very smoothly. But my first experiences in the C-150 were . . . uh . . . tense. I was all over the place until I figured out how to deal with the much lighter controls.
Got to fly a Texas Taildragger once (C-150 with 150 horse engine). Man, what a rocket! The owner visited an airport my wife and I owned for a short time back in '89. 1K1 at Benton, KS.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/23a.jpg
Bob . . .
The nice thing about the C150/152/172 is the spin recovery procedure: let go of the controls. 😀 Very safe for duff pilots like me.
Yes. A "airplane-in-every-garage" trademark. Unlike first examples of the Tomahawk where Pug addressed the "desires" of the instructors, a substantial portion of which were ex military. Military pilots were taught to spin and recover their airplanes . . . assuming they WERE spinnable.
The Tomahawk would spin very easily (the instructors called it 'nicely'). While the Tomahawk had an accident rate on a par with other machines of it's class, the frequency of stall-spin accidents was many times higher. Piper added stall strips as an AD to get the nose to drop sooner and with less enthusiasm. The AA-1 Yankee was a fast-break airplane too. The only one to embarrass me with an instructor on board twice on the same day. The 150s were originally fitted with the classic Cessna barn-door flaps (40-degrees at full deflection). The dragon that bit folks in 150s was go-around on a hot day. The airplane flat could not return to level flight from 100' off the ground on a hot day with the flaps all the way out. There was an AD against the 150s to limit flap travel to 30 degrees. But even then, a warm day go around from 100' feet at gross was very close to a touch and go landing.
I had a couple of 150's in my rental fleet. Used to fly with every one of my new renters to hammer in two strong nails. "nose on the horizon is a safe positive rate of climb" and "do your go/no-go landing decision a good 1/4 mile out if hot and heavily loaded." I was pleased if my 150s stayed on the ground during 105 degree afternoons.
Didn't have anyone bend an airplane while we had the airport . . . but an instructor and student put 704TL into the corn a few months after we left. They were not badly hurt but the airplane was totaled.
The Tomahawk would spin very easily (the instructors called it 'nicely'). While the Tomahawk had an accident rate on a par with other machines of it's class, the frequency of stall-spin accidents was many times higher. Piper added stall strips as an AD to get the nose to drop sooner and with less enthusiasm. The AA-1 Yankee was a fast-break airplane too. The only one to embarrass me with an instructor on board twice on the same day. The 150s were originally fitted with the classic Cessna barn-door flaps (40-degrees at full deflection). The dragon that bit folks in 150s was go-around on a hot day. The airplane flat could not return to level flight from 100' off the ground on a hot day with the flaps all the way out. There was an AD against the 150s to limit flap travel to 30 degrees. But even then, a warm day go around from 100' feet at gross was very close to a touch and go landing.
I had a couple of 150's in my rental fleet. Used to fly with every one of my new renters to hammer in two strong nails. "nose on the horizon is a safe positive rate of climb" and "do your go/no-go landing decision a good 1/4 mile out if hot and heavily loaded." I was pleased if my 150s stayed on the ground during 105 degree afternoons.
Didn't have anyone bend an airplane while we had the airport . . . but an instructor and student put 704TL into the corn a few months after we left. They were not badly hurt but the airplane was totaled.
Nelson Pass ought to have some aviation stories... his father is still working on planes 6 day a week.... mostly Barons and Duke's.
Cyclotronguy
Cyclotronguy
Hi, George, i have the same variac as you!!
Also, if i can see clearly, you have the same Hameg 203-7 i used to have!!
Hi Chris,
I've given it a try and am not having much luck so far. The latest IO libaray suite works with the gpib pci card I got 82350B, and it sort of sees the device, though with errors. I got Pete Millett's .vxe files and they won't run. I can send comands, but, would like to get it to work with VEE and that seems to be problematic.
I'm starting to wonder if I need to build an "old" pc with back dated software to make this work. Trouble is old versions of VEE on the Agilent site don't have licenses... do you have info on what version of windows you are running, your gpib pci card, IO suite, etc.?
What do you guys think? Not quite ready to throw in the towel, but, close...🙁
Ken
So, a little success with the gpib card and talking to the HP8903a with the VEE software. I can control the 8903 with comands from the IO suite or the VEE 8.5. But, I can't receive data from the 8903. When I send the command to get data from either the right or left display, I get nothing back. Any thoughts? Anyone familiar with HP-IB or GPIB?
Thanks
Ken
Thanks
Ken
Anatech wrote:
It's a Radiometer Copenhagen SMG1 FM Stereo generator. I've had it for years and rebuilt the power supply so far.
Does anyone have a manual for this thing? I've been flying blind for years now.
Hello Anatech,
I have a manual for the Radiometer SMG1c. The bad part it is called a Gebrauchsanweisung🙁 It's written in the German language. The schematic is with English text.
It's a paper copy. When you really want it I'am glad to make a copy for you.
In the 90's I have done some measurements on FM channel processors and in the trial and error phase of the project it became quickly obvious that to measure an audio signal to noise of better than 80dB I needed something a lot better. So at the end it was Tektronix ASG100 SMC 2 -> SMK -> DUT -> SMDC- 2 -> FAB all R&S -> Tektronix VM700.
The R&S stuff is gone by now but the VM 700 has an excellent audio analyzer in it. So it's still part of my lab🙂.
It's a Radiometer Copenhagen SMG1 FM Stereo generator. I've had it for years and rebuilt the power supply so far.
Does anyone have a manual for this thing? I've been flying blind for years now.
Hello Anatech,
I have a manual for the Radiometer SMG1c. The bad part it is called a Gebrauchsanweisung🙁 It's written in the German language. The schematic is with English text.
It's a paper copy. When you really want it I'am glad to make a copy for you.
In the 90's I have done some measurements on FM channel processors and in the trial and error phase of the project it became quickly obvious that to measure an audio signal to noise of better than 80dB I needed something a lot better. So at the end it was Tektronix ASG100 SMC 2 -> SMK -> DUT -> SMDC- 2 -> FAB all R&S -> Tektronix VM700.
The R&S stuff is gone by now but the VM 700 has an excellent audio analyzer in it. So it's still part of my lab🙂.
Well here is my shameful desk! I don't have a workshop, and today I was going to tidy this up, but it hasn't happened. Beyond a joke at the moment! amazing I have got away with this so long since it is in the living room!
Doing a power test of my chipamp with the AC power meter for a reply in another thread.
Soldering gets done at the dining room table, or on the floor, depending on the scale of the job 😉
Tony.
Doing a power test of my chipamp with the AC power meter for a reply in another thread.
Soldering gets done at the dining room table, or on the floor, depending on the scale of the job 😉
Tony.
