Field repairable ham gear?

[W5ATX]

I understand a proposal for rulemaking is out, based on a petition by Mr Nick Leggett, N3NL. He wants the FCC to mandate that ham equipment be field repairable in some manner. What is this guy thinking? Ham gear hasn't been "easily or practically" field repairable by the AVERAGE ham since the FT101 arrived from Japan in the mid-70's. Can you see hams giving up bells and whistles?

As I understand it, his thinking is that ham gear used in emergencies cannot be easily returned to service if it breaks. He sees that as a danger to safety (I presume anyway) that the federal government should correct.

So what to do about this? As other threads here have indicated, some in the ham radio fraternity seem to seek to hold back technological progress. Then again, it's always been that way. After WW1, the spark ops were against CW. Then the CW men opposed phone operation. (They may have had a valid point though . . .) And of course many hams still remember the early days of SSB on the ham bands. Wow. Is it possible this N3NL guy is one of those progress haters?

Actually, I'm sure he's not. In fact, his concerns about equipment being used for emergencies being too complex might be valid. But to ask the feds, who don't do a thing for us already, to mandate that the equipment manufacturers dumb down their wares? I think that's a bit of a stretch.

Here are a couple of ideas. First off, hams could start being hams. They could HOMEBREW rigs that would serve them in their emergency situations. That's a noble idea too, except of course not many hams seem to know ohm's law anymore, never mind how to build a rig. That being a reasonable presumption (in MY opinion anyway), how simple a rig would we need for it to be field repairable by today's average ham? Ummmmm . . . two tin cans and some twine?

I have a better idea, and the control freaks among us will be able to relate to the good side of this idea. Even though this is extreme, it's simple, and can be easily regulated. And most hams could learn how to service this stuff too.

For HF, I propose that all amateur transmitters comply with the following: They be a simple circuit, either a 6L6 or a 2N2222 oscillator controlled by a crystal. Either of these would certain put out a signal for emergency work, and best of all, they're VERY simple. Crystals shall be available only from the United States Office of Wavelength Control, PO Box 666, Washington DC 20202. Transceivers for VHF (2m only please, all other bands are too technical for us hams) shall be no more complex than a Drake Marker Luxury transceiver. What a rig THAT was. An IC for transmit audio, some discreet transistors, and a tube, a real honest to goodness tube, in the final. And all that in a MOBILE rig too. Wow. Beat that.

Folks, I can't believe this idea even got far enough to have a comment period. As much as we complain about complexity and cost, a move backward would be bad for ham radio. And realistically, I think I was correct above: How simple a rig would we need for most of us to be able to fix it?

Thoughts?

Chris

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif Who was it recently that wanted Ham gear to be EM pulse resistant? Another rocket scientist like this Ligget boob. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Considering his suggestion involved "modular" construction...He ain't looked at a modern rig lately......They are essentialy a module all ready. That is the small portable stuff for emergency communications.

And EM pulse resistance?........I guess you could carry an old microwave oven carcus around but that won't offer any real protection from a massive EM pulse either.

73 de Craig.........KCØGOA

[W5ATX]

EM pulse resistance is easy. It's called TUBES hi hi. But that sure would be a step backward for the state of the art, huh?

Another thing the government cannot mandate.

Oh well.

73,

Chris

[KD7KOY]

W5ATX hit it on the head. If you want something "field repairable" and EMP resistant, use old tube gear.
Get a drawer of parts, extra tubes etc. and your good for another 50,000 miles.
Although not with the "bells and whistles"..it gets a signal out and can be repaired. Thats the name of the game in the field or under emergency conditions.
Why "reinvent the wheel"..use what we already have.

[KD5NCO]

The most miniature, or the most high tech radios of today are already "Field repairable", the U.S. Army does it every day in the field. The process is very simple, if you do not have the skills, equipment, and spare parts.... you hire a technician, train him on the range of equipment, outfit him with a shop and tools, and keep a stock of common parts and expected failure spares on hand.

There is a slightly less expensive method: have two or three backup radios, power supplys, and antennas ready to replace the dead unit. ( most of the sky warn guys I know here in central Texas have two of every thing in their "chase trucks".

I suppose Yaesu could produce the FT-90R ( smallest full featured dual bander I know of) as a user repariable unit..... it would be big as the old brick CB radios and cost three times as much though.

I rate the request for rule makeing as DUMB IDEA.

BTW EMI/EMP hardening is as simple as unpluging same as you would do for lightning. Trust me, here in the U.S.A. you will have plenty of notice for the second burst. We let the first one through without notice because we were waiting to see if the thing was real before we paniced everybody.

[wb0wao]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W5ATX @ April 19 2002,19:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I understand a proposal for rulemaking is out, based on a petition by Mr Nick Leggett, N3NL. He wants the FCC to mandate that ham equipment be field repairable in some manner. What is this guy thinking? Ham gear hasn't been &quot;easily or practically&quot; field repairable by the AVERAGE ham since the FT101 arrived from Japan in the mid-70's. Can you see hams giving up bells and whistles?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Chris -
There is no way that the &quot;masses&quot; will give up their $3000 Yaecomwood DSP, 200w, dual VFO, spectrum scope rice box. They HAVE to have the latest &quot;toy&quot; from the land of the rising sun. Those rigs are nice and have a lot of cool features, but if they do go down, only a factory service center can fix 'em.
The guy does have a point, but he is going about it in the wrong way. Especially during this war that we found ourselves in, and it is a WAR, we hams may have to step up to the plate and provide emergency communications. So we must have RELIABLE and REPAIRABLE rigs. And if your $3K Yaecomwood goes south on you, you probably do not have the components, equipment, or the knowledge to repair it. But making a TS-2000 or FT-1000 &quot;field repairable&quot; is NOT the answer.
Well, the answer is and has been here for quite a while. There ARE a LOT of hams that can build rigs and repair them. I know, I have done it! I am NOT a EE or even work in the electronics field, but I learned to build a very capable 40m CW rig that is quieter than ANY commercial rig that I have ever owned or used! This rig has 100 kHz band spread, RIT, a variable xtal filter and the only active components are a few diodes, a varactor, and 2N2222 transistors. I am currently working on a 15m version of the same rig, and using the same basic circuit, it can be modified to work on pretty much any band from 80m to 6m. Oh, the only catch is that it is a &quot;QRP&quot; rig! You may find that most of the &quot;QRP&quot; crowd can and has built useful and reliable rigs for years.
It is the &quot;appliance operator&quot; mindset that is the threat here. Plunk down a wad of cash or flip out the plastic and you are QRV!
BTW, as you can tell I am a QRP operator, so no comments about &quot;Life is Too Short for QRP&quot; http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Oh, and by the way, I am an &quot;Extra Lite&quot; or &quot;Nickle Extra&quot; (take your pick) so I guess I shouldn't be operating CW or building rigs either... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

72/73

Dennis - WB0WAO

[KB9YFI]

My emergency VHF station is field repairable. All I have to do is replace a module and I'm back in business. Unplug the antenna and power supply and plug in a new tranciever module. At $135 I can afford 3 extra radios for the price of what 2-meter radios used to cost back in the day of &quot;field-repairable&quot; no-frills gear. I love my Yaesu FT-1500. I doubt if it will ever fail but for the price they are selling you can afford to buy a couple 'spare' parts.

Jim - KB9YFI

[W5ATX]

I think EVERYONE here is correct. And WB0WA0, it sounds like you think I was seriously asking if the idea is practical. I just couldn't think of any better title for the topic.

I know hams aren't going to give up their toys. I wouldn't either. And I see you prove my idea of the 2N222 is valid - you already have it working !!!! hi hi.

Seriously though, yes, custom built for the purpose would be a grand idea. And if qrp cw isn't what they need, there are plenty of other buildable ideas. You have a good one in place there, and I applaud you. Also, congrats on the new Extra. Nickel extra, extra lite, I don't care. You've got your head screwed on straight; that's what counts.

KD7KOY, you're right too. At today's ham radio prices, there's no reason not to have spares if you think your needs are such that they're warranted. I just got another rig for my wife's car, so now I'm finally in the &quot;I have spares&quot; dept too. I wish I could pay just $129 for what I like though. Oh well, my choice, my tears!

Basically, Fred said it: This idea is DUMB. I just wanted to see if other folks had the same view before I said it myself.

Thanks for the &quot;vindication.&quot;

73

Chris

[VE6BUD]

Well, when you consider the volume of used equipment out there that usually sells at a fraction of the price that it would have cost new, there really isn't a reason why someone shouldn't carry a spare box.

In an emergency, one really doesn't have time to fix a box anyway. Back in the late 70's, Some Yaesu radios came with a bunch of boards which plugged into a backplane. It was a simple matter of yanking out the board and putting in a new one in order to get the radio working again. Mind you, this meant that the radio ended up becoming quite large as a result. (I'm thinking of the FT-221, FT-225, FT-101ZD &amp; FT-901DM.)

However, as it's been said before, this really isn't practical anymore. It's quite unfortunate that Heathkit went belly up. Maybe buying some old Heathkit gear might teach me a thing or two. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Just to get back to the &quot;The rig is a module&quot; thinking:

Brand new Yaesu FT-2600M : $300 CDN.
10 yr old Icom IC-229A: $150 CDN
20 yr old Yaesu FT-720R : $100 CDN

All are 2m mobile radios and I own the last two. If one of them breaks down, I just throw it into the shop and use something else until it comes back.

BTW, There is hope... There's a company out there called &quot;Elecraft&quot; who makes HF radios in Kit form. They not only have a lot of the features of the lower-end rice boxen (IE. IC-718) but are completely field serviceable with a lack of those dreaded surface mount components.

Unfortunately, I can buy a rice box for cheaper than anything Elecraft offers and with more features, but that's the price you pay for a radio that can last you your lifetime and beyond, provided that you look after it!

[WB2WIK]

N3NL is indeed the same person who floated a memorandum regarding EMP immunity. And now Nick is back, with this one concerning field reparability.

I really must contact him directly to see if he is actually an active amateur radio operator who uses the hobby/service to communicate with others, or if he honestly just sits around thinking up this stuff.

Amateurs are not liable for emergency communications, it's a service we try to provide when possible, and hopefully when it does not interfere with other emergency providers and their communications. Those who take it seriously are allowed to do so in any manner they see fit, including having spare rigs, which seems the most sensible -- not to mention the cheapest overall -- way to assure continued availability.

In many industries, it has already been technically settled how to provide continuous service without any interruptions at all. The telephone companies place this as their #1 priority, with #2 being continuous, uninterrupted service of their automated billing systems, without which they would not survive long. It is extremely rare to pick up a telephone and not hear a dial tone (at least on a land line). In fact, it happens so rarely that most people cannot remember when it last happened to them. When it does happen, it's virtually always a localized problem because of a natural disaster (earthquake, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado) that takes out local lines in a small area without impacting service in the rest of the country; or, it may be caused by a traffic accident (car crash, train wreck, etc) that impacts a very small service area and can be quickly repaired.

The way the phone companies provide 99.99999% uptime is by using equipment providing redundancy. When one part of a system fails, as any will eventually do, an identical part takes over that functionality so the complete system remains in service. Then, the failed part is repaired or replaced quickly to retain continued redundancy.

This is the &quot;plus.&quot; The &quot;minus&quot; is that all systems cost at least twice as much to build, since everything's redundant, meaning there's at least two of all mission critical parts.

If we're all willing to spend twice as much on our equipment to facilitate redundancy, we can boast the same results. But since we're not, it's not gonna happen.

WB2WIK/6

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif QRZ bio for N3NL says &quot;Inventor and technical writer&quot;.
I don't think much of his tech writing so far........and I have to wonder if maybe he isn't trying to patent a &quot;field repairable&quot; rig!


73 de Craig.........KCØGOA

[k9kjm]

Boy, Am I glad to see most everyone commenting on this stupid proposal from N3NL seeing it for what it really is: Trying to get big brother to mandate radio prices at least double what they are now. BUT we all need to post comments to the FCC so they understand where real hams stand on this issue!!!! Let's not let this become law!!!! And I do hope someone can talk directly to N3NL and get him to &quot;think&quot; about messing with some other hobby! AND STAY OUT OF MAKING PROPOSALS THAT AFFECT AMATEUR RADIO!