198 kHz qrt

[JohnW2]

One of our simple mods on things like 19 sets was to poke the centre of pieces of coax into 2 IF coils and add a high resistance pot between them, the objective being to mix the 2 antiphase signals together. The pot setting was very critical to provide enough positive feedback to allow it to work but not enough to make it unstable.

If I understand you correctly (I'm not certain that I do!) that sounds conceptually similar to what I said about having a 'regenerative' (i.e. 'with positive feedback') first RF stage in a TRF receiver. The primary reason for doing that was to considerably increase 'Q' in the initial tuned circuit but, as I said, it tended to be 'frowned upon, because it could easily result in generation of RF at the frequency of the signal being received, which then fed back into the aerial and was radiated!

 

[spile]

Do we know anything about what (if anything) is to become of the site?

I have not seen any timetable to turn off the Radio 5 MW transmission or to remove the two masts and T antenna which I can see from my window.

 

[JohnW2]

I have not seen any timetable to turn off the Radio 5 MW transmission or to remove the two masts and T antenna which I can see from my window.

Thanks. Nor have I seen any such timetable or proposal, which makes me wonder why they have apparently been so keen to bring the LW one to it's end - as I have often said, it presumably would have been both easy and 'cheap' for them to continue the service with 'modern kit' if they had sio wished!

 

[spile]

Thanks. Nor have I seen any such timetable or proposal, which makes me wonder why they have apparently been so keen to bring the LW one to it's end - as I have often said, it presumably would have been both easy and 'cheap' for them to continue the service with 'modern kit' if they had sio wished!

A combination of end of life, running cost, being unable to justify energy use for a severely declining number of listeners. It doesn’t add up. I would imagine the masts will go eventually.

 

[JohnW2]

A combination of end of life, running cost, being unable to justify energy use for a severely declining number of listeners. It doesn’t add up.

Yes, I imagine that their thinking must have been along such lines - but, as I've said, I wouldn't have thought that equipment replacement cost would be particularly significant - although (energy) running costs obviously would.

I would imagine the masts will go eventually.

Again, quite probably, particularly if the land was worth good money (and could get appropriate planning permission).

However, don't 'we' have a need to maintain an LF/VLF communications facility for global communication with submarines ( for which the running costs would presumably come at least partially out of the defence budget?).

 

[SUNRAY]

Yes, I imagine that their thinking must have been along such lines - but, as I've said, I wouldn't have thought that equipment replacement cost would be particularly significant - although (energy) running costs obviously would.

Again, quite probably, particularly if the land was worth good money (and could get appropriate planning permission).

However, don't 'we' have a need to maintain an LF/VLF communications facility for global communication with submarines ( for which the running costs would presumably come at least partially out of the defence budget?).

The BBC part of the site is relatively small

 

[JohnW2]

The BBC part of the site is relatively small

What's the rest?