| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.07.00 01:57l 226 Lines 7291 Bytes #-9303 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_200C
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/200C
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8PWD<PI8CDR<PI8AWT<
PI8JYL<PI8WFL<PI8WFL<PI8HGL
Sent: 000725/1658 @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:64451 $:HD_2000_200C
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 00 17:08:47 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_200C>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
profit, etc. However, any ham should be able to build his own.
73
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:12:43 -0400
From: "Bob Lewis" <rlewis@staffnet.com>
Subject: RigBlaster
> There is another maker of these PSK31 interefaces that is
> cheaper though has less functionality.
>
> http://www.sanduskyohio.com/LECTROKIT/misc.htm
>
This one is ideal for those who want to use low level constant outputs
from the Icom accessory connector. It has an op-amp in the receive
line to provide some gain. I use a very similar circuit between my
IC761 and PTC-II.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:00:46 -0400
From: "Rob" <Pse@NoEmail.Com>
Subject: RigBlaster
Yes, RIGBLASTER uses one opto-isolator on the RS232 line to key the rig's
PTT line. Not a big deal at all.
Instead of using a transistor, you use a opto-isolator to key the PTT line.
The circuit is simply a 4N33 opto-isolator, one or two diodes, and one
resistor. It provides better isolation and costs only a dollar or so more
than the transistor keying circuit. See www.qsl.net/wm2u for a simple
circuit.
BUT RigblASTER does NOT use any opto-isolators on the audio lines between
the sound card and rig. I think you will find that RigBlaster simply uses
audio isolation transformers. Audio isolation transformers will work fine
but do not provide the same level of isolation and protection as
opto-isolators. For the price of a RigBlaster, you would have thought that
opto-isolators would have been used throughout. It would not have cost much
more.
73's
Rob
"Dick Hughes" <dhughes33@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:i9fnns88blnq65n0koac5nggkgr2on1uq5@4ax.com...
> The RigBlaster does use a single 4N33 optoisolator in the RS232 DTR
> line.
>
> Dick Hughes - W6CCD
>
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 18:33:17 -0400, "Rob" <Pse@NoEmail.Com> wrote:
>
> >Others have already published many interfaces on the web.
> >
> >See the following:
> >
> >http://www.qsl.net/wm2u/interface.html
> >http://www.w5bbr.com/soundbd.html
>
> >
> >If you really want to isolation you can use opto isolators also on the
audio
> >lines. I don't think RIGBLASTER does this. But such a circuit can
easily
> >be made. G3VFP has recently made such a circuit.
> >
> >73's
> >Rob
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:13:29 -0400
From: "Rob" <Pse@NoEmail.Com>
Subject: RigBlaster
Dick,
I think you will find that RigBlaster does NOT use a power transformer to
power the 4N33 opto-isolator. The transformers in RigBlaster are more
likely audio isolation transformers used to break up any ground loops on the
audio lines to and from the sound card.
It is my understanding that RIGBLASTER only uses one opto-isolator for the
PTT keying circuit. Instead of a transistor, an opto-isolator is used.
Most opto-isolator PTT keying circuits consist of one opto-isolator, one or
two diodes and one resistor. Not very complicated at all. For an example
of such a circuit, see www.qsl.net/wm2u
Personally, I would have liked to have seen opto-isolators used NOT ONLY on
the PTT keying line BUT ALSO on BOTH of the audio lines to and from the
sound card. It would have not cost much more.
73's
Rob
"Dick Hughes" <dhughes33@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:o6tmns0m0mdatt29k7jmg6m6d36dbcvd02@4ax.com...
> I have to disagree regarding the RigBlaster and MFJ TNC switch box
> being similar in complexity. I have both units. The MFJ is nothing
> more than a box with one switch, some jumpers, 4 capacitors and some
> connectors. The RigBlaster is far more complex, having one active
> component (4N33) requiring a power transformer, 2 relays, 2
> transformers, 10 resistors, 1 potentiometer, 2 switches, 12 diodes, 9
> capacitors plus jumpers and connectors. The construction on the
> RigBlaster is also superior to the MFJ. Just based on a comparison
> with the selling price of the MFJ, I would say the RigBlaster is worth
> at least twice, and maybe three times the MFJ. Both units work well
> for their intended purpose, but you really cannot compare them.
>
> Dick Hughes - W6CCD
>
>
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 15:29:35 -0400, "Rob" <Pse@NoEmail.Com> wrote:
>
> >Steve,
> >
> >Hmm.... Let's try to compare apples with apples..
> >
> >MFJ has been selling for years a packet TNC/Radio switch box for $39.95
US.
> >This switch box also has a nice silk screened circuit board with jumpers
etc
> >in a nice metal box.
> >
> >The RIGBLASTER unit is similar. RIGBLASTER is essentially a TNC switch
with
> >a few extra parts to interface the PC to the rig. None of these extra
parts
> >are very expensive. I would expect that the cost to build both units to
be
> >around the same give or take a few dollars.
> >
> >Both units are also advertised extensively.
> >
> >I highly doubt that these MFJ switches outsell the RIGBLASTER interfaces.
> >It is more likely the other way around!
> >
> >Considering the selling price of the MFJ packet switch sold in the same
> >market, I think a reasonable price for a RIGBLASTER unit would be between
> >$40 and $50 US, if not lower. But when there is lack of any real
> >competition, you can charge almost any price. Isn't that part of the
> >American dream?
> >
> >Now, what do you think?? Is RigBlaster too expensive??
> >
> >73's
> >
> >Rob
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:02:25 +1000
From: "William Gourlay" <cynicus@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: RigBlaster
Steve Sampson wrote in message......
> "Hamish Moffatt VK3SB" wrote
> What most Monarchists don't understand about Americans, is they
> *like* to spend money. Money to most Americans is like a full bladder.
> That's why everything is big (BIG!). Our parking lots at Wal-Mart are
> larger than most cities of the World.
He ain't a Monarchist! ...very big :-)
> We drive cars (we used to call them trucks) that are big (BIG!) and
> our horns make real big (BIG!) sounds (none of that wimpy Queen
> sound from the British colonies).
Are you saying something nasty about our Bathurst Group A cars?
.... :-)
> P.S. $80 is chump change. We spend that much on gas and burgers.
What, is your name Dennis Leary? ;-)
Cheers, Cynicus.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:55:57 -0400
From: "Bob Lewis" <rlewis@staffnet.com>
Subject: RigBlaster
> I think you will find that RigBlaster does NOT use a power
> transformer to power the 4N33 opto-isolator.
It does require an external 12 VDC power source to operate the
opto-isolator and the relays though. They provide a wall wart.
> The transformers in RigBlaster are more likely audio isolation
> transformers used to break up any ground loops on the
> audio lines to and from the sound card.
RigBlaster handles ONLY the PTT and Tx audio lines. Receive audio does
not pass thru the RigBlaster. Transmit audio does pass through an
isolation transformer.
> Personally, I would have liked to have seen opto-isolators used
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_200D
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
