How About a Little Standardization?
Dick Hayman (WN3R)
on
December 18, 2009
View comments about this article!
I just finished rebuilding my station and I'd like to suggest that manufacturers agree on some standard widths and heights for their accessory products.
May I suggest the following? The opening between 19" rails is just under 17.5". Let that be the maximum. Based on that maximum width, boxes that are 8.75" (2 will fit) and 5.75" (3 will fit) can be set between them or on top of an amp (e.g. Alpha 87a) easily without wasting any space. Standard heights as well will help with stacking small control boxes. Rotor controllers, SteppIR switch boxes, W2IHY, Ten Tec, Top Ten, MFJ, etc. boxes would look much better setting on your desktop.
Needless to say, doubling, say 5.75" for 11.5", would work as well. And so on.
Any other suggestions or recommendations?
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by QRZDXR2 on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
could we get a drawing or picture or something to go on... at first I was not sure what you were suggesting...and as to the width/height/depth most of the radios are all over the place.. so best way to compensate for that is to have the peg board pins and shelves that can be adjusted to fit.
While most hams can't take the time or have the ability to make a station desk/work area... others have excelled and posted some pretty fancy layouts.
I don't think you can group all radios into one size or sizes... amps sit on floor, amps sit on table top... antenna tuner goes somewhere around the amp.. probably...as that makes it the close'est to the flow of RF...
Venting is another issue. One needs to vent the power supply, radio, amp etc... while also trying to keep the power useage down. dust and dirt are two other items that one needs to consider. I knew a guy who had his ham shack in the laundry room ... where he could tap into the 220 volt power... notice I said he had... as when his wife did the laundry the lint from the elect dryer was going everywhere.. and inside the radio little cat balls of it started forming... grin...
So besides the fun-it-ture... one need to remember .. location location location... smile
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by AF6TI on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To simply just use the 19 inch rack standard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19-inch_rack
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KE5OFO on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
How about some standardization for plugs. Things like mics and acessories. I have noitced that most modern rigs all use the same plugs but the wiring is not the same. It would be nice in a pinch to be able to grab the Kenwood mic from my Elecraft and use it on my Icom if needed and vice versa. Plus power cords. Why should I be the one to have to put new PowerPoles on all my equipment?
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N2UGB on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember my Kenwood Hybrid line, the TS-520, Kenwood tuner, Kenwood VFO, Kenwood speaker were all the same height. Of course, not same depth or width. Looked good.
Now that accessories come from many sources. Problems arise.
My principal rig now is an FT-817ND. Finding accessories to it's height spec, sorta tuff.
73
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WN3R on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
19" rack info was very useful. Great find!!!!
73, Dick
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K8YZK on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Will never happen as radio manufactures are like car manufactures, they all want to be different.
I would like to see mic plugs setup the same even within the same manufacture., but you know what to me it is not a big deal.
KT
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K9MHZ on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think you'll have issues with depth in that case. My 7700 has 19" rack handles, but is also about 18" deep, so it stacks way out (or way back, depending on your desk) compared to the rest of the gear. They're cramming more and more stuff into these things, and they're becoming the SUVs of radio gear.
Brad
K9MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WY3X on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to admit- I'm more than a little peeved when I buy something that is "standard rack mount" and then I have to leave the door open on the back of my rack cabinet because whatever I just bought is too deep!
73, -KR4WM
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by W1ITT on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dick's comment has merit, but what's in it for the manufacturers? In broadcast stations, the 19 inch rack panel became a defacto standard because broadcasters generally wouldn't buy things that did not adhere. Hams are an unruly bunch who buy their toys without apparent interest in modular stacking. I'm not sure who would want a keyer in a rack, for instance. For that matter, I'm not sure we could get agreement in the ham community on any given standard. (Tally me with the 19" crowd.) Many hams need a "wife approved" look, and the Martha Stewart crowd just hasn't tumbled to the 19" rack concept.
While amateur radio is a very big part of many of our lives, it's small potatoes to the big name companies who mostly sell to government entities, while maintaining a line of ham gear because the president and a few of the engineers are hams. I doubt that we will succeed in "whipping them into shape."
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by NA4IT on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let's see:
"T" power connector for VHF/UHF rigs
BIG 6 pin power connector for HF rigs
8 pin round for mics
1/8" mono for external speakers
1/8" stereo for headphones
1/4" stereo for code keys
6 pin mini din for afsk/packet modes for ALL rigs
phono jack for amp keying
As for the rack mount specs, 1 rack width for HF rigs and big accessories, 1/2 width for VHF/UHF rigs and small accessories. Also, all 1/2 width equipment same height, so side by side they will be the same...
de NA4IT
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KC5MIB on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm going to echo ITT's comments. 19 inches wide is the defacto standard, but, not just for us broadcast types, but also for many computer racks and oh by the way it was also called the relay rack.
Yes Web, depth issues are a problem. If you can weasel a trip to the IT department at your local university you will find numerous racks and of varying depths. Go to the Middle Atlantic site, they make racks, rack gear and really neat rack based furniture (I'm finishing out my station with an acquired AV edit bay). You will note a few different depths or racks but all meeting the 19 inch standard width and the Rack Unit standard measurement for the screw mounting, 1 RU = 1.75 inches.
Cheers/73 de
John, MIB
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K6AER on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think trying to build everything into a rack size configuration is a waist of space. Some objects need vertical display room. Others need size considerations for power supply height and cooling efficiency. I have been a broadcast engineer for many years and many times having to rack something is a pain in the butt.
When you rack everything cooling begins at the front and exhaust out the rear. If you have ever been I a studio it is noisy where the equipment is. A minimum rack height of 1.75 inches can be very inefficient. Imagine a rotor display needed three rack heights for the display and the rest of the box is empty.
The easy way out of your stacking dilemma is to build a series of shelves with different heights. Now you can move individual pieces of equipment in and out with out effecting other arrangements.
I prefer my equipment on my operating desk and not on some stand up rack out of reach.
It is funny that some hams want their station to look like a studio broadcast center. What They don't realize is when studios rack equipment they rarely have to interface with the equipment. It sits off in another room making heat and blinking away.
Broadcast centers generally just have a few controls at the microphone and all else is in another room with a separate technician running the controls. Our hobby is unique that we have all the control at out fingertips.
As for connector standardization let the market decide. If a connector is wrong for the application the ham community won’t buy the unit. I would like all radios to use “N” connector but I’ll bet there is a lot of push back on that idea.
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KB1NXE on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Also, all cabinet screws must be countersunk. No more scratching adjacent cabinets...
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KG4RRN on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
1)That will never happen, there is too much gain (money) to be made on non-standardization of everything electric/electronic/Sony/Apple for examples.
If in doubt, look at 1):
People tried to standardize the USB plug in computers, now we have cell phone chargers charged in computers and have everything from wireless modes to printers using them.
Just make a ham radio with USB ports, we will handle the rest.Let's see... microphone USB, antenna USB, Power supply USB, and auxillary port UBS, CW keyer USB, sound card-packet USB, and speaker USB, oh and amplifier USB, I got them all !
73-
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by W9OY on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Rack panels? What a load
The last think I want to do is stick my radio stuff into a bunch of rack panels. My hamshack is in a small little room not some full sized basement or something
What I would like to see beside Mic standardization, is a standardization in band data I/O from the radio. From my perspective the Yaesu BCD data is the easiest to work with, and easiest to home brew from
73 W9OY
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Depends on what you like.
Check out mine. I like racks.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26113204@N06/3529272383/in/set-72157618028272561/
Philip
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N2EY on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The question is: How much more are you willing to pay for it?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'd rather see I-O connector standardization.
Manufacturers use a variety of microphone connectors and pinouts; accessory jack connectors and pinouts; etc.
Why not make all those the same so switching "rigs" is as easy as just unplugging cables from one and plugging the same cables into the next one?
Ten Tec (and a few other specific rigs) have it right that the major rear-panel I-O ports are all simple RCA phono jacks: Pretty universal, and when you buy the rig, they supply you with the cables you'll need to connect to the rig.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by OLLIEOXEN27 on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
When are manufacturers going to stop adding silly features that raise the prices of radios but don't improve performance? Until they can make a radio that sounds better than my Triton IV I have no use for any of their stuff.
oli
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K3DC on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let's see:
"T" power connector for VHF/UHF rigs
BIG 6 pin power connector for HF rigs
Why does it have to be a 6 pin connector for HF? Can the T not deliver enough current for barefoot rigs?
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K3DC on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ten Tec (and a few other specific rigs) have it right that the major rear-panel I-O ports are all simple RCA phono jacks: Pretty universal, and when you buy the rig, they supply you with the cables you'll need to connect to the rig.
One thing that would be nice is a rear panel set of "dry pair" contacts.
I cerated a box of 3 switches for my FT-450 for UP, DOWN, and FAST coming from the mic port and I programmed them to send CW messages. A set of 8,10, etc on the back would make it nice for hams to create their own switches and program each switch. In my 450 I can program the buttons to do many functions but if I add the C.S. button on the front I'm limited to a total of 4 custom switches.
k3dc
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Great intentioned idea................NEVER HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!
Gee, if they did agree on defacto standards, hams might makr their own rigs from say 2 broken rigs into one rig that serves them well.
DSP.SDR,and multi-stage unversal IF mixers, vco's and finals.
An excellent example is what one ham did to a Drake tr-7.
He added DSP, and all sorts of module kits that make the ole' TR-7 as good as a new $5000 radio.
Great for Ham consumers. Horrible for Ham Rig Manufacturers!!!!!
My dream Radio would be fussion of a TS-950SDX, a K3, TR-7A, all built mil spec and removable modules.
Be very interesting to see what standardS. NOT TO MENTION THE BEST HYBRID RADIO'S FROM ALL!
73 DE WA2JJH
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by AP2WF on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let me add the mounting brackets and screws specs to the wishlist.
Wasay
AP2WF
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by AD5KL on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Would be nice if you could buy a faceplate that would match your radio to a 19" rack, like the car stereos do for the various vehicles.
Or have a generic rack-mount metal enclosure (open at front & back) with a black plastic face that your could cut to fit as needed for your own gear. It would also allow you to have a side-by-side if you wanted to run 2 mobiles (or add a speaker) in one rack space for instance. You could use a Dremel or small hobby knife to make the custom cuts.
I've seen this done with wood but it would have a more professional appearance if done correctly with metal or plastic. Someone has probably already come up with this idea.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by G0GQK on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
They never have agreed, why should they suddenly start now ? Years ago they could never agree about the thread sizes in bolts, and if you really feel in the mood to be amazed you should look at the massive numbers of fasteners, screws, bolts etc. which are used in the aeronautical industry and years ago it was worse !
G0GQK
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by AC0GR on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Even if they could stick with some form of internal standardization within their own product lines...
IC-706 has the same footprint as the AT-180 tuner, so they stack very nicely. However the associated PS-125 power supply is taller than the 706, yet shorter than the stacked pair... nice. :/
|
| |
|
Racks
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Would be nice if you could buy a faceplate that would match your radio to a 19" rack, like the car stereos do for the various vehicles.
Or have a generic rack-mount metal enclosure (open at front & back) with a black plastic face that your could cut to fit as needed for your own gear. It would also allow you to have a side-by-side if you wanted to run 2 mobiles (or add a speaker) in one rack space for instance. You could use a Dremel or small hobby knife to make the custom cuts.
I've seen this done with wood but it would have a more professional appearance if done correctly with metal or plastic. Someone has probably already come up with this idea."
http://www.novexcomm.com
Thats how I mounted my radios. The guy has a good product.
Philip
KA4KOE
|
| |
|
Appearance?
|
|
|
by N2EY on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"it would have a more professional appearance"
But I don't *want* a "professional appearance". It's an amateur radio station - I want it to look like one!
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
| |
|
RE: Appearance?
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
... and if manufacturers agreed to "standardized" the size and shape of everything made from this point forward, what would I do with everything I already own which was manufactured from the past?
Guess that means I am still going to have to contend with the very same size and shape issues I started with in the shack long after everything becomes "standardized" anyways.
Also, would this proposed standardized system interfere with non standard equipment sizes such as a Swan amplifier, CDE rotor control box or even the "non conforming" size and shape of a BC 348Q?
If everything was the same standard size and shape in my shack, then how is it that such a Lego block radio kingdom will somehow appear to look more professional?
I'm not sure this idea would actually serve to solve anything because it would mess up my non standard home brew equipment activities.
..Oh and all this talk about "computerizing" amateur radio's with built in USB ports, Wifi cards, hardrives, printers and CD ROMS built into the latest Yaesu rig etc.. .um.. they already make those.
They call these devices "computers." These technological box like devices with TV screens attached have nothing to do with radio communication equipment. The two technologies do not coexist inside one another unless you live on a large cube like colony called the Borg... :)
|
| |
|
RE: Appearance?
|
|
|
by W7ETA on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just buy a C-line and you'll be all set, extra MS-4s to put you rotator controller into. then, if you can't put your Stepir control box into a MS-4 cabinet, don't buy one.
73
Bob
|
| |
|
19" rack mount
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on December 18, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm completely against standardizing on the 70 year-old RETMA/EIA 19" rack mount dimensions, they're silly for consumer electronics gear.
Hardly anything needs to conform to that standard.
And it's very, very old. RETMA developed the 19" rack equipment standard when it was the "Radio Electronics and Television Manufacturer's Association" (later absorbed into the Electronics Industry Association), and everything electronic was brand new and used tubes, big transformers, etc.
It's not like that anymore; the standard is fine for machine rooms but silly for consumers with home stations.
I could fit fifty of my Elecraft KX-1 transceivers on a 2U rack panel.
Smaller is better.
I'd be happy if manufacturers would just standardize on I-O connectivity, as that's very easy to do, costs nothing, and would make changing gear a lot easier.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KC2PNF on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
In the audio industry, the 19" rack is the absolute standard. If a company wants engineers to take their gear out on gigs or install it in studios they make it fit. Standard measurements are 19" to the edges of the mounting ears. Heights are expressed in Rack Units (RUs). 1RU = 1-5/8" 2RU = 3;5/8" etc. Just like the author suggested, items that are smaller than full width are usually configured so that two or three will nicely fill 1RU. Companies make rack shelves that you can drill holes in for mounting screws for those odd pieces that don't come with rack ears.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N6NKN on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Waste of time. Don't you know SDR is the future of ham radio??
Rick N6NKN
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>How About a Little Standardization? Reply
by KC2PNF on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend!
In the audio industry, the 19" rack is the absolute standard. If a company wants engineers to take their gear out on gigs or install it in studios they make it fit. Standard measurements are 19" to the edges of the mounting ears. Heights are expressed in Rack Units (RUs). 1RU = 1-5/8" 2RU = 3;5/8" etc.<
::That's a bit off. 1RU = 1.750" 2RU = 3.50" etc. Always has been, I have the standard in my hand, but anyone can download it.
The good thing about the standard is there's millions and millions of cabinets already made for it; including many shock-mounted frames in rolling racks with front and rear panels that are easily picked up by fork lifts or pallet jacks and also shippable if you just close the panels and lock them. So, it's not a bad standard for industrial use.
The bad thing about the standard is for many items, the 19" panel width and 17.775" interior clearance between the vertical mounting rails is way too big and just wastes a lot of space. I have rack mount routers that are 19" panel width and 1U high and have, say, 24 ports. That's great in a machine room, but it's silly for home when I can put the same 24 ports on a plastic box that sits on the desk and occupies far less space.
WB2WIK/6
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
SDR??
Did you even bother to check my photos? The HF portion of the shack is running LP-PAN and HRD. I only touch the TS940s to turn it on and tune it up the first time.
Face it, a LOT of people don't want to spend 2.5K on a new Flex 5000. I spent less than a grand and have 90% of the funtionality of a Flex 5000. I run the radio using PowerSDR-IF.
Philip
KA4KOE
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K3LL on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Standards are great!
There are so many to choose from.
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K7DZW on December 19, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Thanks for the great laugh. I am now back in my chair but my eyes are still filled with tears of laughter.GOD made whinners so the rest of us could grasp humility IMHO.Keep whineing and send those damn Alpha amps my way and I will work around the porblem and let you know when I get it all " Standardized ".:)
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by W0ELT on December 20, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
When possible, I like to have my equipment able to be mounted in 19 inch rack. I use some of the standard racks musicians use when doing concerts. This allows me to quickly re-arrange my station based on the activity or contest. Since I only use one brand of portable rack cases - everything stacks very easily. You can look at my rack mount equipment in QRZ - I just uploaded one more picture that has the quipment rack mounted.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N8QBY on December 20, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
by K6AER: " I think trying to build everything into a rack size configuration is a waist of space". Well, just keep your belly out of that space. :o)
|
| |
|
Whose Standards?
|
|
|
by N2EY on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm all for standards.
But whose standards do we apply?
The 19 inch rack standard is pretty good for home-station stuff if you have lots of room. But for mobile, portable, or the every-inch-counts small shack, it's a real space-waster.
It's easy to standardize on some connectors (like the SO-239) but the space problem affects a lot of others.
What's really driving all of it is that there's no industry committee driving amateur standards the way there is for other electronics. But do we really want such a committee, considering that it would make rigs bigger and more expensive?
I think not.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
| |
|
RE: Whose Standards?
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Philip(KOE) makes an excellent point. Many 1980-1990 radio's do have the best of both worlds at a fraction of a "personal computer rig"(FLEX_DREX)
Many radio's can be improved to meet todays standards. Some can be IMPROVED with ready to implant boards.
I have found some of the FREE WARE(try before you buy) with a minimal
computer, to do everything the $3000+ wonder rig do.
The NEW Yeasu FT-950 and FT-2000 really suck!!!!
Just my buck 380 of literary trash. A buck 380 is my 2 cents with inflation added. :) hi-hi
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K3YD on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Not saying that rack mounts won't work, but I haven't seen them adopted by the Amateur community. I've visited many stations over the years and can only recall two which used rack mount organization.
To me, portability and compact size are paramount; these objectives are generally at odds with rack-mount organization.
I would agree with WB2WIK and others who wish for standardization among connectors. It would be convenient, in a pinch to plug a Kenwood mike into an ICOM or Ten-Tec. Headphones, speakers, keyers, etc. have this kind of standardization. Computers get by with serial or USB ports. Why not microphones?
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little METRIC SYSTEM?
|
|
|
by WI7B on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dick,
Too funny!
Of course they are already standarized. We're the ones who aren't...
In the event, since the VAST MAJORITY of radios and their components are made in the 'rest-of-the-world', why don't you suggest that we US hams adopt the METRIC SYSTEM and stop measuring and labelling our racks, radios, cablesm etc. in INCHES.
Try centimeters and meters. We already do it with bands, lets do it with everything else, then we will be standardized.
73,
---* Ken
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N9NWO on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How about going to the XLR (either 3 or 4 pin) connector for mikes in base radios (RJ-45 in mobiles)? The 8 pin connector is a pain, especially since every manufacturer has their own way of connecting it.
Likewise lets get rid of the 1/4 inch mono/stero jacks and go to 3.5 mm jacks for headphones and keys. Most of the commerical audio is now with the 3.5 mm plug.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by VE6TL on December 21, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We need to go back to that great ham, Napoleon Bonaparte. He saw that the British had confused everything with their odd units based on the length of body parts (the foot, the distance from outstretched hand to the nose, etc.) and decided to use units that made sense. Everything could be calculated easily by multiplying or dividing by powers of 10. SI was born and is now used everywhere but in America. This is why we still need two sets of tools! The American manufacturers argued that they would lose their competitive advantage by going metric. But this hasn't stopped foreign manufacturers from building Toyotas and Hondas in the U.S.
Ironically, the Japanese have also figured out that keeping things non-standard helps to maintain market share, to a certain extent. For example, I am less likely to buy a new ICOM rig if all my gear is interfaced for Yaesu (or the other way around). The history of product development is littered with attempts at producing standards, with survival of the fittest being the end result. Other companies have taken advantage of the situation by building conversion kits, patches, adapters, etc. The bottom line is, it's nice to dream but it will never happen. Napoleon was an optimist!
Jerry VE6CNU
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by W6RMK on December 22, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
if you want custom panels (in metal) to put your radio into a 19" rack, then go to http://www.frontpanelexpress.com/, draw what you need, and have them machine it for $50-70..
As for using mini 1/8" plugs instead of 1/4"... Nope.. they're not very rugged, there are entirely too many "designed for low cost" flavors of the basic jacks out there. It's the single most annoying thing about the original Flex Radio SDR1000. 1/4" phone jacks can take a beating and are just more rugged. If you want something smaller, then modular is probably good, or even mini-Din (although not if you mate/demate lots of times)
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KC8RWR on December 22, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W1ITT: "Many hams need a "wife approved" look, and the Martha Stewart crowd just hasn't tumbled to the 19" rack concept. "
Are you kidding? All the wires go in the back. (preferably tied up, in a tray or otherwise organized) There's a door to close over the front and the radios disappear when not in use. Ok, that may not be an improvement for us but often those less refined non-ham types seem to have an aversion for the site of anything with buttons or knobs. I think it's like a bullfighters red scarf to a bull.
Of course, if you have a scratched up old rack which was painted blue some time in the 70s you might want to consider a bit of paint first. Some of the newer ones look almost good enough for a living room, at least if money trees are native to your back yard. I suppose if you are Mr. Stewart yourself you could resort to a couple of rack rails mounted inside an old armoire.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WA1UFO on December 23, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I cannot imagine a world in which all women were blondes or brunettes etc! The same applies to the beautiful world of ham radio. Variety is the spice of life; anything else is BORING! 73s de Hans
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K9MHZ on December 24, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To rack or not to rack....it's all good either way.
Rack mounted my LINUX server, switch, WAP, etc. There is NO economizing of space in that world...but it's very cool. The blinking LEDs alone are enough to make you look smarter to anyone visiting your shack/computer room. When they ask you about it, just rattle off a bunch of acronyms. If you don't know any, just make a few up.....has the same effect; they'll think you're speaking in tongues.
Brad
K9MHZ
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 25, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The blinking LEDs alone are enough to make you look smarter to anyone visiting your shack/computer room.
When they ask you about it, just rattle off a bunch of acronyms.
--------
This video should help explain things:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD1LHejil6M
:)
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by K9MHZ on December 26, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Oh man, that's excellent. Rack mounted, too!
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by AI4WM on December 26, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree on standard box sizes.
Spending most of my radio career in commercial radio I have grown to like full/half/third etc rack width sizing as well as standard rack height spacing. Even pro audio people generally stick to rack sizing.
Standard rack sizing makes mounting and arranging things so much easier and nicer even for those who do not have or use a rack.
Maybe someday ham radio equipment makers will standardize like that.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N8CMQ on December 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We have the same problem in avionics.
The nice thing about standards, there are so many to choose from!
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WA3SKN on December 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Standards?
Well, I have seen "standard" 19 inch, 23 inch, 24 inch, 25 inch, and 30 inch racks!
And as for a standard, we have one... It's called "the metric system"!
Really, the best you could hope for in the USA is something that will fit in a 19 inch rack, our defacto standard. And please plan on ventilation around the eqpt. Remember... Power=Heat!
73s.
-Mike.
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by N0NB on December 28, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Just equipping all transceivers with Anderson Powerpoles would be a great start.
|
| |
|
How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by KA2DDX on December 29, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I like your thoughts about standardization - allow me to play devil's advocate for a minute, however.
Let's say all ham radio manufacturers built their radios to a spec that included a list of 50 items. e.g. same finals, same mic jack, same number of knobs, menu items, etc...........
So basically, they would be all selling the same thing with a different name on it. This type of thing usually triggers a price war which eventually means profits nosedive, someone goes out of business and/or quality suffers greatly.
Look at the PC price competition in the 90's and the past decade. They all (most all) use Intel processors, Microsoft operating system, same size cd or dvd drives, keyboards, mouse, etc. all connect the same way, all have usb ports, lcd monitors, etc...........
Used to be resellers could sell a PC and make a nice profit. Now, they sell a PC and just barely recover costs. Has quality suffered? That's debateable, but the number of choices has greatly diminished.
So, is that what we want? Good arguments exist for pro and con.
Larry - KA2DDX
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WN3R on January 1, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
From the responses it looks like most of you taking the time to participate missed or forgot my first sentence. It's the little accessory boxes that are difficult to line up nicely on the desk and shelves. I have no problem with the bigger gear. I wish I had never mentioned the 19" rack standard as it misled so many of you. Obviously, positive responses are more helpful and interesting. Thanks and Happy New Year.
|
| |
|
RE: How About a Little Standardization?
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on January 12, 2010
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How about a standard compiler and/or launguage codes for all the new SDR RADIO'S.
sTANDARD IF freqs and USB audio for example.
How about modules that are 100% swappable. Your 100W PA brick fails.....buy one used.
ALC for HPA's and legal limit amps should be a standard for voltage vs freq responce.
ALL mic connectors will be USB. Any Plug in...USB.
Have common points to check voltages. A 5Kc roofing filter for all rigs.
3W minimum into a 4 ohm load for all speaker outputs.
A Gen/Ham switchable front end. Hit one switch, bandpass filters with varactor diode tweaking.
I think most hams would rather have their rig optimsed
for hambands. When did you use your rig for premium SWLing.
No mic gain control or RF gain control. Military and commercial rigs do not have either.
A Universal theft code/beacon/GPS. If you do not punch in your code once a weak, the RX says.....reward for return. Every 10 minutes it TX's....Your callsign on the stolen radio. All companies stick with way of doing this!
To conserve, the TX power is varied by last RX. Can be turned off for bad qsb.
How about the rig makers find out what type of nise needs to be blanked by most?
Just my 2 cents de WA2JJH
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other Recent Articles
VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:
rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:
Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
|
