Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Historical question  (Read 443 times)
WB6LNH
Member

Posts: 67




Ignore
« on: June 13, 2005, 03:05:32 PM »

A while back I was up late one night and listening on 20 meters and had the tv on in the shack.  A old Robert Taylor movie was on, it was about Col Tibbets and his story about the bombing mission over Hiroshima.   My question is this: is there a historical record of any EMP that happened at either the first tactical use of the bomb or of the previous test in New mexico.  No solid state devices in use then to get neutralized, so wonder if anyone has ever read anything about this?
73's Rick/WB6LNH
Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20599




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2005, 08:58:11 AM »

What a great question!

I think probably "no," but that's a guess.

Let us know if you get any good answers...
Logged
K7UNZ
Member

Posts: 691




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2005, 09:48:26 AM »

Hi Rick!

Don't believe there was much interest in EMP at the time, mainly 'cos we were still living in tube technology.  

There was a really interesting article in QST in the late 80's on this subject.  I wish I could be more specific, but I no longer have it on hand to refer you to.  If you're an ARRL member, you can look thru the back issues on their web site.

The bottom line was that tube gear could, for the most part, survive EMP while it was disasterous to solid state equipment.  This is a simplification of the article, but interesting never-the-less.  Seemed that tubes, even when subjected to EMP overload, could "refresh" themselves rather quickly.

I kinda always figured maybe that was the reason my old Drake gear still "hears" better in the high noise and static crashes of 80 meters (hi)!

73, Jim/k7unz

Logged
WB2WIK
Member

Posts: 20599




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2005, 10:04:40 AM »

>RE: Historical question  Reply  
by K7UNZ on June 14, 2005  Mail this to a friend!  
I kinda always figured maybe that was the reason my old Drake gear still "hears" better in the high noise and static crashes of 80 meters (hi)!<

No, that's not why  :-)

The old Drake receivers (like the R-4, R-4A, R-4B, R-4C) had a lot of high frequency rolloff in their audio chain, restricting high frequency response even when a "wide" IF filter was used.  That reduces the annoying effect of static crashes, which consist largely of higher frequency noise.

WB2WIK/6
 
Logged
K7UNZ
Member

Posts: 691




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2005, 09:20:05 PM »

Well darn, you burst my bubble.....hi!

Actually, I really don't know why they hear better (both R-4B and R-4C), but they sure do!  Not like the static disappears mind you, but a definate improvement compared to my "newer" stuff.  In fact, I used to keep my R-4C plugged into my FT-990 as an outboard RX just for that reason.  Now I just drag one of the sets of "twins" out of the closet in winter, and just use it for 80/40 meters.

Jim/k7unz


Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!