eHam
eHam Forums => Boat Anchors => Topic started by: KE0ZU on March 27, 2021, 08:13:57 PM
-
I'm interested to see how many are still being used today.
-
I'm interested to see how many are still being used today.
There weren't that many made, so the number still in service will be pretty low. Like Hallicrafters SR-2000s.
A part of the "wattmeter war" of the 1960s-70s.
-
I had two for awhile that came from that 1992 IRS auction. Fantastic audio on AM and SSB.
A wattmeter war is more misinformation from you. The industry was trying to shrink the footprint of high power stations which had left many eager hams out of the picture due to no room for a big rack and the increasingly high cost of separates such as the S Line and 30S1.
Collins led the way in 1955 with the KWS-1/75A4 and then the Cosmophone 1000 offered 1000W input in one box (not a true transceiver) but sold very few. But the stampede was on with the NCX-1000 1000W input in 68-69 being one of the last. It seems that even 1000W input in a desktop transceiver was not to be in a ham TX/RX package, actual transceiver or not. The SR-2000 had an external PS which omits it for this discussion and was also nit a big seller
The future appears open for an attempt at a 1000-1500W output ham transceiver in one box. The R&S XK2900L does 1000W with a small external stackable PS from 1.5 kHz to 30 Mhz but I shudder at the price.....havent asked!
Carl
-
I have S/N 007 still running over here in Oregon
Greg
-
Thanks all, for your responses. Mine is #209 previously owned by W7CPA.
I put in a power on B+ timer, and a P.A. Screen current limiter/cutout.
I've killed a couple of 8122s over the years and they are getting too expensive to simply rely on what seems to be progressively worsening operator performance. :)
-
Use a 8072 which can be found a lot cheaper and make a heat sink to slide over the top
-
As information:
The Cosmophone 35 and 1000 were true transceivers. In fact they had what would today be called "dual VFOs" and could operate transceive on either VFO or split, by means of a simple selector that determined which "VFO" controlled receive and which controlled transmit.
In reality, there was only one VFO - but it had two tuned circuits, selected by a small relay inside the VFO box.
What makes a radio a "transceiver" in the modern sense isn't whether it has everything in one box.
What makes a radio a "transceiver" in the modern sense is whether it is an integrated system that permits the receiver and transmitter frequencies to be on the same frequency without having to adjust separate frequency controls.
Having an external power supply does not mean a radio isn't a transceiver - if that were the case, very few of the HF transceivers made for the amateur radio market would meet the requirement. Almost all of them (including the National NCX-3, NCX-5, 200, the various Hallicrafters, the Heathkit SB/HW lines, the Drake TR series, and many many others) had external power supplies - yet they're all transceivers.
The "wattmeter wars" of the 1960s were a real thing. Early amateur HF transceivers were what today would be called "100 watt" rigs, usually using a pair of 6146s or horizontal deflection amplifier tubes (aka "sweep tubes") to provide about 100 watts CW output and SSB PEP output. Some provided a little more. That power level was more than enough to drive a grounded-grid linear amplifier to the legal limit.
Some manufacturers decided to go a step further, however. Swan had their popular 350 and 500 transceivers, Hallicrafters had the SR-400 and SR-2000, Drake had the TR-3 and TR-4, Yaesu with the FT-DX400 and 560, and of course National. Even Signal One got into the game a bit. All ran more power than the usual pair-of-6146s "100 watts" - some a little more, some a lot more.
There isn't a clear "winner", though.
The Hallicrafters SR-2000 could run the old US legal limit on SSB (2000 watts PEP input) but on CW was limited to 900 watts DC input despite having a pair of 8122s in the final amplifier.
The National NCX-1000 could run the old US legal limit on CW (1000 watts DC input) but on SSB was limited to 1000 watts PEP input to its single 8122 in the final amplifier.
The advantages were obvious - fewer adjustments during tuneup, smaller overall size, hopefully less overall cost. But there were disadvantages too. Besides the generally larger size and weight (the NCX-1000 weighs 60 pounds), the power requirements tended to rule out mobile and portable operation compared to "100 watt" rigs.
All of this is easily verified by looking at the rigs, their manuals, and the dates of production.
-
The advantages were obvious - fewer adjustments during tuneup, smaller overall size, hopefully less overall cost. But there were disadvantages too. Besides the generally larger size and weight (the NCX-1000 weighs 60 pounds), the power requirements tended to rule out mobile and portable operation compared to "100 watt" rigs.
Yeah sure, another boo boo by Jimmy who is batting zero lately. That is a Hallicrafters SX-42 with a front panel that will fit into a standard 19" relay rack. Many, many other receivers used the same size.
Weee, my first photo post on Eham!
(https://i.postimg.cc/5099FhX5/NCX-1000-and-SX-42.jpg)
-
Plus the NCX-1000 is a complete transceiver with the PS built in and still at only 60 lbs; the SX-42 weighs more !!
-
Thanks all, for your responses. Mine is #209 previously owned by W7CPA.
Then you're probably well aware of his website - in particular this:
http://www.arizona-am.net/PHOENIX/W7CPA/National-Restoration.html#NCX-1000_Restoration
It is interesting that he describes the NCX-1000 as "a prototype that slipped into production status before it was ready. "
I put in a power on B+ timer, and a P.A. Screen current limiter/cutout.
I've killed a couple of 8122s over the years and they are getting too expensive to simply rely on what seems to be progressively worsening operator performance. :)
It is interesting that the NCL-2000 has a B+ timer to enforce the required warm-up time, but the NCX-1000 doesn't.
Interesting rig. Note that the mechanical dial calibration is only 5 kHz while the competition (even Heathkit!) offered 1 kHz, and that CW sidetone and a crystal calibrator were extra-cost options. And of course no sharp filter for CW.
Too bad it was on the market for such a short time.
-
The future appears open for an attempt at a 1000-1500W output ham transceiver in one box. The R&S XK2900L does 1000W with a small external stackable PS from 1.5 kHz to 30 Mhz but I shudder at the price.....havent asked!
Carl
I find a "kW in a box" solid-state radio for the amateur market somewhat unlikely.
The cooling problem is quite real, and this is one of the main reasons for the packaging size and cost of the professional gear.
An R&S XK2900L is in the region of $200k each, somewhat depending of what is considered to form part of the transceiver.
The Marconi/SELEX/Leonardo, today somewhat dated, 400 W HF2000-family radio costs about $60k.
-
Even if you set aside the technical issues, the market filters would reduce the served market to a size that position it as a boutique radio.
- Glenn W9IQ
-
It is interesting that he describes the NCX-1000 as "a prototype that slipped into production status before it was ready. "
It wasnt the first ham product that did that and it wont be the last. AND as you have been TOLD in the past National Company was in serious financial trouble due to its parent company trying to cheat in a military contract and lost its ability to bid on future contracts.
OTOH National Radio Company was profitable right to the end but all its profits went to the parent.
Maybe Jimmy, you will grow up some day and quit bashing National as a personal vendetta as a pure TROLL. You really are a bore and each post just helps your popularity score to decrease even more.
-
Thanks again, to all for your comments.
Opinion, speculation, design/feature deficiencies and corporate environment aside, the radio simply is what it is, a somewhat rare, unique, and interesting design, that works sufficiently well to be enjoyable as is.
It's nice to see there are a fair number of examples still in use today. It would be interesting to know how many there actually are, but I doubt that'll ever be known.
-
A very nice and well thought out reply Mike, thanks.
Carl
-
Thanks again, to all for your comments.
You're welcome!
Opinion, speculation, design/feature deficiencies and corporate environment aside, the radio simply is what it is, a somewhat rare, unique, and interesting design, that works sufficiently well to be enjoyable as is.
It's nice to see there are a fair number of examples still in use today. It would be interesting to know how many there actually are, but I doubt that'll ever be known.
I agree 100%.
That said, I think it's important to point out various design/feature deficiencies, as well as the historical context of any old radio, for a number of reasons:
1) Some of the deficiencies, such as the lack of warmup-time protection, can be rather easily fixed with no-holes mods. Others may require a bit more work but are often worth doing for various reasons. (And some mods are a Bad Idea from the get-go!)
2) It is good to know of such issues BEFORE deciding to invest a lot of resources into buying/restoring an old radio. In the case of the NCX-1000, for example, if someone wants a lot of power for SSB operations in a one-box vintage pre-WARC HF transceiver, it's a good choice. For serious CW operation - not so much.
3) Historical context is valuable - particularly accurate historical context. The closest competition to the NCX-1000 was probably the Hallicrafters SR-2000, which has its own pros and cons. Making such comparisons is part of our history, not an "insult" to anyone or anything.
IMHO
----
It's interesting that there are some folks who consider ANY comment on a particular rig's shortcomings to be a personal attack and insult, even though the comment is 100% accurate. It's as if the rigs of the past are sacred icons that must NEVER be spoken of in ANY way that is negative in the least. Anyone who DARES is attacked for....BLASPHEMY!
Why that is, I don't know. Makes no sense at all.
73 de Jim, N2EY
-
It's interesting that there are some folks who consider ANY comment on a particular rig's shortcomings to be a personal attack and insult, even though the comment is 100% accurate. It's as if the rigs of the past are sacred icons that must NEVER be spoken of in ANY way that is negative in the least. Anyone who DARES is attacked for....BLASPHEMY!
They are called fan boys - not pretty.
Of course there is also the opposite - folks who cannot allow nice things to be said about a product.
-
It's interesting that there are some folks who consider ANY comment on a particular rig's shortcomings to be a personal attack and insult, even though the comment is 100% accurate. It's as if the rigs of the past are sacred icons that must NEVER be spoken of in ANY way that is negative in the least. Anyone who DARES is attacked for....BLASPHEMY!
They are called fan boys - not pretty.
Of course there is also the opposite - folks who cannot allow nice things to be said about a product.
Good observation! I can think of a certain company with wide product line. It has a three-letter name.....
73 de Jim, N2EY
-
Of course there is also the opposite - folks who cannot allow nice things to be said about a product.
Good observation Mike and those will troll repeatedly and condemn the products from that company they dont like and/or attack the poster....and have zero experience with them.
Strictly keyboard self claimed experts...not
Carl
-
Some of the deficiencies, such as the lack of warmup-time protection, can be rather easily fixed with no-holes mods. Others may require a bit more work but are often worth doing for various reasons.
It is far from a design deficiency as the warm up requirement is clearly mentioned in at least 3 places in the manual. Have you even bothered to read it?? If it was so important why was a mod not published by an owner?
Also note that I have stated several times that any reply I wrote to a customer as Service Manager had to be approved by the Sales Manager/later VP of Sales who was totally against anything negative about the company and was responsible for all of the BS including what I was "forced" to write. Thankfully he was canned for other reasons.
Maybe owners back then were better at reading the manual. BUT a new owner today may skip that step and cause short tube life. Companies back then werent planning on 50+ years service life and their products becoming collector prizes and fully functional and enjoyable to use either here in 2021.
And more negative hits from you:
Interesting rig. Note that the mechanical dial calibration is only 5 kHz while the competition (even Heathkit!) offered 1 kHz, and that CW sidetone and a crystal calibrator were extra-cost options. And of course no sharp filter for CW.
At least the VFO was consistent on all bands. Only radios with a PTO/LMO/etc offered a 1 kHz readout and those were very few in 1967 when the engineering started and National was putting very little money into product development.
That said, I think it's important to point out various design/feature deficiencies, as well as the historical context of any old radio, for a number of reasons:
Historical context is valuable - particularly accurate historical context. The closest competition to the NCX-1000 was probably the Hallicrafters SR-2000, which has its own pros and cons. Making such comparisons is part of our history, not an "insult" to anyone or anything.
It's interesting that there are some folks who consider ANY comment on a particular rig's shortcomings to be a personal attack and insult, even though the comment is 100% accurate. It's as if the rigs of the past are sacred icons that must NEVER be spoken of in ANY way that is negative in the least. Anyone who DARES is attacked for....BLASPHEMY!
Unfortunately 100% accuracy is few and far between when it comes from those without hands on knowledge of a product, and especially of one very complicated.
Unfortunately also is someone who considers any attempt to offer a statement, question, opinion, or disagreement is accused of a personal attack or insult....over and over and is unable to ever admit being wrong.
With any other brand those who are considered experts on those products actually own them, restore them, post repair/alignment details on them, and even have a web page dedicated to it and help others as a mentor. You do nothing but complain about National since I worked there and you have been hateful for decades since.
You dont own a National anything, offer absolutely zero help to others trying to service them, BUT you are always ready to complain non stop when National or myself pop up on your troll alert. And its not just on eHam.
Unfortunately eHam lets you get away with it over and over.
Why that is, I don't know. Makes no sense at all.
That is a stretch even for you. One word describes you.....vindictive.....since I challenged you decades ago. Talk about a vendetta from one who is unable to stop.
Carl
National Radio 1963-69
Service Tech, Service Manager, Senior Engineering Aide
Member Of HRO-500, NCL-2000, NCX-1000 Design Teams
Still servicing most all models from the 30's
-
Working on one, #37. Just about good, couple more items. RX sounds good. Full output. Delicate transformers. Heavy :D
Tim
Ki6NQT
Suisun City
-
Tim, you are now appointed as the NCX-1000 expert! Start a web page that is open for comments and it will most likely save others from the scrap pile.
Carl
-
Hi Carl, thanks but I'm no expert :D. Just love to have fun with these radios of history plus I don't have to worry about having to pull out an manual just to operate after a 2 week vacation!
A web site for the NCX-1000 would be a great idea for a retirement project in a couple of months!
Take care all,
Tim
-
Working on one, #37. Just about good, couple more items. RX sounds good. Full output. Delicate transformers. Heavy :D
Tim
Ki6NQT
Suisun City
I might have a couple of transformers, NOS populated PS boards (need new caps by now), plus 8122 sockets, also proper for the 8072, 8873, 8874, 8875, and 3CX800A7.
Carl
-
I have two of them. Also numerous NCX-5 and NCX-3 plus NCL-2000
-
I'd like to add S/N 46 to the list of fully operational NCX-1000s. Checked into the 20M Vintage Sideband Net this past Sunday.
My set was bought inoperable but complete. Required reworking the vfo coil that had somehow gotten itself broken in transit, along with replacement of all electrolytics and most every 1/4 carbon resistor. So many of those resistors (and those boards have bunches of them) had drifted way high in value that they all had to go. A low drive problem turned out to be a bad 0.05uf bypass disc in the 2nd TX amplifier stage. Rx is sensitive, quiet and the AVC is just right for me. The vfo is remarkably stable after just a few minutes of warm up. Tx audio reports all excellent via an Electrovoice 619 mic.
This turned out to be a very challenging restoration (off and on during the covid experience) but it now looks great sitting next to the NCX-5/NCL-2000 combo. There were a number of engineering changes apparently made as the first manual I sourced lacked an added emitter follower in the TX path, among others. I have just one problem remaining and that's a receiver image only on 20M...can weakly hear some CW from the bottom end of the band folded in the sideband portion. Will tackle it eventually but can live with it for now.
For its time, it was an interesting hybrid design with just a tube driver and 8122 final. As a phone guy, a VOX option would have been handy.
73 Nick K5EF
-
Thanks again, to all for your comments.
You're welcome!
Opinion, speculation, design/feature deficiencies and corporate environment aside, the radio simply is what it is, a somewhat rare, unique, and interesting design, that works sufficiently well to be enjoyable as is.
It's nice to see there are a fair number of examples still in use today. It would be interesting to know how many there actually are, but I doubt that'll ever be known.
I agree 100%.
That said, I think it's important to point out various design/feature deficiencies, as well as the historical context of any old radio, for a number of reasons:
1) Some of the deficiencies, such as the lack of warmup-time protection, can be rather easily fixed with no-holes mods. Others may require a bit more work but are often worth doing for various reasons. (And some mods are a Bad Idea from the get-go!)
2) It is good to know of such issues BEFORE deciding to invest a lot of resources into buying/restoring an old radio. In the case of the NCX-1000, for example, if someone wants a lot of power for SSB operations in a one-box vintage pre-WARC HF transceiver, it's a good choice. For serious CW operation - not so much.
3) Historical context is valuable - particularly accurate historical context. The closest competition to the NCX-1000 was probably the Hallicrafters SR-2000, which has its own pros and cons. Making such comparisons is part of our history, not an "insult" to anyone or anything.
IMHO
----
It's interesting that there are some folks who consider ANY comment on a particular rig's shortcomings to be a personal attack and insult, even though the comment is 100% accurate. It's as if the rigs of the past are sacred icons that must NEVER be spoken of in ANY way that is negative in the least. Anyone who DARES is attacked for....BLASPHEMY!
Why that is, I don't know. Makes no sense at all.
73 de Jim, N2EY