The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Henry Kolesnik"
Subject: MFJ v Autek v Palomar v HB R-X NB ??
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:48:55 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
I'm in the process of retiring (modest budget) and hoping to do some HF and
VLF antenna work. I have a Palomar R-X noise bridge that has served me
reasonably well but it doesn't go below 1 mHz. I've used a borrowed MFJ 259
and Autek RF-1 but not enough experience to make a decision other than they
sure are convenient. I've reviewed the Dec. 87 QST article on a Lab-Style
RX noise bridge as well as the Aug. 89 QST on Improving R-X noise bridges by
using a binocular ferrite core for the transformer, the "heart" of the noise
bridge. I'm looking for intelligent opinions on what I should consider for
my last or next to last antenna bridge. Right now I'm sort of leaning to
building the Lab-Style in Dec 87 QST substituting the binocular ferrite core
but I'm not sure what it'll take to get the instrument down to VLF and maybe
LF, maybe two instruments or a band switch.. Have there been any articles
elsewhere that I should find and read? Are there commercial instruments
perhaps by HP or others that might be on the used market and should be
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup