A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Jim Weir - Radio Receive Current



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 14th 06, 07:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jim Weir - Radio Receive Current


"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...

The Escort 2 I replaced it with is rated just 0.5 amps during receive, and
the
ICOM IC-A5 that replaced *that* runs for hours on a set of AA batteries.
Were
those first-generation solid-state radios really that inefficient?


yes. back then no one thought about power efficiency.


  #2  
Old June 14th 06, 07:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jim Weir - Radio Receive Current


"Tater Schuld" schreef in bericht
...

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...

The Escort 2 I replaced it with is rated just 0.5 amps during receive,
and the
ICOM IC-A5 that replaced *that* runs for hours on a set of AA batteries.
Were
those first-generation solid-state radios really that inefficient?


yes. back then no one thought about power efficiency.


It is true that power-efficiency wasn't a prime design factor
before the 90's or so. Even so, it would really take a lot of
bad sense to design a solid state nav TX drawing 2 amps
(that means 25 watts!) in rx standby or even active mode.
So, unhindered by much factual knowledge, I tend to agree
with O/P, somethings's wrong somewhere.

Humbly from continental Europe,
Karel.


  #3  
Old June 15th 06, 07:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jim Weir - Radio Receive Current


those first-generation solid-state radios really that inefficient?



Around 1978, I was given the job of modifying a Motorola Land Mobile (FM
~150MHz) repeater for use on a mountaintop repeater site where we were
installing solar power. The idea was to see how much current we could save
with simple modifications.

I found that when you turned the speaker off with the little plastic slide
switch provided, it actually SHORTED the output of the audio transformer.
Shut the thing up - sure did! So 90% of the standby rx current was being
drawn by audio circuitry - just because the design people had been too cheap
or lazy to do it right. And this was on a fairly modern (by aviation
standards) radio that was worth $5000 or so, even back then.

I moved the switch so that it cut power to the audio instead of just
shutting it up - and the size of the panels needed dropped by half!

You said they didn't care about current draw. That may have been an
understatement!


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14? Guy Alcala Military Aviation 265 March 7th 04 09:28 AM
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons Curtl33 General Aviation 7 January 9th 04 11:35 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM
Ham Radio In The Airplane Doug Carter Home Built 24 July 8th 03 03:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.