1. Messages
  2. Receiving Your First Thrilling TP on a Stock Ultralight

Re: Receiving Your First Thrilling TP on a Stock Ultralight

Dennis Gibson <wb6tnb@...>
 

Richard - my DeBock aligned ultralights (SRF-59 and 39FP) and stock
TRF 12-655 are equally sensitive. RS made two TRF's and I have one of
each. The 12-655 is the best known and best overall performer. Later
on they came out with a TRF 12-656A. It's as sensitive as the 12-655
but not as selective. The 12-565A has better AGC. I use it a lot when
selectivity isn't an issue. It's generally parked on a graveyard
frequency. The other thing I like about both is that they have
excellent audio quality for a radio of that size.

73

--- In ultralightdx@..., "bbwrwy" <richarda@...> wrote:

I need to retract what I said earlier about the URL's being better
than the (at least mine) TRF. I just sat down and compared it to them
with the TRF the winner. Of my URL the closest is a stock (factory
aligned) SRF-T615. Both had daytime reception of KWMT-540 (5 kW @ 734
km./456 mi.) and WNAX-570 (5 kW @ 726 km./451 mi.) with readable
audio, but the TRF was noticeably better. I also compared it with a
SRF-39FP with muddled audio and the DT-400W had only a trace of a
signal. At the high end, once again it was the T615 that came closest
to the TRF with the latter winning. Because the X-band didn't exist
when the TRF was made, mine only goes up to 1660 kHz, but KTXR (388
km./241 mi.) could be heard.

I was a little surprised because I'd not compared them before. Now I
understand why the TRF is still a revered receiver. Of the ULR's, the
T615 fared best, the 39FP in the middle with the DT-400W last. I have
a feeling this is partially due to the longer antenna in the TRF. We
only have to look at what has been accomplished by experiments adding
longer ferrite antennas to URL's.

Richard Allen
Join main@UltralightDX.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.