Change of plans.

See “Real Serious Prepping Note” at the end of this!  Today’s column was going to be about unboxing of a Johnson Ranger and a Hallicrafters SX-32 and the process of restoring each of these to primo condition.

Unfortunately, though, the caffeine-agitated mind would not stop; insisting we first get closure on my explorations into the matter of coherence in ham radios (general) and in transmitter (RF tank circuits) in particular.

After you read my Anti-Dave persona’s latest rant Is AI Really NZT-48? – Hidden Guild then here’s a ham-radio  plug-in for that kind of thinking.  While I wait for someone to rent my brain as a Tier 1 Thought Realms explorer…so I can quietly retire. Absent calls from Directorate 153 for piecework, I may just bring back Google ads — if I’ve got something they can sell, maybe they’ll finally rank my sites higher. That in turn might fund a golf cart, and maybe even a few greens fees…

Wisecracker tee-shot: “Who is that old timer asking about washing his balls?” 

He’ll take the chicken-fried.

The Transmitter Coherence Inquiry

Let’s summarize where we were in the earlier discussion.

We knew that some old time mid 1950’s ham gear did a really good job of “punching above its weight” in terms of distant signal reception than did others.  This led to our initial line of inquiry:

“Why Some Rigs “Hit Harder”

• Where it lives: In the tank coil topology. Specifically, rigs where unused coil sections (like 160 m windings) stay partly in-circuit on higher bands.

• The why: Those leftover turns aren’t dead — they act as parasitic, partly-resonant stubs. At harmonic/sub-harmonic relationships, they phase-lock with the fundamental.

• The effect: Dual resonance  constructive stacking of fields. Not extra watts on the meter, but extra field coherence into the antenna.

• Why only some rigs:

  • Economy designs (progressive taps, shared coils) left ghosts in play. Left stronger “punch?”

  • Premium rigs (plug-in coils, isolated bands) avoided ghosts – cleaner but no “above weight” effect.

The Remarkable Solution

The first step in the inquiry was initially focused on which transmitters were most likely to experience this enhanced coherence of signal.  Names like the Heathkit DX-60, the Johnson Ranger, and the Johnson Viking II (I happen to have all three in my ham radio collection) stood out.

The next level of inquiry was to  understand how the plate tank circuit of the final RF amplifier sections in each of these was constructed.  Comparing to lesser transmitters, such as a WRL Globe Scout, the Ai collaborated work focused on signal coherence based on both the “Q” of the final tank circuit and whether un-shorted coil sections might play a role in developing a “coherence generation” aspect.

Late this week, sparked by caffeine and heavy mitochondrial light stimulus, the answer came to me.

Since it’s the weekend, I asked AI to generate an article on concept and why coherence matters and also why it’s misunderstood.  Oh, and almost not always measurable via traditional instruments.

But the whole solution, as you will read, comes back to a conversation about 4-5 years ago with my friend (and long-term Peoplenomics subscriber KW1B.  In a convo about where the government was in FTL communications, he chanced to use the phrase “The real magic is at resonance.”

Well, the deeper I thought, the more “magical” resonance became, so a tip of the coffee urn to Wm of the Radio Ranch for the keen perspective reminder.

How Signal Coherence (Really) Works

Imagine a radio wave in a transmitter final amplifier stage.  A low-level signal has been received at the grid (or cathode if grounded-grid configuration). This signal turns the final amplifier on for about 1/2 of an RF cycle.  The “missing half” is “completed” by the final amplifier’s “tank circuit”.

This resonant circuit changes the impedance of a tube type amplifier output from somewhere typically in the 4,000 to 10,000 ohms (impedance, of Z_) down to the feedline (Z) which is normally 50-75 ohms, unbalanced.  Earlier radios (which were also in the “punches above weight” class used “link coupling” to be better balanced on the output.  Which when coupled to a “balanced feedline system” (300 ohm twin lead, ladder lines, or spaced open wires) did a more effective job than coaxial cable at moving signals from the amplifier tube to the radiative element (antenna).

The insight popped that besides the topological differences (so-called Pi section filter for output matching vs. the previous generation’s link coupling to balanced lines) that there was an easy accounting for differences because some radio transmitters included a “drive control” while others did not.

The game was afoot….

Here’s Why This Matters

In “simple” transmitters, such as the Eico 723 and many of  the “Globe” class, there was no adjusting for drive levels.  A ham radio op would simply adjust the overall “driver tuning” (if even this was included) and would first tune the “Plate Tuning” capacitor to resonate the tank circuit to the “current dip” on the plate current meter.  Next, the loading capacitor (closest to the antenna) would adjust the output and thus plate impedance.  When properly set up, all works fine…

ALMOST.

Here’s where Bill’s insight (magic at resonance) comes into play.  It all relates to drive power and generated waves.

We know that:

But, we also know that this is an approximation.  But here’s the real key: We can also get to ideal plate impedance (hence the setting of the RF tank circuit) through other means. Volts and Amps along will give us the idea.

Now we’re at the point where coherence can be sussed out.

Any Ham Radio Transmitter with a drive control can be set either using the “simple, brute force” approach (Eico, Globe, and others) OR it may be more precisely set.  But in this case, the tuning outcome will be different.

• The tuning process begins with minimal drive level.
• Then the driver tuning (which feeds the power amplifier tube grid, usually) is peaked.
• And on the output, the RF tank is resonated.
• Next, the drive level is advanced. Until the desired operating power is reached.
• Just below this, the RF tank (tuning and loading) is “touched up”

The result is that under normal drive condition, the whole circuit is in “coherence.”  Closer to ideal resonance.

In the lesser class of radios (simpler tuning) what happens is the amplifier will still operate fine. And the power output may be exactly the same on a meter.

But the subtle difference is that the lesser radios generate an RF envelope (at the tube) that is slightly off of perfect.  (Bill’s magic).  This occurs because while the RF envelope looks identical there is a minor time-domain asymmetry induced by the mismatched impedances.  Over driving or underdriving changes “where perfection” lives.

If this insight had come along, oh, thirty years ago, it might have been a useful thing.  Because one could, in theory, construct a higher coherence transmitter by adding a variable capacitor (via a voltage variable element such as a varactor) to ensure that the RF was always held to time-symmetry.

Where “coherence comes from?

All RF signals have width.  The higher the level of coherence, the more a signal narrows and can “punch through” fore a given power level in marginal operation.

Today, it might be a useful exercise to describe this approach because it would be useful in devising other time-asynchronous applications (UFO back-engineering, for example, lol).  See my papers on “The “Q of Time” on PN back when.

But the whole press for the Art and Science to move any more forward disappeared when the F.C.C. left it’s “power input measure” to obtain limits. They now use the directly measured peak envelope power approach.

You can still (sort of) beat the limits.  Extraordinary tuning processes to minimize bandwidt6h iof pure carrier at very low baud rates.

That Simple?

Oh, is it? The problem with coherence is that it only becomes important when you are doing near the noise floor and the SNR’s (signal to noise ratios) have become an impediment.  In this case, the small time-axis asymmetry of generated RF going through the radiative process can only amount to a fraction to maybe a 1 or 2 db difference at a distant site. Still, the low signal, slow speed, decoded by human ears, it’s a Biggy. It’s not “apparent difference” at all signal levels.  Only those where narrowest bandwidth makes a difference – where the coherence effect likely lives.

Around here? Our Most Likely Answer is now in hand.  And here’s how AI sums up this exploratory work.

“The AI critique boiled it down this way: the method is sound because it follows a classic engineer’s sequence — observe an anomaly, propose a mechanism, test it against known rigs, and refine until the outliers make sense. The conclusion is plausible: coherence lives not in the raw wattage but in how resonance is managed by the tank and drive, and only rigs with certain topologies allow that sweet-spot alignment. The caution is that coherence is a subtle, time-domain quality — hard to measure with standard ham shack instruments — so what we have here is a strong working model, not a laboratory-sealed law. Still, for practical radio men, the insight is enough: chase resonance where it lives, and you’ll always sound bigger than your wattmeter says.”

If you have varactors and a few weeks to calculate and reduce to circuitry a variable capacitor to change the tuning of your Pi-section output for MAYBE a fractional db under only the most marginal of conditions?  Have fun.

We now consider it wrapped — “here’s the model, here’s the caution, here’s how much it matters, (not enough), here’s the beer.”

Historical Application Note and Scaling

Going from memory here (I hung up my SBE and RF engineering K&E in 1970), I believe it was Phil Lerza at KFRC who developed the variant of these time domain notions when he designed the KFRC antenna network to use a special broadband phasor network.  Remember, the idea concept here is that waveform time-asymmetry matters. Drive apparent loudness – the real front lines in the 1970s rock ‘n roll wars.

It was beyond the scope of today’s report to issue a full-on RF analysis, however it seems likely – in the historical record – to assess whether the modest asymmetry stack introduced by varying final amplifier impedance, was one of the reasons that “controlled-carrier” modulation schemes never featured the “apparent loudness” of high-level plate modulation AM radios. Besides never being able to hit 100 percent modulation levels due to topology.  Hand me that history book, would you?

KFRC was the “Super 610” for Dr. Don and B.R. because it’s antenna matching system was designed to be equality responsive to both upper and lower sidebands.  In other words, a high Q antenna will proide carrier power on its center frequency all day long.  But, the amplitude modulated sidebands would roll off both above and below the operating frequency.

The KFRC system purported to use a “tri-phasor” design with “side phasors” to ensure that antenna differences didn’t “roll off” modulation power in the sidebands.

Later (we’re talking 1984 here) Lerza’s evolution was for a modulated and low level diplexed arrangement which is similar to (optimizing in the Q domain) and accounting for exceptional intelligibility of the KFRC signal compared to more conventionally-engineer Bay Area signals.

Specifically, a survey of West Coast powerhouse “rockers” of the era reveal a neat topology of technological gradients.

• San Francisco: Lerza and broadbanded antenna phasors and later additional RF timing concepts (time domain synergy of frequency dispersed signals) ay KFRC.
• Portland: KISN benefited from a transmitter location on the Columbia River (waterfront) and the conductivity enhancement “following water” KISN ruled the Columbia river basin in some sense.
• Seattle: KJR  was on the salt flats west of Harbor Island so a simple wide msatching of a near-perfect ground led to signal (and apparent loudness) dominance on AM.

One week from Labor Day, we have to practice up for beer-drinking. A fine time to work on antennas and old tube type gear.  Only 130 days before Straight Key Night 2026.

If you’d like more, see the short Technical Appendix following.

The Serious Prepping Note

In many of our forward-looking models, the world is in a (Per Bak -driven) state of “sand pile collapse” to where the number of potential trigger conflicts could be as many as a half-dozen now, or more.

Since there is still a good bit of prep time before it all “falls out” here’s a useful note on how to treat radioactive water in a post WW III scenario.  We look for Myanmar (peripherally China-India) to warm shortly. Colleagues are whispering, which means we’re acting.

Threat Profile

After nuclear war rainwater will contain fallout particulates such as strontium 90, cesium 137, plutonium and uranium. It may also contain soluble ions like cesium and strontium salts, and volatile radionuclides such as iodine 131 and tritium. The danger is front loaded. The first two weeks carry the highest short term dose risk. Iodine decays rapidly with an eight day half life. Cesium and strontium persist for decades.

Distillation Efficacy

Distillation is highly effective at removing fallout bound to particulates and heavy isotopes. Removal rates are often above ninety five percent. Distillation is less effective on volatile radionuclides like iodine and ineffective against tritium since tritiated water is chemically identical to water. Splashing or entrainment can carry trace cesium through if the boil is too vigorous.

Protocol

First delay collection if you can. The first forty eight hours after fallout are the most dangerous. If water stores allow wait one to two weeks before harvesting rain. Cover or shield catchment surfaces to minimize deposition. Second let collected water settle for at least twelve to twenty four hours. Draw from the top not the bottom. Simple sand or cloth filtration will remove suspended grit. Third distill the water gently. Do not boil hard. Use a splash guard or copper scrubber to limit entrainment. Discard the first small portion of distillate since volatiles leave early. Fourth pass condensed water through activated charcoal to strip iodine and organics. If available ion exchange media such as zeolite adds another layer against cesium and strontium.

Warnings

Never drink raw rainwater after fallout. The risk is lethal. Residue in the boiler is hot waste and must be handled with care and stored away from habitation. Distillation will not remove tritium though tritium risk is usually lower than other isotopes. Time is also a filter. Each passing week reduces risk as short lived isotopes decay.

Takeaways

Distillation is mission critical for survival water. It is highly effective against the long lived killers. Activated charcoal is a second line of defense. Waiting time is a third. The survival standard is multi barrier treatment. Settle then filter then distill then charcoal. Redundancy is survival.

Bottom Line Here?  We have 600 gallons of potable water in our backup pressurized water system.  But minimally, 20-gallons per person, per war is a good planning metric.  Then, use of an electric distiller with charcoal filters seems prudent.  If we can, we will avoid even doing this type collection/catchment and distillation until a month (or longer) after the flash bang dust passes.

Things to think about in our more optimistic moments.

If you want a darker outlook, picture a Covid-II that is genetically and racially selective.  But let’s not talk about that, shall we?

Write when you make contact,

[email protected] /ac7x

STS Technical Appendix: AM Phasors and Envelope Coherence

Ideal AM: Symmetry by Design

In an ideal AM signal, a large carrier phasorbeiung used, two equal sidebands appear as

Carrier: f_c
Upper sideband modulation: f_c + f_m
Lower sideband modulation: f_c – f_m

Their amplitudes are equal and they rotate in opposite directions. The vector sum always aligns with the carrier, producing a symmetric envelope with constant phase.

Where Asymmetry Enters

Amplitude imbalance occurs when one sideband is larger, producing uneven peaks. Phase imbalance occurs when sidebands are not perfectly opposed, shifting phase and distorting the envelope. Modulation index imbalance results from overmodulation or clipping on one swing of the signal, creating asymmetry.

Effects of Asymmetry

Distortion occurs in the demodulated audio as harmonics. Spectral inefficiency arises from spurious emissions or splatter. Receivers experience reduced SNR and less accurate demodulation when faced with asymmetrical envelopes.

Causes in Real Gear

Nonlinearities in modulators or tubes skew the sidebands. Asymmetric modulating waveforms, such as natural speech, create uneven envelopes. Propagation effects, such as ionospheric cross-modulation, can differently affect sidebands.

Why This Matters to Coherence

Perfect symmetry yields maximum coherence. Even small asymmetry introduces time-domain distortion. At high SNR levels it may not matter, but near the noise floor, a one or two decibel improvement from coherence can determine copyability. Coherence lives not in the wattmeter but in symmetry of amplitude and phase, which is why rigs with adjustable drive and carefully tuned tanks often sound larger than their rated output.

The sidebar on HAARP selective sideband fading is beyond the scope of today’s report. Except as a mention that HAARP changes the ionosphere’s “mirroring” properties and selective fading changes likely result.  There are now 20, or so, atmospheric heaters in use worldwide, most above HF where heating is more efficient.

Does that mean your DXCC award was done with a “cheat” in place that you didn’t even know about?

~ure and ai