Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
ALL - Once again, _WHY PRIVATE E-MAILS_. DO YOU LACK THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS? AFRAID SOMEONE MIGHT DISAGREE?? WHAT!?!?!?!?!? Like Paul, I'm interested in others responses, whether I agree with them or not. Aside from losing those opinions today, they are also left out of the archives. Sheesh!! 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs www.k4oah.com Paul Christensen wrote: Great set of responses, both from public and private E-mails. Many thanks to all for your input. It was a real learning experience for me since I have not lived the moment with a Collins S Line. Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
My opinion from years of having both... The Sherwood R-4C I have blows away almost anything available today and in the old days as well. Yes I really said and mean that! It hears anything my TT-Orion II can hear and while the TT has a lot of nice bells/whistlesit does not copy weak DX any better then the R-4C. As to my Colllins...I really enjoy looking at it and using it regularly...it workd FB and I enjoy the audio. I use a KWM-2 and a S3 line. As to my Hallicrafters I enjoy them as well. 73, Lee -Original Message- From: Richard Tucker ri...@wavewls.com To: Don Cunningham d...@martineer.net; Paul Christensen w...@arrl.net; drakelist drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Thu, Jun 16, 2011 9:26 am Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared I have owned and used both Drake C-line and Collins S Line and both were are still great gear. The two things that always set Drake apart to me were the inclusion of 160M and the flexibility to transcieve and switch back and forth between R4C and T4XC PTO's. I enjoyed an appreciated all comments. Rick W0RT - Original Message - From: Don Cunningham d...@martineer.net To: Paul Christensen w...@arrl.net; drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:03 PM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared Paul said This may seem like a trolling exercise to some, And in light of most of your posts, yes, it does, hi. I have several Drakes and several Collins rigs. I love different things about each and plan to keep ALL as long as I can enjoy and maintain them. I think you should have both, AND some Heathkits, some Swans oops, maybe I'm going too far there, :^)) 73, Don, WB5HAK ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] SM0VPO Audio Board in R-4C
Paul, Would you mind giving more details about how the antivox output is connected in your R-4B audio mod? I might do something similar to an R-4A. Thanks, Kihwal, K9SUL From: Paul Christensen w...@arrl.net To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 8:48 AM Subject: [Drakelist] SM0VPO Audio Board in R-4C The SM0VPO audio board worked so well in the R-4B, I decided to add one to my R-4C -- which is a much easier exercise when the Sherwood PS-4 board is already installed. The photos in the links below were taken last night after I completed installation. Well, it was finished last week, but it took several grounding iterations to get it right with no trace of buzz due to circulating filament currents. Like my recent R-4B installation, there is absolutely no hiss, hum, or buzz at any AF control setting. The output transistors run cold to the touch and only get slightly warm when continuously running at high power levels into the MS-4 speaker. Getting near audiophile grade performance from a circuit that's designed to work into *both* headphones and a speaker from a single-ended supply is no easy accomplishment. I'm still amazed at the design. The photos below show the one and only manner of installation (that I can figure out!) into the R-4C. The board is mounted sideways on angled aluminum brackets such that the NB-4 can still be plugged into the top without creating any mounting interference. The location is good since it is away from the magnetic flux field of the power transformer and AC HV line. Although not easily seen, a Zobel network was installed, consisting of the usual 0.1 uF cap in series with a 10-ohm resistor at the AF output. The large black cap is gulp 2,700 uF on the AF output line. Ultra-low noise Toshiba BC550/BC560 transistors used in the high-gain stage, with ample power supply de-coupling between the high gain stage and the high-current TIP41 transistor drivers. http://72.52.250.47/images/R4C-1.jpg http://72.52.250.47/images/R4C-2.jpg http://72.52.250.47/images/R4C-3.jpg Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] SM0VPO Audio Board in R-4C
Would you mind giving more details about how the antivox output is connected in your R-4B audio mod? I might do something similar to an R-4A. Thanks, Kihwal, K9SUL Kihwal, I have Antivox connected to the normally-closed contact on the headphone jack. My headphone jacks are all converted to two-circuit Switchcraft Tip/Ring/Sleeve types so that any stereo headset can be used without hunting for an adapter. My Antivox works only when listening to a speaker and keeps any induced noise and RF off the headphone jack when the headphone plug is inserted. Paul, W9AC___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
WOW! Strange statement on a Drake Reflector List.. I've owned several Collins Radios to include a 51S1 receiver (sold it for $1375.00), KWM-2 and 2A's (traded and sold all of them to include the special Collins microphone), even some commercial Collins HF equipment (tossed them too). I've used KWS-1's, 75A1's, A3's, A4's, 75S you name it, Once had a complete 32S/75S station to include phone patch's, watt meters and all (it was quite the station), R388's, R390's frankly I haven't missed any of them because none impressed me in any way. I didn't find the receivers to be special (other than the frequency coverage of the 51S1), the audio wasn't sent from heaven if you know what I mean. Sorry but Collins may look good but so far they were just OK nothing special. HOWEVER! My Drake radios, I've loved everyone I've had and still have. In High School I was given the opportunity to purchase a Drake TR-4C station with RV-4C, Speaker and W4 power meter, very nice! Some years ago I had a B-Line and was talked out of it by a friend and regretted it ever since, great station! The audio was wonderful, receiver selectivity tremendous, transmitter power and audio always great reports. Today, I have a C-Line (TX4C, R4C, TR4C, RV-4C), R4B, L4B, MN2000, W4, WV4, TR6, I'm I leaving anything out Collins, had'em but I'll keep my Drakes forever! Thank you very much, Oh I think that Collins Reflector is looking for a few more members..Hi Hi From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Ron Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 2:27 PM To: k4...@mindspring.com; drakelist@zerobeat.net; john Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared I came into this as computers were making a mark on the electronic industry and taking away the appeal of ham radio so I may have this a little wrong. I recall being told that Collins radio equipment was manufactured for the government at a time when money was flowing easy. Drake on the other hand did manufacture items for the government, but their radios were primarily for the ham radio consumer market. If true, then John's statements ring very clearly. Was I told wrong? 73, Ron WD8SBB --- On Wed, 6/15/11, john joh...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: john joh...@nc.rr.com Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared To: k4...@mindspring.com, drakelist@zerobeat.net Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2011, 5:46 PM Collins made extraordinary radios with extraordinary parts Drake made extraordinary radios with quite ordinary parts. John K5MO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net/mc/compose?to=Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
Ron - That's a pretty accurate description. Collins had a long history with the military, which was their primary customer. Art Collins started out in his basement building transmitters for commercial customers. Of course there were amateurs who could afford his products, mostly well-to-do by necessity! The AM era stuff, 75A and 32V series, was primarily for ham use, but still priced pretty high compared to Johnson, WRL, Hallicrafter's, etc. Higher quality, but not 'greatly' superior in functionality. The KW-1 was a very low production item, (~250?,) and many of those were grabbed by shortwave broadcasters in third world countries. The 75A-4 and KWS-1 were 'for ham use', but were sold to the military for use worldwide, including airborne use by Art's friend Curtis LeMay for 'his' Strategic Air Command. One interesting tidbit was that Leo Meyerson was invited on the checkout ride with LeMay, Collins and others. They had the 75A-4 / KWS-1, 75A-3 / 32V, Globe King 500, and other gear of the time to compare the effectiveness of SSB v. AM for worldwide coverage for SAC planes. As they were getting on the plane, LeMay asked Leo, 'where's your SSB equipment', and Leo had to admit he had none. All the S-Line equipment, starting with the KWM-1, was designed with the military in mind, and so included complete parts lists, chassis photos, etc. typical of government contracts. Simple circuitry and operation were a primary goal. There were still hams who could afford Collins products, although I only knew of a few!! :-) Bottom line, Collins was designed for the military and government, with ham use a very small part of their total production. Essentially, Drake came along and found less expensive ways to emulate the Collins equipment and circuitry to make it more affordable for the 'average' ham. Drake was just the reverse of Collins, i.e., the majority of their business was with hams, with a small (if any?) government segment. Heath did somewhat the same, although they went a little too far, in my opinion, and ended up with a product that felt 'cheap' and flimsy, compared even to the Drake. Drake was not fancy, but WAS and IS solid in construction. I've probably omitted or gotten things wrong, but that's the best I can do from memory. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs www.k4oah.com Ron wrote: I came into this as computers were making a mark on the electronic industry and taking away the appeal of ham radio so I may have this a little wrong. I recall being told that Collins radio equipment was manufactured for the government at a time when money was flowing easy. Drake on the other hand did manufacture items for the government, but their radios were primarily for the ham radio consumer market. If true, then John's statements ring very clearly. Was I told wrong? 73, Ron WD8SBB ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
This is a great thread! In the late '70's, I had a KWM-2A, remote VFO, etc.; all Collins. I decide to get back into CW, so, of course, the KWM-2A had to go (for those who don't know, the KWM's really don't do CW in spite of the CW switch position on the mode switch). After doing a lot of research, I traded the Collins for a C line, my first Drakes. I never regretted the decision. It was only after I wanted to try RTTY that I traded the C line for a 7 line. That was back in 1982. I still have the 7 line and it remains my main SSB/RTTY rig (I use a homebrew setup for CW, just 'cause). That should say something about Drake reliability, not to mention my fondness for Drakes. Oh, by the way, I also own a KWM-380. I still use the 7 line and prefer the 7 line. The only reason for the Collins is it is at my second home and it is nice to have a rig in one package (i.e. built in power supply) and I don't have much room for a shack in that second home. 73 Lee WB6SSW ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
- Original Message - From: Ron wd8...@yahoo.com To: k4...@mindspring.com; drakelist@zerobeat.net; john joh...@nc.rr.com Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared I came into this as computers were making a mark on the electronic industry and taking away the appeal of ham radio so I may have this a little wrong. I recall being told that Collins radio equipment was manufactured for the government at a time when money was flowing easy. Drake on the other hand did manufacture items for the government, but their radios were primarily for the ham radio consumer market. If true, then John's statements ring very clearly. Was I told wrong? 73, Ron WD8SBB I am not sure what Drake manufactured beside the ham radio stuff but they did make some commercial radio gear. Collins began as a garage shop run by Art Collins. During the depression he began by selling custom built radio tranmitters to the wealthier hams, and there _were_ wealthy people even during the depression. Collins always built his stuff to a very high level of perfection and finish. It was sold as much for prestigue as for performance. At some point he began to build equipment for the airlines and broadcasting, all of very high quality. At some point he developed the Autotune system, an automated method of tuning transmitters to a given frequency by means of pre-set servo motors. This system became very popular among the airline users since they needed to have frequency agile circuits. From that it was a natural transision to military equipment especially stuff for aircraft. The famous ART-13 is an example of an Autotune transmitter made for aircraft use. As others found government contracts could be enormously profitable. For one thing they were reliable, the bills would be payed, and they could be quite large. Once the defense industry got going, shortly before WW-2, there was an enormous expansion of industries catering to it. A number of businesses were created especially to deliver on government contracts (Northrup Aviation is an example). Collins did very well at this. Unlike some others (like Hallicrafters) Collins contract operations continued after the war. He supplied equipment thought vital to maintaining a defense effort and the company made sure to apply innovative design to insure a continuing market. Despite this Art Collins never forgot the ham market that had given him his start, but always filled exactly the same role as when beginning in business; deluxe, state of the art, equipment for those who could afford it. The first Collins ham products after the war featured the new idea of a permeability tuned VFO plus a different method of generating the final working frequencies that allowed an enmormous improvement in stability and dial accuracy over anything else ever offered. Three of these new products were the 75A receiver, the 32V transmitter and the super-deluxe 500 watt 30K-1 transmitter. None of these had any real competition as regards its performance. Hallicrafters was still offering a post-war version of the HT-4, AKA BC-610, at more than $1500. In 1946 this was probably equivalent to $30,000 now. Of course surplus BC-610's were soon available at a fraction of this cost. The 30K was of a similar order of cost but covered all ham bands and had a very stable VFO plus many other features. It was entirely up to date, used late Eimac tubes, and was just a superior machine, if one could afford it. The 75A receivers was the key however, this was a double conversion receiver using the collins permeability tuned VFO, crystal controled first conversion and the now familiar method of tuning with out actual bandswitching. It had a good, low noise front end, and an excellent crystal filter, evidently licensed by Hammarlund. It was ham band only, somewhat unusual at the time. It offered the same sort of performance in terms of stability, noise, and low spurious responses at 10 meters that other receivers could offer only up to about 20 meters and many not there. It was just revolutionary. Other receiver makers quickly began to develop double conversion sets but most of them were based on the conventional tunable first LO and fixed second LO so that stability was as much a problem as with conventional single conversion sets. I think all had problems so that it was a few years before any competition came out. In the mean time Collins kept improving both the receivers and transmitters and quickly picked up on the trend to SSB, which the other big manufacturers did not. However, Collins was always priced right at the top so could be only dreamed of by most hams. That opened a window of opportunity for smaller manufacturers to fill the gap. Drake was one of the more successful of those although Hallicrafters eventually began to make some respectible equipment. However, I think Hallicrafters was
Re: [Drakelist] Collins and Drake Compared
On Jun 16, 2011, at 6:13 PM, Garey Barrell wrote: Essentially, Drake came along and found less expensive ways to emulate the Collins equipment and circuitry to make it more affordable for the 'average' ham. Drake was just the reverse of Collins, i.e., the majority of their business was with hams, with a small (if any?) government segment. Heath did somewhat the same, although they went a little too far, in my opinion, and ended up with a product that felt 'cheap' and flimsy, compared even to the Drake. Drake was not fancy, but WAS and IS solid in construction. Well put, Garey. I've personally always considered Collins the gear for the rich man while Drake was the gear for everyman. Tom -- Tom Swisher, WA8PYR A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. - Thomas Jefferson ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
[Drakelist] Collins, Drake etc.
Well, I first saw the S/Line in the early 60s when W2KOY (SK), the local MD, had the full setup and I was a drooling kid whose OM was a dedicated homebrewer. Unrequited technolust. Went off to college a few years later and talked the Student Government into buying an S/Line for the startup Ham Radio Club. TH-7 on rooftop tower on top floor of dorm. Loved the gear but it wasn't much better on CW than my OM's homebrew rig. About 6 years later and 1500 miles further west I was introduced to Drake gear (full 4B-line) at W0LJF (SK) and ran contests most successfully from his station, especially SS. My own rig at that time was a TA-33jr and an HW-101. Subsequently bought a 2B+2BQ to enhance CW operations at my home QTH. So, truth be told, while Collins gear was clearly the high priced spread, even Drakes were still out of reach for us average joes who made do with Heathkits, surplus and used older gear. Peter Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins, Drake etc.
So, truth be told, while Collins gear was clearly the high priced spread, even Drakes were still out of reach for us average joes who made do with Heathkits... Toward the end of its life, the R-4B + T-4XB was right at $1K. I can't imagine spending that during my teenage years in the mid 1970s. To me, it was like a car purchase. By 1975, what was the street price of the S-Line combo? I imagine Collins offered little in the way of discounts. I make this assumption based on the back pages of QSTs I've been reading from the late '50s. For example, every single dealer who supplied the KWM-1 advertised it for exactly $820 in 1958. It sure seems like Collins had strict terms and conditions on just how much a dealer could discount, if any at all -- much the same way other high-end products are sold today in order to retain an elite branding image. I imagine this was less of an issue with Drake. Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins, Drake etc.
Paul Christensen wrote: So, truth be told, while Collins gear was clearly the high priced spread, even Drakes were still out of reach for us average joes who made do with Heathkits... Toward the end of its life, the R-4B + T-4XB was right at $1K. I can't imagine spending that during my teenage years in the mid 1970s. To me, it was like a car purchase. By 1975, what was the street price of the S-Line combo? I imagine Collins offered little in the way of discounts. I make this assumption based on the back pages of QSTs I've been reading from the late '50s. For example, every single dealer who supplied the KWM-1 advertised it for exactly $820 in 1958. It sure seems like Collins had strict terms and conditions on just how much a dealer could discount, if any at all -- much the same way other high-end products are sold today in order to retain an elite branding image. I imagine this was less of an issue with Drake. Paul, W9AC Paul - In 1971, the S-Line prices were as follows KWM-2 - $1150.00 516F-2 - $ 153.00 75S-3B - $795.00 + $250.00 for three mechanical filters 75S-3C - $850.00 (includes accy xtal deck) + $250.00 for three mechanical filters 32S-3 - $865.00 32S-3A - $1065.00 (includes accy xtal deck) 516F-2 - $ 153.00 So $2775.00 for the basic rx/tx pair plus power supply IF you wanted the extra crystal deck(s) for expanded coverage plus speaker, add another $290.00 By 1977, the prices had increased considerably, as Collins became Rockwell Collins and much less concerned about the Ham market. KWM-2A - $3533.00 75S-3C - $2504.00 32S-3A - $2957.00 516F-2 - $ 440.00 312B-3 - $ 80.00 (speaker) Now only $11,375.00 !! By comparison, the C-Line was R-4C - $599.00 + $200 for 4 filters T-4XC - $599.00 AC-4 - $120.00 MS-4 - $ 25.00 Total of $1543.00 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
[Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Wow, what a great thread on Collins vs. Drake. I've never had the privilege of using any Collins gear, so this has been very enlightening. Thanks all for keeping this so objective. It seems Ten-Tec came along much later in the game than Drake or Collins, but also has a high regard from their owners. With the head start that Drake and Collins had, perhaps it is not as fair a comparison. In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. So, how about a comparison of the Drake 4 and 7 lines with the above mentioned Ten-Tec rigs? 73, Darrell VA7TO -- Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Darrell Bellerive wrote: In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. Before the Corsairs, with the Tritons, Argos, early OMNIs and Century (21,22, 22 digital display) rigs Ten-Tec went for simplicity of design and good sound. Compared to the design of the Colins (sophistocated and no expense spared), the Drake (near genius), the Ten-Tec rigs look like they were designed by copying pages from Doug DeMaw's books. I am NOT saying that the Ten-Tec rigs are poor performers, far from it. For casual rag chewing, I'd put my Argo 509 or Trition IV Digital (display, not oscillator) against any modern rig. In the Drake rigs I've seen every part is carefully placed, every wire carefully run, every joint carefully soldered. My SPR-4 manual warns against changing the length or route of wires as it may affect performance. I don't know if it would affect the Ten-Tec rigs in the same way, but it does not seem so. The designs seem to be simple circuits. The Century rigs have direct coversion receivers. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Collins, Drake etc.
- Original Message - From: Paul Christensen w...@arrl.net To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 7:23 PM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Collins, Drake etc. So, truth be told, while Collins gear was clearly the high priced spread, even Drakes were still out of reach for us average joes who made do with Heathkits... Toward the end of its life, the R-4B + T-4XB was right at $1K. I can't imagine spending that during my teenage years in the mid 1970s. To me, it was like a car purchase. By 1975, what was the street price of the S-Line combo? I imagine Collins offered little in the way of discounts. I make this assumption based on the back pages of QSTs I've been reading from the late '50s. For example, every single dealer who supplied the KWM-1 advertised it for exactly $820 in 1958. It sure seems like Collins had strict terms and conditions on just how much a dealer could discount, if any at all -- much the same way other high-end products are sold today in order to retain an elite branding image. I imagine this was less of an issue with Drake. Paul, W9AC Its hard to know what actual discounts might have been offered. At the time strict fair trade price control by manufacturers was still legal, dealers had to abide by their agreements, at leas for advertised prices. What is not clear is how much effective discounting went on in the form of trade-ins or extras supplied free when equipment was bought. I suspect a lot of price competition went on under the table. OTOH, I don't know how much mark up there was on ham gear, maybe not a lot. Most commercial electronics had enough so that a 40% discount over list price could be offered. There may have been more on consumer gear. Ham gear may not have had enough volume to allow this. Speaking of old ham magazines, I was just looking at the December 1946 edition of QST. This one has the announcement for the Hallicrafters SX-42 in it. Eight full pages of advertising from Hallicrafters (four double trucks in a row) plus about eighty ads by individual dealers featuring the SX-42, probably co-operative with Hallicrafters, having exactly the same cut of the receiver and the same price. Some other dealers also advertised the receiver but did not feature it exclusively. This was a very heavy weight campaign. I think the SX-42 was Hallicrafters first really new receiver after the war and was obviously a prestige item for them. -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL dickb...@ix.netcom.com ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
