Boat Anchor Beauty Evaluation

What is the most beautiful Boat Anchor? Wow - interesting question. I suspect beauty (of a BA) is in the eye/mind of the beholder. I have an SX-28A sitting above my R-390A. In the right light, that 28 looks pretty sharp - maybe even better than the 390. Tough question. Is there an objective way to determine this beauty factor?

I have several important criteria for evaluating BA's. One is the knob count. The more knobs on the front panel, the better its chances of being in my BA cave. For me, BAing is not a spectator sport. I want to be as busy as an organist at a Bach recital while tuning in that station. Meters are also important as well as a high tube count. Many other factors enter into the evaluation. I offer for peer review the following formula for quantifying the attractiveness of a BA.

If you want to skip all of the technical BS & just find out what your BABE rating is, click left pointerHEREright pointer.

The formula:

BABE = ((Kn -Ku -2Kb) + .6Tn + .5Ln + 2.5Mn + 1.5Gn + .5Rs + 1.15Wt + 1.2Vr + 5Rd + 2Ps + 2Ed / 10(1/(2Fq)))  /

Where BABE = BA Beauty Evaluation

The above formula applies weighting coefficients to the variables. More weight is given to variables that have greater curb appeal. For example, knobs and meters are easily seen and appreciated by anyone in visual proximity to the BA or its image. Weight, however, takes more effort to be appreciated. One obvious exception to this rule is radioactive devices which are a glowing example of BA attractiveness.

I was thinking of factoring in the - uh - semiconductor count. I decided, however, it is just better to ignore them.

Using the above formula, I have calculated the BABE rating for my pitiful few BAs as follows:

Collins R-390A 296.6 (1) 302.6
Hallicrafters SX-28A 172.9 (2) 244.5
Hallicrafters SX-100 173.3 181.3
Hammarlund HQ-180AC 171.7 (3) 180.7
Heathkit SB-100 117.1 118.28
Swan 500 2.57 (4) 114.98
Hammarlund HQ-215 99.6 (5) 99.6
Hallicrafters S-118 67.02 71.88
Zenith TransOceanic Royal 1000 50.15 (6) 52.6
Kenwood TS-830S 178.04 (10) 178.04
Total BABE (7) 1328.98 1544.48

As can be seen above, the R-390A kicked BA booty. I have attempted to quantify the attractiveness of a BA as best as possible. I'm sure there will be some who wish the change the weight factor for Tn and Mn. Missing from the equation is cabinet/paint/chrome condition. Proper placement in an area with subdued light can help mitigate deficiencies in this area. In any case, I am reasonably sure of the accuracy of my equation because I plotted my points after I drew my curves. Absent from the formula is any evaluation of the internal complexity of the BA. For example, compare an R-390 to an R-390A. On the other hand, the IB (8) factor can tend to nullify any advantage in this area so it was eliminated. I'm beginning to think that I'm a little too hard on rust. Work is under way to develop conversions to other related units (9). I solicit comments on the above even if they aren't heaped with praise.

The following are additional factors for future consideration:

Number of visitors: