TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Transmitters...

To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Transmitters...
From: Lee <lee@wa3fiy.com>
Reply-to: Lee <lee@wa3fiy.com>, Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:05:23 +0000
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
That "TOR" spec is also important for we traffic operators who use Pactor. Hmmmm....? My present radios including Pegasus, Orion classic, Argonaut VI work very well on Pactor as I move scores of messages per month. I wonder how these latency issues being discussed affect Pactor operation? Hoping Ten-Tec keeps that in mind in new designs.

73,

-Lee-
WA3FIY

------ Original Message ------
From: "Ken N9VV" <n9vv@wowway.com>
To: "Kimberly Elmore" <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>; "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: 12/10/2015 12:43:24 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Transmitters...

*AND* The ARRL has removed the "TOR" (T/R time <=20ms) test for Pactor and Amtor with very little comment. That was an important and essential test data point for us CW operators. I am sorry to see it disappear from their evaluations.

72/73 de Ken N9VV


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>