Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+4cx10000\/imd\/sunits\/splatter\s+etc\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+4cx10000\/imd\/sunits\/splatter\s+etc\s*$/: 11 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: irosky@yahoo.com (igor rosky); Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 06:48:01 -0700 (PDT); Well what this points to is the inability of most ham radio manufactueres to deliver a decent total solution. G3SEK will probaly disagree, but here goes A TRANSMITTER WITH A 3RD order IMD OF -40 DB A; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00176.html (16,416 bytes)
2. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:41:45 +0100; A +30dBm intercept point is no use unless the phase noise is at least -130dBc/Hz at the offset you're using. About 16 - 20dBm intercept at full sensitivity and tailoring the sensitivity to go down wi; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00199.html (10,582 bytes)
3. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: itr@nanoteq.co.za (Ian Roberts); Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:40:04 +0200; Peter, please help me: Why? Do you mean tailoring the gain to go down with increasing intercept? A received noise floor specified as a power does not correspond to any receiver noise figure. For exam; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00207.html (12,163 bytes)
4. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:27:40 +0100; Ian asks: least Because if the phase noise performance is poor, then signals that produce an IMD product have produced a phase noise output as well, that may be bigger than the IMD product. See my IE; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00212.html (12,629 bytes)
5. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:12:09 -0400; First, I agree that receiver intercept is hardly an issue unless someone leaves a noise blanker on or has too much front end gain. The largest problem is by far the very very poor transmitter IMD spe; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00217.html (10,837 bytes)
6. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 13:41:25 -0700; ? Part 97 allow any amount of in band splatter within amateur service bands as long as it does not interfere with emergency communications. ? the two I tested had a total IMD that was c. 22db down.; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00220.html (11,674 bytes)
7. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 08:56:56 +0100; Way back when G2DAF first published his design (which used 4-125s), G6JP who was heavily involved in valve design and manufacture at GEC criticised it as inherently bad for linearity. George's star w; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00231.html (8,683 bytes)
8. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:00:43 +0100; Wouldn't have happened if they'd been made of high nickel-chromium steel...... 73 Peter G3RZP -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requ; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00232.html (8,392 bytes)
9. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: measures@vc.net (Rich Measures); Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 07:27:36 -0700; ? .... hardly a good day for RSGB credibility. ? ... because it produces abundant feculence with voice modulation. ? Indeed, Peter, indeed. For DAF-disciples, the Great Satan is the dreaded voice-mo; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00240.html (8,991 bytes)
10. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 16:36:17 +0100; Well, it was 40 years ago now, so the ins and outs and whys and wherefors have long been forgotten. G6JP is still alive, active on 80 metres, and over 90, but I think everybody else concerned has bee; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00242.html (8,469 bytes)
11. [AMPS] 4cx10000/imd/sunits/splatter etc (score: 1): Author: amps@txrx.demon.co.uk (Steve Thompson); Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 07:52:37 +0100; --Original Message-- From: Peter Chadwick <Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com> To: 'Rich Measures' <measures@vc.net>; 'amps' <amps@contesting.com> To: <amps@contesting.com> Date: 13 July 1999 16:38 Subject: RE; /archives//html/Amps/1999-07/msg00273.html (8,771 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 11
Page: [1]