Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:aldermant@alltel.net: 641 ]

Total 641 documents matching your query.

61. Re: [TenTec] Orion vs SDR-1000 (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:31:02 -0400
Of course the Orion firmware is not and probably never will be open source. But it sure doesn't cost Orion users very much! Tommy - W4BQF By definition, the "value" of an SDR is going to be in the so
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-08/msg00583.html (10,528 bytes)

62. Re: [TenTec] radar????? (score: 1)
Author: "Tommy-W4BQF" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 17:35:51 -0400
Sounds to me as though you don't have the intestinal fortitude to say what you mean. Tom - W4BQF
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00103.html (8,835 bytes)

63. Re: [TenTec] ARRL Review of FT9000 (score: 1)
Author: "Tommy-W4BQF" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 21:10:49 -0400
After a frustrating two years with firmware updates and firmware beta testing, I got rid of my 'problem' radio and went back to two Omni 6 Plus rigs and based on this experience, I have to say that m
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00212.html (10,545 bytes)

64. Re: [TenTec] Yaesu FT9000 oversights in QST review (score: 1)
Author: "Tommy-W4BQF" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:41:05 -0400
Curt, You may want to revisit your 'been there done that' thing. If you open wire feeder radiated, that was because you had an imbalance in your antenna some how. Two wires carrying V/I 180 degrees o
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00286.html (14,350 bytes)

65. [TenTec] Test Only (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 17:16:04 -0400
Repaired PC. Tom - W4BQF
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00412.html (6,467 bytes)

66. Re: [TenTec] PTO Rebuild (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:04:39 -0400
I believe they require the radio also, but would suggest you call and ask for Don and pose the question to him. Tom - W4BQF Will Ten-Tec rebuild a PTO alone or do they want the radio to tag along wit
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00435.html (7,851 bytes)

67. Re: [TenTec] Hercules 444 with Corsair II, Paragon, or Omni-VI+. Is it possible? QSK? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:06:31 -0400
Yep...it sure will run with the Corsair 2. Used to use that set up when I was learning QRQ. Corsair 2 Hercules 444 Accessory Socket Control Socket Pin 8 --Pin 1 Pin 1--Pin 2 Rx Ant connector--Receive
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00490.html (10,169 bytes)

68. Re: [TenTec] Hercules 444 with Corsair II, Paragon, or Omni-VI+. Is it possible? QSK? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:13:36 -0400
Forgot to add this: Before you hook it up, I suggest you take the covers off the 444 and get into the fan area and do your best to clean out all the dust collected on and around both fans over the ye
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00491.html (10,165 bytes)

69. Re: [TenTec] Tuner for Centurion to balanced antenna (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 01:53:27 -0400
Greg, I have insomnia tonight, so I just emailed you a plot of a 80m dipole, at your height of 78 feet, showing the azimuth pattern for 3.530 MHz, 7.030 MHz, and 14.030 MHz. This EZnec analysis shows
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00498.html (15,291 bytes)

70. Re: [TenTec] Tuner for Centurion to balanced antenna (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 03:39:15 -0400
At Tuesday 02:28 AM 7/19/2005, you wrote: Thanks Tommy...can you get the 80 meter dipole to match all bands, 160-10, perhaps by carefully selecting feed length? Have you noticed if you have big nulls
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00500.html (11,808 bytes)

71. Re: [TenTec] [OT] FCC says CW dead? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:28:45 -0400
I think it means what it say, code will no longer be required for any USA ham license. The other frightening thing is their 'new' definition of the amateur radio service. You notice that it is no lon
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00609.html (9,520 bytes)

72. Re: [TenTec] Orion debacle (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 08:17:26 -0400
This is the most sensible post on the 'issue' so far. Tommy - W4BQF Interesting how quickly the Ten Tec apologists can mobilize. A year or two ago, it was, "Never need to buy a new rig; the firmware
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00654.html (13,687 bytes)

73. [TenTec] Jim (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 09:39:29 -0400
"Gosh, any moron can pick up a mike. Now sending and receiving cw at 30 wpm is an art. CW is ham radio. jim, K4CFA" Spoken like a REAL ham! Tommy - W4BQF CW is for REAL hams ! Tommy - W4BQF
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00665.html (6,734 bytes)

74. [TenTec] Alpha testing (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:05:49 -0400
"The faster sweep scope and DSP enhancements are firmware. I've been alpha testing the v2.0 of the original Orion code - the sweep scope is definitely faster than in the original version of the trans
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00701.html (7,041 bytes)

75. Re: [TenTec] [OT] FCC says CW dead? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:25:02 -0400
I agree, but for a different reason. I thought PSK (and especially Stream) was very neat. What absolutely killed my interest was seldom, if ever, having a QSO, but sitting there looking at a bunch of
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00712.html (9,308 bytes)

76. Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:32:00 -0400
Rich, You have a good argument....for a single case only! Age is not an impediment for learning CW. My example is a gentleman, age 84, that I talked to Monday night. This gentleman was running at abo
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00716.html (10,867 bytes)

77. Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:00:26 -0400
Alan, Nope, you are absolutely correct. I used an inappropriate word in my interpretation of Paragraph 4 on page 3. Tommy - W4BQF Where is that about defining the amateur service as a "hobby"? The on
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00730.html (9,886 bytes)

78. Re: [TenTec] Orion debacle (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:07:41 -0400
Well, what you would say is partially wrong! The reason for the initial re-write of the firmware core was detailed in a note from Gary to the beta firmware test group. If you were a member of that us
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00731.html (8,267 bytes)

79. Re: [TenTec] Re (Ten Tec) (ot) FCC says CW dead? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:39:53 -0400
"The change from "occupied bandwidth" to "necessary bandwidth" was a significant one. Under the necessary bandwidth provisions, all of the testing issues are no longer an issue. " posted by W1RFI on
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00737.html (12,154 bytes)

80. Re: [TenTec] Re (Ten Tec) (ot) FCC says CW dead? (score: 1)
Author: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:47:19 -0400
The primary reason you probably hear about CW on the Ten Tec reflector is because it was Ten Tec that set the standard for a good CW, full QSK radio. And if you want to hear about only Ten Tec gear h
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-07/msg00738.html (10,377 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu