Bill, You understood incorrectly! His response was to get rid of the -5 switch because of it's apparent non=reliability! And, yes, he said some users of the -5 have had success for years, just happe
Well, you are inquiring into the FUTURE! Charlotte fest occurs NEXT weekend. Who knows what will be on display? BTW, have you been following any of the Beta Orion testers web sites? For example: htt
Hmmmm........ The ARRL lab came out with IP's well below the Ten Tec specs; seems odd. TT spec is +4 dBm for the third order IM intercept point, at least that is what the ARRL lab test reports TT has
Stuart, K5KVH, wrote, in part: Thank you for the lead, Stuart. I have just been there and read the complete method, procedure and examples of how they do the 2nd and 3 rd order IP tests. I was shocke
Ron, WN3VAW, wrote in part: Well, the important "others" in this case are the engineers within the Ten Tec engineering department: Doug Smith, KF6DX; Jack Burchfield, K4JU; and Gary Barbour, engineer
Stuart, K5KVH, wrote, in part: Well, if the ARRL cannot afford to do an accurate test, using the correct and industry standard method, then, I believe they have no business substituting some other me
George, W5YR, sent me the following in a private e-mail: I did not, but after looking thru some back issues, found their work in the July/August 2002 issue (I have a short memory!). Sure enough, a ra
Read Ed Hare's piece in the July/August, 2002, QEX, pgs. 50 and 51, along with the surrounding paper by Doug Smith, pgs. 46 - 52. Many sources of inaccuracies are discussed and admitted. 73, Jim KH7M
Aloha to all following this topic, Ed Hare has written a very detailed and well presented reply to my posts and concerns, thank you Ed. And I accept your criticism of my "low blow"; was not intended
HI again Ed, And thanks for your note, in which you wrote, partly: subscription Ed, I hope he does not take too long; a couple of the folks out here had trouble being accepted! One at last got subscr
Hi guys, I apologize for the format this came in. I am going to redo the piece and resend. Not sure how, but would also like to change this font!! Am sure that is from where the format problem came a
Ok, folks, here is a proper format, I hope, with easily read font....and spell checked! My continuing note exchange with Ed Hare, ARRL Lab Supervisor. HI again Ed, And thanks for your note, in which
I rcvd and email from Ed. He has not yet been "accepted" by the list moderator to join the TT reflector. He has asked me to post his first reply to my comments about the ARRL Lab test procedures/meth
And, Ed also asked that his second reply to me be posted to the reflector. That is the post to which I most recently responded which contains much of his remarks, but with a lot of my stuff tossed in
Now here again, Ed has responded to my last post. He has also requested that I repost to the reflector, so here goes (this one came here about only 10 minutes ago): " Actually, by "Collins" standard,
Hi again, Am still thinking about the deltas between the ARRL IP numbers as they report about the Argo V and the Ten Tec claimed typical specs. Not concerned, however, as TT reports pleasure with the
see Well, that is interesting. The International Broadcast bands are full of powerful stations, each separated by only 5 kHz from the next. The 340 seems to have no trouble dealing with those, even
Hi, Last October, before I placed an Orion on order, I had asked Doug Smith about trading in my RX-340. I have always been very interested in "clean" signal performance of rcvr's, thus my interest an