Mail Archive Search: <+from:k8vt@ameritech.net>

Results:

References: [ +from:k8vt@ameritech.net: 247 ]

Total 247 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [TenTec] OMNI 6+ (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:26:17 -0400; I would like to know how you made the interface cable. I presume you mean the 4 pin to 8 pin mic cable. If so, I bought it at the time I bought the Advantage. 73, Carter K8VT; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-06/msg00077.html (7,321 bytes)
42. Re: [TenTec] OT: CQ Friedrichshafen Hamfest (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 16:34:10 -0400; I am using Mozilla Thunderbird for my email. It has two choices, "Reply" and "Reply List". The latter, as expected, goes to tentec@contesting.com When I use "Reply" (presumably direct to the poster),; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-06/msg00201.html (9,383 bytes)
43. Re: [TenTec] OT: CQ Friedrichshafen Hamfest (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 21:53:09 -0400; Thanks to you (and all the others) for the responses. Unfortunately, when I did that, it still came up as "tentec@contesting.com In Thunderbird, it has two "reply" choices: Reply to All -- which goe; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-06/msg00203.html (9,818 bytes)
44. Re: [TenTec] OT: CQ Friedrichshafen Hamfest (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 11:40:56 -0400; Rick (and others that have replied), Don't want to be repetitive, but whether I choose "Reply", "Reply List" or right-click on "From", the *ONLY* thing I ever see is "tentec@contesting.com", nothing; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-06/msg00210.html (10,023 bytes)
45. Re: [TenTec] OT: CQ Friedrichshafen Hamfest (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 21:07:58 -0400; Reed, Thanks for the thought ("Manually type in Rick's email address Rick@dj0ip.de") , BUT... ...there is one minor flaw with your suggestion: Until I received your message above and one other messag; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-06/msg00228.html (10,008 bytes)
46. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 16:35:53 -0400; These types of problems usually indicate that there is RF leaking An interesting thought, but can we always blame the "antenna being too close to the shack"? I bought my Omni VI new in 1994 and have; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00301.html (12,150 bytes)
47. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:18:58 -0400; You didn't specify which band(s) the problem is on. Good point -- and my bad. I forgot to mention that this happens on 80-10 when used as a conventional dipole and also on 160 when the dipole is used; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00348.html (9,971 bytes)
48. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:20:41 -0400; MOST ANY rig will if you have a bad shield connection on coax jumper, or have rig too close to the antenna, (second floor shack), and there are many other rig and feedline issues to rule out in any R; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00349.html (11,412 bytes)
49. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:22:49 -0400; I suspect you are correct. This does not surprise me in that the antenna itself (132 foot dipole at 25 feet above ground) is anything but physically balanced. The dipole is not in a straight line (be; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00350.html (11,984 bytes)
50. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:24:04 -0400; If the line is operating anywhere near a balanced Well, I guess it depends on your definition of "little" radiation. In my case, I have measured greater current in one leg of the ladder line than th; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00351.html (10,453 bytes)
51. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:24:35 -0400; What you and Bob say makes sense. However I did not mention this earlier, so let me clarify the situation: I had this problem from Day One with the Omni VI -- and no data connection to the radio at t; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00352.html (9,932 bytes)
52. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:25:23 -0400; Yeah, but... I HAVE connected the mic to the mic input -- a 705(?) TT and a Heil Pro headset. Neither works above ~ 10 watts input, even with the mic cable using various styles and quantities of ferr; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00353.html (12,222 bytes)
53. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 22:45:58 -0400; Absolutely true -- but I have never yet used the rear connector. Use the mike when needed but disconnect the rear pnl connection. Same when using the audio in on the rear, disconnect the mike. Again,; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00366.html (10,210 bytes)
54. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 17:57:21 -0400; A bit unlikely. However, a few years ago, I used a Drake TR-7 on SSB at full power (antenna and everything else the same) and it worked fine. Caveat: I am sure that the TR-7 is a lot less "computeriz; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00409.html (14,716 bytes)
55. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 17:57:33 -0400; Using a Palomar Engineers clamp-on RF ammeter, I measured 0.9 A in one leg and 1.3 A in the other on 20 meters. 73, Carter K8VT; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00410.html (10,267 bytes)
56. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 17:58:11 -0400; Yes, I have a Tektronix DMM (IMHO nicer than the Fluke 83 and 87 I've got -- but that's another story) that has a low ohms scale that compensates for the test leads. I will try it, but I am not sure; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00411.html (10,620 bytes)
57. Re: [TenTec] Trading Radio's (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 17:53:33 -0400; Bob, When you were at Dayton, I believe you were the one that mentioned that your physical inspection of the Omni VII indicated a potential "pin 1" problem. This sort of agrees with my asking TT tech; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00761.html (9,676 bytes)
58. Re: [TenTec] Trading Radio's (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 19:53:54 -0400; 1) My apologies to you and Bob for the mix up. 2) Thanks for the interesting test outlined below. 3) The question begs to be asked: How come the older solid state radios (like my TR-7) did not exhibi; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00764.html (12,223 bytes)
59. Re: [TenTec] Eagle problem? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 19:54:09 -0400; Sorry for the delayed response -- been out of the loop for awhile... No doubt true -- but if I shorten one leg to balance it on one band, will it still be unbalanced on other bands? Possibly a moot p; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-05/msg00765.html (12,260 bytes)
60. [TenTec] Bounced from list? (score: 1): Author: Carter <k8vt@ameritech.net>; Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:38:53 -0400; I got an email (presumably from the list administrator) saying "Your membership in the mailing list TenTec has been disabled due to excessive bounces The last bounce received from you was dated 09-Ap; /archives//html/TenTec/2014-04/msg00246.html (8,116 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 60
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]