Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:wb5jnc@centurytel.net: 291 ]

Total 291 documents matching your query.

81. Re: [TenTec] New or Used Decision; Omni VII (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:55:46 -0600
What I find interesting (if I'm reading Sherwood's chart correctly) is that the Corsair (other than filter ultimate rejection) and Omni V come in very close to a statistical dead heat with the Omni V
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-01/msg00165.html (9,806 bytes)

82. Re: [TenTec] TenTec 544 (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:42:49 -0600
I've seen the RIT/offset circuit cause this kind of issue. The offset trim pot may need to be readjusted. The procedure is in the manual on page 3-39 (at least on the copy that's posted on TT's websi
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-02/msg00196.html (8,319 bytes)

83. Re: [TenTec] OT: Openwire Balanced Antenna Tuners (QST Test) (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:58:06 -0600
Rick, TNX for the spreadsheet - it's an interesting read. What I gleaned in a quick analysis is that while they aren't as convenient, the "old school" link-coupled tuners (in this case, the Johnson M
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-02/msg00209.html (10,049 bytes)

84. Re: [TenTec] low power 509 Argonaut (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:21:08 -0600
Phil, This fellow seems to be pretty heavily into repairing the old Argonauts: http://www.earlandrews.com/argonot1.html Maybe he could shed some light on what to look for. ___________________________
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-02/msg00374.html (8,489 bytes)

85. [TenTec] FS: 217 & 219 filters (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 17:22:13 -0600
Clearing out the excess stock: 217 (500 Hz) and 219 (250 Hz) 9 MHz filters, tested in the "ALalyzer Analyzer" (Argosy) and seem to work as they should. $60 each shipped CONUS or $110 for the pair shi
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00044.html (6,719 bytes)

86. Re: [TenTec] FS: 217 & 219 filters (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:10:00 -0600
Filters are spoken for. TNX/73, Al _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00045.html (7,410 bytes)

87. Re: [TenTec] ORION shows strange behavior, like drift during TX (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:54:44 -0600
I wouldn't totally discount the possibility of RF sneaking back in where it wasn't supposed to - the cable to the footswitch could be functioning as a "Murphy"* antenna. Might a snap-on ferrite choke
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00057.html (13,441 bytes)

88. Re: [TenTec] TEN-TEC SSB NETS ON SUNDAY (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 12:33:06 -0500
Wade, You gotta give these folks some slack - they may not be able to move because they have special XTAL control rigs just for the net frequency HI HI!! (Or maybe their tuning knob is stuck???) 73,
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00224.html (9,061 bytes)

89. Re: [TenTec] Digital noise in ten Tec Argosy II (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:30:29 -0500
Maybe apples and oranges, but I seem to remember a thread (or conversation with TT service?) back when about display noise being related to bypass cap issues on the Omni-Ds - I'd guess the same might
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00234.html (10,698 bytes)

90. Re: [TenTec] TT Orange ball: "Press Release" (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 20:09:39 -0500
Wonder if the guys at the factory are listening? -- Press Release from "Pseudo Ten-Tek Inc." (Undated, sometime in the future) - We at Pseudo Ten-Tek (hereafter PTT) pride ourselves on listening to o
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-03/msg00314.html (10,852 bytes)

91. Re: [TenTec] Subject: Re: WTB: TT 288 SSB Filter (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:04:26 -0500
Here's a direct link to the ad: FS/TRADE: Ten-TEC Filter for Corsair Ten Tec 288 1.8 KHz 8 Pole Ladder Filter, 6.3 MHz $60. Shipped in small Flat Rate Priority Box. USPS Money Order or Paypal http://
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-04/msg00017.html (9,709 bytes)

92. Re: [TenTec] Built in SWR meter bannans (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:52:49 -0500
Jim, TNX for the info. Does it matter whether the THHN is solid or stranded? What core size do you recommend (I'm guessing 2" or so)? Also, (purely from a "dumb questions dept." perspective) would a
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-04/msg00254.html (11,455 bytes)

93. Re: [TenTec] New rig at DAyton (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 20:03:25 -0500
Given the name "Rebel" and the fact that the code is open source, wonder when we'll see one that plays "Dixie" through the sidetone monitor on bootup? _______________________________________________
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-05/msg00101.html (7,605 bytes)

94. Re: [TenTec] RX366 (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 21:23:21 -0500
Rick, I have to agree. Even with just casual operating (I'm not a contester) I've seen more than one situation where other stations were complaining about "splatter" or QRM (on both SSB and CW) which
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-05/msg00158.html (9,215 bytes)

95. Re: [TenTec] (no subject) (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 19:19:53 -0500
I'm a little late with the reply here, but I think this needs to be said. It is a rarity indeed to see a spokesman for a U.S. company give a "mea culpa" simply because they didn't bring a product to
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-05/msg00177.html (8,076 bytes)

96. Re: [TenTec] message Steve Miller (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 14:35:17 -0500
Be careful clicking on links even if you do have good antivirus etc. protection. Look up "Zero day exploit" if you want to see what I mean. There was an article on the IBM Developerworks site (unfort
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-06/msg00045.html (9,130 bytes)

97. Re: [TenTec] RF Speech Processor "TX IMD" (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 13:51:53 -0500
Actually, there is already a government mandated "clean transmitter standard." It's called "Sec. 97.307" (as in FCC Part 97) and is titled "Emission standards." Might an update of this section of Par
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-06/msg00167.html (11,489 bytes)

98. Re: [TenTec] RF Speech Processor "TX IMD" (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 18:50:23 -0500
Rick, 97.307 doesn't specify which order IMD or what testing method; paragraph (d) just says "spurious emissions" must be at least 43 dB below fundamental (2003 on, pre-1978 products are exempt.) I i
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-06/msg00172.html (13,926 bytes)

99. Re: [TenTec] RF Speech Processor "TX IMD" (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 20:58:47 -0500
Well said Bob. The only thing I'd note is that in the broadcast industry "back then" (I was a small market AM chief and TV operating and maintenance engineer for a while) "good engineering practice"
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-06/msg00176.html (12,240 bytes)

100. Re: [TenTec] Orion II Low Output on 12 and 15 m (score: 1)
Author: Al Gulseth <wb5jnc@centurytel.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 10:44:39 -0500
An LPF relay could be a suspect, or a component in the LPF for those bands may have changed value. (Apples and oranges here, but I had an Argosy way back when that went to TT for warranty service on
/archives//html/TenTec/2013-06/msg00319.html (12,313 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu