Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+2\.7\s+filters\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+2\.7\s+filters\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] 2.7 filters (score: 1): Author: EdGuzis@cris.com (Ed Guzis .); Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 20:45:32 -0600; Everyone involved in the 2.7 filter discussion, please note: In discussions with Ten Tec engineers on the phone today, it was pointed out to me that using anything wider than the standard 2.4 KHz fil; /archives//html/TenTec/1998-01/msg00087.html (7,376 bytes)
2. [TenTec] 2.7 filters (score: 1): Author: turner@safety.ics.uci.edu (Clark Savage Turner WA3JPG); Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 21:36:34 -0800; To: <tentec@contesting.com> Why would this be? Another 300 Hz of bandwidth causes catastrophe? Something seems amiss here. I have used wider filters in other rigs, and I know my carrier is still dow; /archives//html/TenTec/1998-01/msg00090.html (7,415 bytes)
3. [TenTec] 2.7 Filters (score: 1): Author: EdGuzis@cris.com (Ed Guzis .); Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 07:29:59 -0600; Hi Everyone, Like Clark, WA3JPG, I am confused on the response of TT about the use of wider filters in the Omni VI. My experience with crystal filter modifications on older non-TT crystal mixed rigs; /archives//html/TenTec/1997-12/msg00290.html (7,483 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]