Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+More\s+IP3\s+Stuff\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+More\s+IP3\s+Stuff\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Fri Mar 7 16:08:29 2003; 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; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00299.html (11,507 bytes)
2. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w1rfi@arrl.org (Hare,Ed, W1RFI); Date: Fri Mar 7 16:16:41 2003; Hi, Jim, An important nit -- the spec for the RX-340 IP3 is +30 dBm typical, +25 dBm min. Those negative numbers would be bad. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-59; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00301.html (8,144 bytes)
3. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w9ac@arrl.net (Paul Christensen, Esq.); Date: Fri Mar 7 16:19:28 2003; That's quite an endorsement from Ulrich...particularly since his company is (allegedly) working with ICOM on their newest transceiver, (ICOM PRO III perhaps?) which I understand is behind schedule fo; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00302.html (13,790 bytes)
4. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Fri Mar 7 16:52:03 2003; Oops! Thanks, Ed. 73, Jim PS: I have looked, but can't find that I logged down my QSO with Dean on the TT 2, oh well.; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00304.html (8,425 bytes)
5. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jmerrill1@adelphia.net (John L Merrill); Date: Fri Mar 7 17:52:51 2003; I think at close spacing, though, the RX340 crumbles. Sherwood did a test and it didnt fair too well at 5khz for dynamic range (46db). What I dont see on his website is his testing setup. Oops! Thank; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00305.html (9,514 bytes)
6. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Fri Mar 7 18:32:34 2003; 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; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00309.html (8,390 bytes)
7. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w1rfi@arrl.org (Hare,Ed, W1RFI); Date: Fri Mar 7 18:50:45 2003; Just a quick check of an unspecified receiver I just tested in the screen room: Reference level IP3 -120 dBm 3 dBm -100 dBm 5 dBm -80 dBm 2.5 dBm -75 dBm 3 dBm -70 dBm 3.5 dBm -65 dBm 8.5 dBm -60 dB; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00313.html (12,180 bytes)
8. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w9ac@arrl.net (Paul Christensen, Esq.); Date: Fri Mar 7 19:05:11 2003; see I believe Carl, N4PY has added a switchable 4 kHz roofing filter to his RX-340, similar to that available in the Orion. I suspect at just over 5 kHz spacing, his performance figures are pretty s; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00314.html (8,517 bytes)
9. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w9ac@arrl.net (Paul Christensen, Esq.); Date: Fri Mar 7 19:15:37 2003; I found Carl's original Message from last year that addresses the addition of his RX-340 4 kHz roofing filter. Pay particular attention to the last paragraph. -Paul, W9AC; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00316.html (11,836 bytes)
10. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: wg6h@postoffice.pacbell.net (Bill Miner); Date: Fri Mar 7 23:02:53 2003; Jim & Ten Tekies, I think you are the one that started this thread and I have learned a lot from reading all of the posts as well as being inspired to re-read the receiver test procedure data that is; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00326.html (14,812 bytes)
11. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Sat Mar 8 21:21:33 2003; Ed, W1RFI, reported on Friday results from the ARRL Lab screen room: Oh my, now some added lights have been turned "on"! I now have a whole bunch of questions/thoughts, hi. First off: an epiphany! I; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00340.html (15,057 bytes)
12. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Sat Mar 8 23:26:01 2003; A very clear display of what AGC gain reduction, or switched in attenuation via such device on a radio will do, just scroll on down to the IP table which Ten Tec displays on the RX-340 specification; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00345.html (9,535 bytes)
13. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w1rfi@arrl.org (Hare,Ed, W1RFI); Date: Sun Mar 9 07:37:47 2003; AGC "on" is the ONLY way to make receiver measurments with a receiver output that would be more than about 30 or 40 dB above the noise floor. But the effect is not quite what you are thinking. In ma; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00349.html (15,416 bytes)
14. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w3uls@3n.net (John Rippey); Date: Sun Mar 9 08:08:45 2003; Given the variables involved in lab data results and their interpretation, as discussed in this thread, there seems to be no substitute for in-home evaluations of transceiver performance by each ham; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00353.html (10,949 bytes)
15. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: w1rfi@arrl.org (Hare,Ed, W1RFI); Date: Sun Mar 9 16:19:46 2003; Alas, to my knowledge, no one doing testing looks at more than a sample of one. The ARRL Lab ends up spending about 20-30 test hours on a major rig and it really isn't possible to do complete testin; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00367.html (9,333 bytes)
16. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: csegar@mindspring.com (Cliff); Date: Mon Mar 10 20:52:13 2003; Well, the discussion on this has died down a bit. I'm hoping that I'm in the same boat as many (translation: I hope I'm not the most ignorant on the reflector! ;-) and am trying to digest all of the; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00451.html (9,239 bytes)
17. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: calderman@cox.net (Chester); Date: Mon Mar 10 21:50:34 2003; Re: IsoLine If it's really got 50/60db isolation, it is not a 'reasonably good item', it is one heck of an excellent item! Think I paid over $500 for an HF combiner/splitter with 40db isolation for m; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00456.html (9,903 bytes)
18. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: jimr.reid@verizon.net (Jim Reid); Date: Mon Mar 10 21:55:12 2003; Don't know; I can't find a thing about it anywhere at the TT web site. Where do you find this gadget? If it is the combiner U. Rohde makes reference to, as designed by Doug Smith, I am sure it is ju; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00459.html (8,537 bytes)
19. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: res0wsci@verizon.net (WILLIAM MANSEY; WA2PVK); Date: Mon Mar 10 22:53:53 2003; Click on the "commercial products" link on the top of the Ten-Tec home page. The combiner/splitter is down the page from the receivers res0wsci@verizon.net -- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. C; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00464.html (8,376 bytes)
20. [TenTec] More IP3 Stuff (score: 1): Author: csegar@mindspring.com (Cliff); Date: Mon Mar 10 23:08:48 2003; It's listed under the commercial products. I guess us hams don't buy test equipment unless its used at a hamfest??!!?? <http://www.tentec.com/TT651.htm> At $129 a copy, it seems like a real deal. At; /archives//html/TenTec/2003-03/msg00465.html (8,722 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]