- 1. [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: Martin Ewing <martin.ewing@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:57:45 -0400
- When I run SP ~ 6 on 1.372, I get about double the average "talk power" seen on an RF power meter as I do with 2.056. I take it to mean that the v2 SP is effectively inoperative. Is that a fair concl
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00147.html (6,640 bytes)
- 2. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: Kc9cdt@aol.com
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 10:28:26 EDT
- The SP, NR, etc is effectively broken on V2. Hopefully TT is working on all that area (DSP). Until then, I just don't use any of it..... Kind of makes you think you have 2/3 of what you paid for for
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00162.html (7,154 bytes)
- 3. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: "Brad Bradford" <y2kbrad@hotmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:52:11 -0500
- Lee and others, PLEASE TAKE OFF YOUR BIB AND PUT DOWN THE BABY BOTTLE AND TAKE THE BABY FOOD OUT YOUR MONTH. What I'm trying to say is quit whining and crying like a baby. Those of us that understand
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00165.html (10,282 bytes)
- 4. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: "William Lee" <n5wrx@stx.rr.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 20:08:15 -0500
- You are right! I am not the Lee ou are repling to butt ..... Already I am thinking a nice Microsoft pastel instead of that drab color of the Jupiter. William Lee _____________________________________
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00166.html (9,933 bytes)
- 5. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: "Toby Pennington" <toby423@earthlink.net>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 21:28:26 -0400
- It is really bad when someone cannot make a factual and truthful remark about one of Ten Tec's products and then get royally chewed out for being a whiner and a cry baby. There needs to be a reality
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00167.html (12,384 bytes)
- 6. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: "Ron Castro" <ronc@sonic.net>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 20:03:14 -0700
- Whoa...calm down, Braddy...take a pill and chill! What Lee expressed is part of a list of legitimate concerns about O2 and v. 2.x O1 firmware that just didn't match the advertisements. No one on this
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00170.html (13,462 bytes)
- 7. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: "Grant Youngman" <nq5t@comcast.net>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:51:40 -0500
- Whew! Some of us have taken the time and made the effort to at least attempt to characterize the differences between the radios, and the differences between the firmware versions. Some differences a
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00171.html (8,158 bytes)
- 8. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: Martin Ewing <martin.ewing@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:22:56 -0400
- (A certain amount of rude language seems to go with ham radio -- or the Internet, but caps lock is de trop.) Anyway, I tried to phrase my report & question carefully. The fact seems to be that v2 fir
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00182.html (9,539 bytes)
- 9. Re: [TenTec] Orion SP on 2.056 vs 1.372 (score: 1)
- Author: Mike Gorniak <mgorniak@genesiswireless.us>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:34:42 -0500
- Sorry, Brad. Some of us consider this forum to be a place where we can share information with each other regarding the performance and operation of our Ten Tec gear. That's why we are here. If you do
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00188.html (8,394 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu