Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+QSK\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: k9ot@mhtc.net (Paul DeWitte K9OT)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:44:09 -0600
I know this is only half T T but I am wondering if anyone has tried using an Ameritron amp with the QSK board with a T T rig? If so what are/were the results? If it is not as fast / and reliable as t
/archives//html/TenTec/2002-12/msg00410.html (6,205 bytes)

2. [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: w9op@excelonline.com (Mark Michel)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 11:55:27 -0700
I have a friend with an Omni VI+ seeking information about using it with either the QRO or Commander Amps. His question is if there any problems using QSK. Thanks, Mark, W9OP -- FAQ on WWW: http://ww
/archives//html/TenTec/1999-08/msg00038.html (6,638 bytes)

3. [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 13:33:20 +0000
I've found QSK useful in handling traffic (but why in 2004 we still have a cw NTS is beyond me) where the rx station can break me for fills immediately, and in ragchewing, and calling DX in a pileup
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-05/msg00712.html (7,518 bytes)

4. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: w8au@sssnet.com
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:39:35 -0400
At 09:38 AM 08/16/2004, Dave Edwards wrote: The original post said "the majority of cw ops prefer QSK" Which I still hold is far from correct. There is life outside TenTec, and the average YaeComWood
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-08/msg00708.html (10,472 bytes)

5. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:58:01 -1000
w8au@sssnet.com wrote: Someone asked "does DXing without using QSK make one a LID?" Well, in veiw of the following, I would say in some cases, yes. I LIKE TO SEND more than receive..... I do not like
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-08/msg00715.html (9,283 bytes)

6. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: MIKE BRYCE <prosolar@sssnet.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:19:46 -0400
kinda hard to turn the rf gain down on my scout or argonaut 5. No, the attn on the argonaut 5 does not count. Weak signals may be attenuated too much. Mike Bryce, WB8VGE SunLight Energy Systems http:
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-08/msg00746.html (10,117 bytes)

7. [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: PHILLIP C FLORINE <flor0045@metnet.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:46:56 CST
In addition to all the requirements discussed previously for (good) QSK, how about transmitted element lengths being proper (3:1) whether using an internal or external keyer without having to fiddle
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00379.html (6,515 bytes)

8. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:13:00 -0500
Hmmmm....good point Paul. But that brings up the question, if you have proper 3:1 element lengths, why would you have to fiddle with the weighting? Or , is it really correct that the 3:1 ratio is pro
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00380.html (8,210 bytes)

9. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: Sinisa Hristov <shristov@ptt.yu>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:07:30 -0500
Morse timing has two aspects. Dit/pause ratio is very important and the value of 1 : 1 is actually optimal, i.e. it transmits the maximum possible "amount of information" for the given average power.
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00381.html (7,717 bytes)

10. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "Scott / W4PJ" <w4pj@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:26:10 -0500
Personally, I like a good Lake Erie Swing. -- Original Message -- QSK elements?<snip> confusing, while larger values are simply a waste of time and energy. ___________________________________________
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00382.html (7,434 bytes)

11. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:34:52 -0500
Next time you hear one, you better record it because they are rapidly fading away...! Tom - W4BQF -- Original Message -- From: "Scott / W4PJ" <w4pj@bellsouth.net> To: <tentec@contesting.com> Sent: Tu
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00383.html (8,104 bytes)

12. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "Scott / W4PJ" <w4pj@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:08:34 -0500
That's OK, I have my own. Scott _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00384.html (7,517 bytes)

13. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "n4lq" <n4lq@iglou.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:57:58 -0500
Tom: I agree that the sidetone should be a true representation of the transmitted signal however there is a delay between that and your ears that can throw off your timing if you are using a keyer or
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00386.html (10,463 bytes)

14. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "JAMES HANLON" <knjhanlon@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:14:10 -0700
I'm probably hopelessly old fashioned, I still use my "boatanchors" on the air regularly like my DX-100, Valiant, Globe King, 75A4, BC-348 and HRO-50. My QSK system uses time-sequenced mercury-wetted
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00389.html (8,762 bytes)

15. RE: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "ron" <roncasa@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:36:15 -0500
Neato! Reminds me of the tube days when I had the Heath dx 60 and matching vfo and rx. Man all the steps to go thru to tune and then manual switching between tx/rx! Sri I sold it back then.....I got
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00390.html (8,240 bytes)

16. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:15:24 -1000
Phil, I think that is a great idea. When building any transceiver (or tx/rx pair) I would think that there would be an order of priorities for acheiving various operating capabilities. My preference
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00401.html (9,209 bytes)

17. Re: [TenTec] QSK (score: 1)
Author: "JAMES HANLON" <knjhanlon@msn.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:28:41 -0700
Ron, I just came in from the unheated garage where I've been working on a vfo for a Globe Chief 90 and I caught your email. The vfo is a pto from a T195, with a 6BA6 oscillator on 160 and a 6BA6 buff
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00403.html (10,026 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 17
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu