Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+QSK\s+with\s+QSK\-5PC\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+QSK\s+with\s+QSK\-5PC\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:01:13 -0700; Would someone who has successfully connected an Omni VI to an Ameritron amplifier equipped with the internal QSK-5PC board be willing to contact me off the list? I want to know how you connected the; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00167.html (7,507 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:53:38 -0500; Al. Whatever you do, call MFJ before you hook that thing up. I didn't and blew diodes out of a rig. My QSK was external which made it even more complicated. I can tell you this....The previous owner; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00168.html (8,152 bytes)
3. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:01:42 -0700; Hi, Steve, I believe I know why the previous owner did that to your Omni VI. (And I'm assuming you care!) Last night I made some measurements of the TX Enable signal on the back panel of the Omni VI.; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00178.html (11,654 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Phil Chambley, Sr." <k4dpk@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:44:33 -0500; On my Paragon (Q18) and Paragon II (Q14) I replaced the relay coils with 4.7k resistors, lifted the respective emitters and use them to drive base of MJE-520. Ground to emitter of the 520, collector; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00179.html (12,282 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Steve N4LQ" <n4lq@iglou.com>; Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:38:33 -0500; Phil et al. Just to clear up any confusion. I got home from work and checked the schematic on this mod. The T voltage is being uses, derived from connector 61 on the control board. This is driving Q1; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00187.html (12,598 bytes)
6. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:38:41 -0700; Is it full QSK? Al W6LX _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00251.html (14,434 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:43:01 -0500; What IS full QSK? Maybe when you hear between dots and your sending at no more than 30 wpm. Or is it when you hear between words when your sending at 50 wpm, Or is it when you know someone is breakin; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00252.html (14,596 bytes)
8. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:10:37 -0700; Tommy wrote this: Tommy has written the above. And also this: But of course, speed is the issue. Speed has always been the issue whenever the subject of QSK has come up on this reflector. Tommy is th; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00255.html (9,575 bytes)
9. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: jsb@digistar.com; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:03:16 -0500 (EST); The mailing list doesn't have QSK capability. My understanding of the subject is, the transceiver won't send RF until it knows the amp is ready for it as a means to prevent clipped dits and fouled re; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00256.html (9,626 bytes)
10. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:29:35 -0700; Well, then, if the radio must *wait* until the amp is ready, then by definition this is degraded QSK compared to the transceiver alone. My question is *how much* is it degraded? Al W6LX ____________; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00261.html (9,181 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: Duane A Calvin <ac5aa@juno.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:32:50 -0600; Depends on the amplifier's relay close delay time, doesn't it? That assumes you're using the QSK loop and the amp relay is keying the rig. So, in this case, it would be a fixed value depending on the; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00263.html (9,757 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:45:20 -0500; Deer Al, From my meger experience, there is no difference in QSK capability when running an Omni 6 or an Omni 6 Plus or a Corsair II with or without a Titan 425. I say Titan 425 because that is the a; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00265.html (13,476 bytes)
13. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:45:26 -0700; Hi, Duane. Well, you've got an interesting point. If it's a fixed value, then as my CW speed increases, the relay delay time becomes a bigger and bigger percentage of my inter-dit time, and at some; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00266.html (8,692 bytes)
14. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:58:58 -0700; Fine. I couldn't really care less what the Orion can or can't do. I think you should get rid of that thing. Yeah, I think that's part of my point. Even some of the replies to this thread obviously h; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00267.html (11,214 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: "Tommy" <aldermant@alltel.net>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:10:28 -0500; 'Figure of merit' ? I don't think so. The primary purpose of an amplifier is to amplify. QSK in an amplifier is a sometimes added luxury. I think if you would get same Ten Tec manuals and study the s; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00268.html (10,895 bytes)
16. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:14:48 -0700; Tommy, this has nothing to do with whether I believe that you did something or not! Whenever I've doubted, I was doubting only the practical usefulness of something, not questioning whether you did; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00269.html (8,765 bytes)
17. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1): Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:17:19 -0700; Tommy, I never understand you. You start off by dismissing the 'figure of merit' concept, then you conclude by giving various figures of merit for various amplifiers! I'll take the latter and pretend; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00270.html (11,822 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 17
Page: [1]