Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Radio\s+Manufacturing\s+Economics\s+Vs\s+Technology\s+\(long\)\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long) (score: 1)
Author: n9dg@yahoo.com (Duane Grotophorst)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:50:37 -0800 (PST)
It was interesting how what had started out as a simple question about frequency stability evolved into a discussion about manufacturing economics. Well now I can?t help but weigh in with some though
/archives//html/TenTec/2001-12/msg00054.html (11,350 bytes)

2. [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long) (score: 1)
Author: w9wis@charter.net (Mike Melland)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:26:19 -0500
I agree...light weight and roomy don't mean "bad". For instance... the Racal RA6790/GM military/government HF receiver. These babies are amazing receivers. They cost well over $10,000 each to the Gov
/archives//html/TenTec/2001-12/msg00062.html (8,416 bytes)

3. [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long) (score: 1)
Author: al_lorona@agilent.com (LORONA,AL (A-USA,ex3))
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:12:48 -0700
so Mike I remember starting a thread some time ago in which I declared that the Omni VI was probably the last amateur radio transceiver that would be "user-serviceable" largely because of the reason
/archives//html/TenTec/2001-12/msg00068.html (7,498 bytes)

4. [TenTec] Radio Manufacturing Economics Vs Technology (long) (score: 1)
Author: RMcGraw@Blomand.Net (Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:23:11 -0600
I agree. My most recent transmitter is one big enough to step inside, sit down (carefully) and work on it. Damn those tiny ones. Oh yes, it's a 1KW AM Broadcast rig that I run on 160M AM. C U on 1885
/archives//html/TenTec/2001-12/msg00072.html (9,703 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu