- 41. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
- I'm 98% sure in the 455 kHz IF. The IF scheme from what I can tell is very close to the Pegasus/Jupiter with 45 MHz 1st IF and ~455 kHz second IF. Putting the improved filtering in those two spots wi
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00221.html (9,104 bytes)
- 42. [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 11:19:01 -0400
- N9DG: tell is very close to the Pegasus/Jupiter with 45 MHz 1st IF and ~455 kHz second IF. Putting the improved filtering in those two spots will improve two areas of weakness in the RX320/350, Pegas
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00222.html (8,899 bytes)
- 43. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: K4IA@aol.com
- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 11:36:17 EDT
- Should the latter turn out to be true, expect Inrad to offer a 4-5 kHz roofer at 45 MHz in the blink of an eye! If INRAD can do it, why not TT? Without much narrower roofing filters, I suspect this r
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00224.html (8,265 bytes)
- 44. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: wa3fiy@radioadv.com
- Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 12:43:13 -0400
- I imagine the Omni VII will have a significantly different first local oscillator than the Jupiter. The Jupiter tunes in 2.5 Khz steps with all finer tuning done in the DSP IF. That is possible becau
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00226.html (9,353 bytes)
- 45. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: Caitlyn Martin <k7vo@mizuhoradio.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 13:00:59 -0500
- Hi, Jim, Grant, and everyone else, First, I agree with everything Grant said about why general coverage can be important. Most general coverage transceivers could also be modified when changes in ama
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00230.html (10,223 bytes)
- 46. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: Jim Lowman <jmlowman@sbcglobal.net>
- Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 20:33:45 -0700
- Hi Caity, Grant and all, First, let me say that I was not putting down general-coverage reception. Like many potential hams in the 50s/60s and earlier, I began as a SWL. My first receiver was a Halli
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00248.html (12,586 bytes)
- 47. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: Philip Leonard WVØT <leolists@seidkr.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 12:41:29 -0500
- No it's not SNOBOL it is DIBOL!! Yep, it has a DEC PDP-8 cpu in it. _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/list
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00392.html (9,655 bytes)
- 48. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: ron <roncasa@verizon.net>
- Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 15:35:20 -0400
- heh heh Ron, wb1hga _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00396.html (8,184 bytes)
- 49. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: "Bwana Bob" <wb2vuf@qsl.net>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 09:22:01 -0400
- Traditionally, that is true. Ham-band-only receivers were superior. Tuned circuits could be more selective because they tuned over a narrower range. VFO's, too, could be made more linear and stable,
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00431.html (11,827 bytes)
- 50. Re: [TenTec] Yep -- Omni VII (score: 1)
- Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@storm.weather.net>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 09:10:16 -0500
- Though there might be. The broad front ends can be prone to 2nd order intermod that the tuned front ends don't show. Tuning the SW BC bands there are stations elbow to elbow and sometimes overlapping
- /archives//html/TenTec/2006-08/msg00435.html (11,826 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu