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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+dual\s+receive\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "GARY HUBER" <glhuber@msn.com>; Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:56:21 -0500; It appears to me, when I check my Omni VI Plus manual, that you cannot simply connect the AUX antenna jacks of two OMNI VI Plus radios to get dual RX off of the main antenna of one of the transceiver; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-09/msg00599.html (8,849 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "D. Kemp" <nn8b@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:08:42 -0700 (PDT); Be careful of connecting a receiver to the Aux Ant jack. I looked into doing just that, but checked the output of the Aux Ant jack first. I get 0.041VDC from that jack when the transmitter is at 100; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-09/msg00601.html (8,013 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "GARY HUBER" <glhuber@msn.com>; Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 07:22:34 -0500; In my previous configurations using a Corsair II or OMNI-D, and an AUX receiver ( R4-B, Paragon, and OMNI VI+), I used the Corsair's N.O. relay to operate a multiple contact double throw relay to tak; /archives//html/TenTec/2006-09/msg00624.html (9,944 bytes)
4. [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: kdl8932 <w6fg@pacbell.net>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:08:35 -0700 (PDT); Hello All, One of the things I liked best about the older T-T rigs was the dual receive feature. What a great weapon when digging into the pile-ups! I assume that the only current Ten-Tec rig with th; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00073.html (7,474 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Barry N1EU" <barry.n1eu@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:14:42 -0400; Ross, I believe you're correct. With the Orions, you actually have two separate receivers and all operating controls are independent and adjustable. 73, Barry N1EU ___________________________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00074.html (8,362 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:50:32 -0400; Yes, you are correct. But you can also run the Omni VII and an rx320 receiver together using my N4PY software for full dual receive. My software will marry the 2 radios together so it will work as th; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00075.html (9,052 bytes)
7. [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: John Rippey <w3uls73@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:02:34 -0400; Carl, et al: Re the RX-320 as a second receiver, my impression is that it's a pretty primitive receiver and would not hold up in pileups, etc. Am I wrong? 73, John, W3ULS ____________________________; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00084.html (7,204 bytes)
8. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:35:55 -0400; It works fine to find the callers for the DX station. The receiver is actually almost the same as the Jupiter receiver without the bells and whistles. 73, Carl Moreschi N4PY 121 Little Bell Drive Bel; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00092.html (8,279 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Kevin Purcell <kevinpurcell@pobox.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 19:00:30 -0700; I own a couple of them. The front end is not dissimilar to an Argosy (RF amp then homemade diode ring) but it's biggest problem is it is lacking preselection. So its exposed to every signal from MW t; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00095.html (8,884 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Kevin Purcell <kevinpurcell@pobox.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 19:12:08 -0700; I really would have though the Jupiter would be better -- it probably is in real life with better preselection/LPF. The intercepts for the RX320 are not very impressive. ARRL RX320 review: Minimum di; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00097.html (9,192 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 19:53:50 -0700 (PDT); The RX-320 and the Pegasus/Jupiter are conceptually very similar, but there are some really quite significant differences circuit-wise. The RX-320's analog signal path is this: 1. Antenna. 2. Single; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00100.html (10,691 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Kevin Purcell <kevinpurcell@pobox.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 23:21:32 -0700; I can't believe I misread the schematic and missed the first mixer. I looked over the circuit diagram (after messing with my Argosy and Omni 546C) and that left an impression that they must be using; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00103.html (13,745 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@storm.weather.net>; Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:30:33 -0600; I'd rather see them spend $3.95 on a packaged mixer made by an expert in mixer making than spend 2 cents on slightly slow diodes and 23 cents each on almost good enough transformers. I think the rece; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00111.html (10,596 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Kevin Purcell <kevinpurcell@pobox.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:36:03 -0700; I've wondered about this in the past too. Using "hand-built" mixers seems to be a part of the TT design style and has been for years. I would have though production costs would have swamped the compo; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00115.html (9,295 bytes)
15. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 11:08:46 -0700 (PDT); Though the Corsair II and the Omni VI use a "monolithic" mixers in the first IF. Haven't seen an Omni V or Paragon inside to know what they use. I'd be surprised if the Jupiter is not just like the P; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00116.html (9,098 bytes)
16. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 11:32:53 -0700 (PDT); I assume the Jupiter is like the Pegasus where the incoming RX is routed throgh a diode switched set of filters (octave?). The TX low pass filters are bypassed when in RX. I never got the sense that; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00119.html (10,888 bytes)
17. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Kevin Purcell <kevinpurcell@pobox.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 17:32:33 -0700; Yes, it's all in the loop design. The Elecraft K2 is rather smart about this in moving in big steps and them tweaking the PLL reference (using a DDS) to move the PLL between the big steps. The RX320; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00133.html (10,487 bytes)
18. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@storm.weather.net>; Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:33:25 -0600; At least in the 2m to 6m transverter there are no balance adjustments. Back in 1963 at Collins we figured a two leaded component cost 25 cents to mount on conventional construction, not printed circu; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00139.html (12,374 bytes)
19. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 19:48:24 -0700 (PDT); Yep, they all do the 2.5 kHz step for the first LO, then fine tune in the DSP. If I'm not mistaken the RX-330/331/340 use a 1 kHz step. Don't know what thier PLL is. If Sherwood ever tests the Pegasu; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00145.html (10,679 bytes)
20. Re: [TenTec] dual receive (score: 1): Author: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py@arrl.net>; Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 22:54:49 -0400; The rx340 is bad on the close in dynamic range because the DSP in the RX340 only has a 40 db range. So any signal in the roofing filter passband (+- 10 khz) can only have 40 db of AGC applied to it.; /archives//html/TenTec/2007-10/msg00147.html (12,043 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1]