Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+AlfaSpid\-\s+Prosistel\s+Debate\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+AlfaSpid\-\s+Prosistel\s+Debate\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] AlfaSpid- Prosistel Debate (score: 1): Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>; Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:59:05 -0600; I own products from both companies and find BOTH to have good products and support. That said, I am surprised and dissatisfied at some of the things said in Jay's posting. I would not have believed t; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-03/msg00148.html (7,987 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] AlfaSpid- Prosistel Debate (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:56:03 -0800; I'd be even more interested in the details of the "Navy approval"... what requirements (some form of MIL-810 for environments? MIL-461 for EMI/EMC?), what testing, etc. DoD has literally millions of; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-03/msg00149.html (8,400 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] AlfaSpid- Prosistel Debate (score: 1): Author: <kb5my@starband.net>; Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 16:18:38 -0500 (EST); I'm just guessing here, but the Navy could also just be buying them for use at shore-based MARS stations located on Navy & Marine Corps bases. This would indicate NO testing, NO adherence to any kno; /archives//html/Towertalk/2006-03/msg00150.html (9,144 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]