- 1. Topband: Re: 160m RX (score: 1)
- Author: w8ji@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:19:45 -0400
- Not claims, measurements. What does it matter where the noise floor is, when the upper end is better than anything else you can purchase? All that means is the receiver is very very quiet when the a
- /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00089.html (8,567 bytes)
- 2. Topband: Re: 160m RX (score: 1)
- Author: artinian" <s56a@bit.si (artinian)
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 06:31:33 -0000
- W8JI: I wonder if God has spared Georgia of galactic noise? If not, 10 uV sensitivity is more then enough for 160m. This leaves plenty of room for a good input filtering permitting much greater input
- /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00090.html (9,750 bytes)
- 3. Topband: Re: 160m RX (score: 1)
- Author: i4jmy@iol.it (i4jmy@iol.it)
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:31:31 +0200
- sensitivity input only need MOSFET would Not necessarily everyone uses efficient antennas on reception, expecially on 160m. Loops or Pennants, not counting beverages with long runs of lossy cable wi
- /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00091.html (10,837 bytes)
- 4. Topband: Re: 160m RX (score: 1)
- Author: w8ji@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:35:47 -0400
- I can directly measure signal level on accurate selective voltmeters. I'll give measured data, rather than pulling numbers from thin air. Galactic noise is a non-issue on 160 meters, because the iono
- /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00092.html (9,221 bytes)
- 5. Topband: Re: 160m RX (score: 1)
- Author: artinian@siol.net (artinian)
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:50:26 -0000
- W8JI MEASUREd: Why do you need -145 dBm sensitivity even on dead 160m band at 9 AM? MEASURE the signal levels overnight. 73 de Mario, S56A, N1YU P.S. I was talking of 40 dB pads! To I4JMY: FT-847 FET
- /archives//html/Topband/2000-08/msg00093.html (7,529 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu