It's not too late for them to put those in you know!
73,
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
To: 'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment' <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sun, Sep 26, 2010 8:01 pm
Subject: Re: [TenTec] The Eagle
Paul, I couldn't disagree more, although you are right :-)
For me, I don't give a hoot about a connection for a Pan adapter.
I need a radio, not a tv set.
I want to have a separate RX antenna input.
I want to have the ability to insert a preselector when I use the radio
in
Europe.
But you know what....I can install both of those myself. I don't need
TenTec to do it for me. I have a drill.
My take, TenTec wanted to get the product to market as quickly as
possible.
FULLY AGREE, they should make a few extra holes on the back panel.
But get the product on the market ASAP to stop the erosion away from the
brand.
To my knowledge, this is the first Ten-Tec transceiver that does not
have 2
extra "spare" RCA phono plugs on the back panel. Too bad.
73
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
On Behalf Of Paul Christensen
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 4:26 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] The Eagle
Importance: High
Probably the most significant way to sway TS-590 purchasers over to the
Eagle is to include a 9 MHz I.F. port for use with LP-PAN, SDR-IQ, or
QS1R
as a panadapter and second Rx. For the minimal manufacturing effort, I
just
cannot see how this one significant feature could be overlooked with
the
full production unit. At the very least, a panel hole for a BNC jack
should
be provided for those that want to add their own I.F. buffer, like that
manufactured and sold by Jack Smith at Clifton Labs.
Paul, W9AC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richards" <jruing@ameritech.net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] The Eagle
> OK... I can follow that. Thanks for the additional gloss.
>
>
> ====================== JHR ============================
>
> On 9/26/2010 16:41, Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP wrote:
>> Richards, I made that statement about having degrade GC receivers if
they
>> are in a transceiver; but it is NOT true for the Omni VII.
>
>> The receiver is only degraded when you are trying to receive at or
near
>> the
>> IF frequency (i.e., 9 MHz).
>> It is not degraded across the rest of the GC spectrum. Sorry for the
>> confusion.
>>
> ===========================================================
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|