[AMPS] Receiver performance

[i4jmy@iol.it]

Some of that numbers effectively doesn't fit, expecially for the tests 
performed with SSB filters @ 3k spacing. A spacing that's practically 
useless in a real SSB traffic because of the inherent SSB transmitters 
bandwith, unwanted sideband rejections, and so on, that suggest larger 
spacings from strong signals not to be interfered, independently by the 
receiver IMDs. 
Last but not least, some of the reported performances @ 3k are well 
over the real SSB IF filter rejections.


73,
Mauri I4JMY

> ---------- Initial message -----------
> 
> From    : owner-amps@contesting.com
> To      : Carsten Groen <cgroen@image.dk>, <amps@contesting.com>
> Cc      : 
> Date    : Mon, 13 Mar 2000 07:03:02 -0600
> Subject : Re: [AMPS] Receiver performance
> 
> 
> on 3/13/00 4:18 AM, Carsten Groen at cgroen@image.dk wrote:
> 
> > Regarding "Mission impossible" thread a
> > while back,
> > have a look at receiver performance etc
> > at:
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/20
> > 0003/msg00116.html
> 
> Someone mentioned these tests on another reflector I am on.
> 
> I don't think they are at all accurate.  They show an FT-1000D with 
about
> the same performance as an FT-847.  Trust me, I have both and the FT-
1000D
> BLOWS the 847 away.  Secondly, they show the FT-990 having BETTER
> performance than the 1000D.  How can that be?  They both have pretty 
much
> the same receiver.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Jon
> KE9NA
> 
> -------------------------------------
> Jon Ogden
> KE9NA
> 
> Member:  ARRL, AMSAT, DXCC, NRA
> 
> http://www.qsl.net/ke9na
> 
> "A life lived in fear is a life half lived."




--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm