[TenTec]
Re: What's this "Radio" jazz all about? Where did that come from?
Allan Henry Kaplan
w1ael at mindspring.com
Tue Mar 30 11:13:29 EST 2004
Al, as I understand those words, "duplicate" refers to one copy and
"replicate" refers to an indefinite number of copies. Similarly, I
believe that "excuse" is transitive and "recuse" is reflexive, that is
to say, one excuses another person, but recuses himself.
When we come to such bloopers as "and so on ad-infinitum" and "and
etcetera", their redundant nature reflects an ignorance of the Latin
meanings of "ad infinitum" and "et cetera". The dead language lives on!
73 to fellow lovers of our language,
Allan, W1AEL.
AL wrote,
"Same place 'replicate' instead of duplicate and 'recuse' instead
of excuse and so on ad-infinitum came from."
tentec-request at contesting.com wrote:
> Send TenTec mailing list submissions to
> tentec at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tentec-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tentec-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TenTec digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Omni VI+ TX (Paul DeWitte K9OT)
> 2. 20 Meter Ten Tec User's Net - March 28, 2004 (Ronnie Zoerb)
> 3. Re: BPL Update (Stuart Rohre)
> 4. Re: BPL Update (Stuart Rohre)
> 5. 280 power supply chassis- FREE (Edward Crawford)
> 6. Re: OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> (Ken Brown)
> 7. Re: OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> (Alfred Lorona)
> 8. RE: OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> (Rick Westerman)
> 9. Corsair II warble (Bob Towers)
> 10. Re: OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> 11. RE: OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> (James Duffer)
> 12. Re: Corsair II warble (Tommy)
> 13. Re: Corsair II warble (Bob Towers)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 12:12:40 -0600
> From: "Paul DeWitte K9OT" <k9ot at mhtc.net>
> To: <TenTec at contesting.com>
> Subject: [TenTec] Omni VI+ TX
> Message-ID: <000e01c415b9$707d2800$70c4b4d8 at t7s1b6>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="Windows-1252"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 1
>
> I receieved an email from a person that was in the 3B9C 160m pileup last
> night the same time that I was.
> The 3B9C was listening 5 up (and that was where I was transmitting). He said
> that he heard me 5 up and could also hear me on the 3B9C TX freq.
>
> Has anyone else had this problem of TX on 2 freq at the same time? I would
> doubt that his rig would be that wide on RCV that that would be the problem.
> Any comments? Sure dont want to clutter up the band. Especially not knowing
> that I am doing it.
>
> Thanks 73 Paul K9OT
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:22:53 -0700
> From: "Ronnie Zoerb" <r.zoerb at worldnet.att.net>
> To: "Ten Tec Reflector" <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: [TenTec] 20 Meter Ten Tec User's Net - March 28, 2004
> Message-ID: <001001c415cb$9e286b90$a3ae490c at sony>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 2
>
> In the midst of the DX contest, 13 check-ins were heard. Band conditions
> appeared to be pretty good with major contest activity. Thanks to all who
> took the time to find us and to Dudley (WA5QPZ) for his help with the net.
>
> Model and number of Ten Tec rigs noted:
>
> Jupiter = 3
> Omni VI+ = 3
> Orion = 2
> Pegasus = 2
> Corsair = 1
> Delta 580 = 1
> Omni V.9 = 1
>
> SPC = TX, TN, MO, MI, CT, TX, NC, IA, OH, MA, NC, BC and CO.
>
> If anyone tried and was unable to check in, please let me know.
> KI0II at ARRL.NET
>
> 73 es everyone have a good week.
>
> Ron KI0II
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:23:44 -0600
> From: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre at arlut.utexas.edu>
> To: "A. Sewell" <n5na at arrl.net>, <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] BPL Update
> Message-ID: <059601c415f5$a4d415f0$4e100a0a at rohredt2000>
> References:
> <20040325003214.29460.qmail at web12401.mail.yahoo.com><046701c4121a$eb554460$03010a0a at office1><000501c41273$ec51a850$24da27a2 at w4bqf2><046101c412ba$dd0bc690$4e100a0a at rohredt2000>
> <003c01c412c7$db3cc000$0f8d48a6 at dell410>
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 3
>
> It came over one the mailing lists. Check out the Ten Tec mailing list
> archives, or maybe it was Glowbugs. Within past two weeks on the
> reflectors.
>
> There is extensive info on the Manassas VA trial on their web page for the
> local club there.
> ARRL.org also has BPL links.
> -Stuart
> K5KVH
>
> since I get hundreds of reflector messages, I do not keep all nor even note
> sometimes which one something comes in on.
> Sorry about that.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:26:05 -0600
> From: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre at arlut.utexas.edu>
> To: <k4rv at mindspring.com>, <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] BPL Update
> Message-ID: <059901c415f5$f8acedf0$4e100a0a at rohredt2000>
> References: <410-2200435260178420 at mindspring.com>
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 4
>
> Tom
> As others noted, UHF channels are being taken up with HD TV, as it requires
> more channel bandwidth for that mode.
>
> Also, other TV channels in traditional bands are to be "refarmed" when HDTV
> is the only allowed transmissions.
> Public Safety agencies were one of those asking for more VHF space.
> 73,
> Stuart
> K5KVH
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:17:47 -0500
> From: "Edward Crawford" <w4wvw at msn.com>
> To: "tentec" <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: [TenTec] 280 power supply chassis- FREE
> Message-ID: <BAY4-DAV138eTtwq8zj00000d09 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 5
>
> I have an empty chassis for a 280 power supply for the cost of postage =
> if anyone needs it. Tired of moving it out of the way every time I get =
> something off the closet shelf. This is the bottom chassis with the =
> front and rear panels only, no top cover. Pretty good shape, couple very =
> light small scratches on the front. The main defect is the bottom is =
> slightly dented where the transformer sits, and this dent has very =
> slightly distorted the very bottom of the front panel. This could all be =
> massaged out if someone took care to not make it look worse. This would =
> be a good candidate if someone has a 280 that needs a refurb, and the =
> price is right.
> Let me know if you're interested.
>
> 73. Ed/w4wvw
>
> w4wvw at msn.com<mailto:w4wvw at msn.com> From k5uj at hotmail.com Mon Mar 29 22:09:52 2004
> Return-Path: <k5uj at hotmail.com>
> X-Original-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Delivered-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by dayton.akorn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9DE3319547
> for <tentec at contesting.com>; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:09:52 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from dayton.akorn.net ([127.0.0.1])
> by localhost (dayton.akorn.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
> with ESMTP id 19747-15 for <tentec at contesting.com>;
> Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:09:51 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from hotmail.com (bay12-f76.bay12.hotmail.com [64.4.35.76])
> by dayton.akorn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083BD319387
> for <tentec at contesting.com>; Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:09:51 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
> Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:09:49 -0800
> Received: from 209.112.93.241 by by12fd.bay12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
> Tue, 30 Mar 2004 03:09:48 GMT
> X-Originating-IP: [209.112.93.241]
> X-Originating-Email: [k5uj at hotmail.com]
> X-Sender: k5uj at hotmail.com
> From: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj at hotmail.com>
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 03:09:48 +0000
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> Message-ID: <BAY12-F76i2rTWeyPFk00013803 at hotmail.com>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Mar 2004 03:09:49.0351 (UTC)
> FILETIME=[764ACB70:01C41604]
> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at contesting.com
> cc: k5uj at hotmail.com
> Subject: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> X-BeenThere: tentec at contesting.com
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> List-Id: <tentec.contesting.com>
> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec>,
> <mailto:tentec-request at contesting.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <http://dayton.akorn.net/pipermail/tentec>
> List-Post: <mailto:tentec at contesting.com>
> List-Help: <mailto:tentec-request at contesting.com?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec>,
> <mailto:tentec-request at contesting.com?subject=subscribe>
>
> I was QRT for around 18 years and became active again around 4 years ago.
> When I was active before, transmitters-receivers/transceivers were called
> rigs. When I came back they all had become "radios." I kind of went with
> it with some perplexity but I've decided to ask what happened because a guy
> wrote an article in CQ this month, telling his tale of being QRT for around
> 45 years and coming back, and he asked the same thing in his article.
> What's this "Radio" jazz all about? Where did that come from? A radio is
> this consumer electronics appliance folks use to swl, hear weather alerts,
> broadcast transmissions, police, fire etc. A T4 isn't a radio. Neither is
> a KWM2, or an Orion or anything else in a shack that delivers and receives
> RF. They're rigs. We're hams. We have rigs. We don't need no stinkin'
> radios. Next, the shack will be called the radio room.
>
> Rob Atkinson
> K5UJ
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> All the action. All the drama. Get NCAA hoops coverage at MSN Sports by
> ESPN. http://msn.espn.go.com/index.html?partnersite=espn
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:38:50 -1000
> From: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown at verizon.net>
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> Message-ID: <4068EBCA.6030203 at verizon.net>
> References: <BAY12-F76i2rTWeyPFk00013803 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 6
>
>
>> We're hams. We have rigs. We don't need no stinkin' radios. Next,
>>the shack will be called the radio room.
>
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> What's even worse is when they ask "base station or mobile?" I hear
> "base station" a lot. Fortunately I seldom hear the term "channel" ,
> though I have heard it, and it really makes me sad.
>
> DE N6KB
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:35:34 -0800
> From: "Alfred Lorona" <w6wqc at dslextreme.com>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Cc: k5uj at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> Message-ID: <006c01c41615$075ee3c0$cde99f42 at x8m0b2>
> References: <BAY12-F76i2rTWeyPFk00013803 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: Alfred Lorona <w6wqc at dslextreme.com>, tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 7
>
>
>
>>What's this "Radio" jazz all about? Where did that come from?
>
>
> Same place 'replicate' instead of duplicate and 'recuse' instead of excuse
> and so on ad-infinitum came from.
>
> AL
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 06:47:24 +0200
> From: "Rick Westerman" <Rick at dj0ip.de>
> To: "'Alfred Lorona'" <w6wqc at dslextreme.com>, <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> Message-ID: <003601c41612$18942180$0331a8c0 at Gateway>
> In-Reply-To: <006c01c41615$075ee3c0$cde99f42 at x8m0b2>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: Rick at dj0ip.de, tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 8
>
> Car instead of horseless carriage?
>
> Some things never change, but most things do.
>
> You guys are burning brain cycles over trivialities.
>
> Hey, back then one was highly respected as a ham.
> (S)he performed public service.
> Neighbors helped us put up our antennas.
> Today, a ham attacks the public's health with RF smog.
> (S)he puts up ugly antennas which destroy the environment.
> Here in Germany, operating a ham radio (same as for cell phones)
> from a mobile (vehicle) is punishable by law (a steep fine, plus
> points against your license) unless you have "hands free" (OK,
> VOX) or stop and park first.
>
> Gentlemen, these are the important things which have changed and
> the issues we need to start spending our brain cycles on!
>
> (Just my 2 cents worth).
>
> 73
> Rick
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Alfred Lorona
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 6:36 AM
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Cc: k5uj at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio
> debate)
>
>
>
>
>>What's this "Radio" jazz all about? Where did that come from?
>
>
> Same place 'replicate' instead of duplicate and 'recuse' instead
> of excuse
> and so on ad-infinitum came from.
>
> AL
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:40:01 +0100
> From: "Bob Towers" <mm3kdz at beeb.net>
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: [TenTec] Corsair II warble
> Message-ID: <200403301140010579.000EBE55 at pop-hub.strath.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 9
>
> I installed the PTO rebuild kit some weeks ago and it has
> substantially cured the warble. However there are still minor instabilities
> (ie frequency wandering) on some of the bands. The frequency jumping has
> been cured, by the way.
>
> I use PSK31 most of the time and I can see the stability of the PTO on the
> waterfall display of MixW. In summary it's like this:
>
> 28Mhz I don't use, licence conditions prohibit!
> 24.920 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 21.070 rock steady
> 18.100 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 14.070 some wandering, about +/- 15Hz
> 10.142 rock steady
> 7.035 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 3.580 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
>
> The worst offender is 14.070, to the point where some operators at the
> other end of the QSOs comment on the instability. It also makes tuning of=
> MFSK signal rather difficult.
>
> The odd thing is the fact that two of the bands are not affected. If I
> switch from 21.040 to 14.070 - without touching the tuning knob - the
> instability appears, which makes me wonder whether the PTO mechanism is the
> culprit.
>
> I would appreciate any comments you might have.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Bob Towers
> MM3KDZ
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:00:28 +0000
> From: ac5e at comcast.net
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> Message-ID: <033020041200.6227.4069615C0009156C000018532200745672FF9ACA9C at comcast.net>
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 10
>
>
>
> Why are they radios and not "tele" something? Because "telegraphy" meaning far writing was already taken. Radio is a contracted form of the awkward telegraphy by artificial radiation - originally radio-telegraphy, then radio-telephony, and now just radio.
>
> 73 Pete Allen AC5E
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 06:39:52 -0600
> From: "James Duffer" <dufferjames at hotmail.com>
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
> Message-ID: <BAY17-F8CCtgx8VUkRa00022599 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 11
>
> Sorry Rob, Truckers have the rigs. Hams have receivers, transceivers,
> transmitters etc.
>
> Times change. However, if you listen to the cw contacts you will hear the
> term rig mentioned still today, and on some QSL cards it is still a term
> that is frequently used.....do you qsl? If you do are you going to use the
> term "rig"? QSL used to be pretty much of the norm....wallpaper, maybe the
> price of postage and cards or whatever makes that less likely to happen. 73,
> Jim, wd4air
>
>
>
>>From: "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj at hotmail.com>
>>Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
>>To: tentec at contesting.com
>>CC: k5uj at hotmail.com
>>Subject: [TenTec] OT: Radios? Why are they Radios? (Was Radio debate)
>>Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 03:09:48 +0000
>>
>>I was QRT for around 18 years and became active again around 4 years ago.
>>When I was active before, transmitters-receivers/transceivers were called
>>rigs. When I came back they all had become "radios." I kind of went with
>>it with some perplexity but I've decided to ask what happened because a guy
>>wrote an article in CQ this month, telling his tale of being QRT for around
>>45 years and coming back, and he asked the same thing in his article.
>>What's this "Radio" jazz all about? Where did that come from? A radio is
>>this consumer electronics appliance folks use to swl, hear weather alerts,
>>broadcast transmissions, police, fire etc. A T4 isn't a radio. Neither is
>>a KWM2, or an Orion or anything else in a shack that delivers and receives
>>RF. They're rigs. We're hams. We have rigs. We don't need no stinkin'
>>radios. Next, the shack will be called the radio room.
>>
>>Rob Atkinson
>>K5UJ
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>All the action. All the drama. Get NCAA hoops coverage at MSN Sports by
>>ESPN. http://msn.espn.go.com/index.html?partnersite=espn
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>TenTec mailing list
>>TenTec at contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE
> download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 07:51:57 -0500
> From: "Tommy" <aldermant at alltel.net>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Corsair II warble
> Message-ID: <001d01c41655$ca198d80$83da27a2 at w4bqf2>
> References: <200403301140010579.000EBE55 at pop-hub.strath.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 12
>
> Unfortunately Bob, you have a good radio that was designed many years before
> digital modes were used and at that time, the stability you are quoting
> would be way above par for those radios. If your getting a max of 10Hz freq
> drift, count your blessings. The PTO is not going to do any better.
>
> Tom - W4BQF
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Towers" <mm3kdz at beeb.net>
> To: <tentec at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 5:40 AM
> Subject: [TenTec] Corsair II warble
>
>
> I installed the PTO rebuild kit some weeks ago and it has
> substantially cured the warble. However there are still minor instabilities
> (ie frequency wandering) on some of the bands. The frequency jumping has
> been cured, by the way.
>
> I use PSK31 most of the time and I can see the stability of the PTO on the
> waterfall display of MixW. In summary it's like this:
>
> 28Mhz I don't use, licence conditions prohibit!
> 24.920 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 21.070 rock steady
> 18.100 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 14.070 some wandering, about +/- 15Hz
> 10.142 rock steady
> 7.035 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
> 3.580 some wandering, about +/- 10Hz
>
> The worst offender is 14.070, to the point where some operators at the
> other end of the QSOs comment on the instability. It also makes tuning of
> MFSK signal rather difficult.
>
> The odd thing is the fact that two of the bands are not affected. If I
> switch from 21.040 to 14.070 - without touching the tuning knob - the
> instability appears, which makes me wonder whether the PTO mechanism is the
> culprit.
>
> I would appreciate any comments you might have.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Bob Towers
> MM3KDZ
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:22:43 +0100
> From: "Bob Towers" <mm3kdz at beeb.net>
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Corsair II warble
> Message-ID: <200403301422430906.00A3B46C at pop-hub.strath.ac.uk>
> In-Reply-To: <001d01c41655$ca198d80$83da27a2 at w4bqf2>
> References: <200403301140010579.000EBE55 at pop-hub.strath.ac.uk>
> <001d01c41655$ca198d80$83da27a2 at w4bqf2>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Precedence: list
> Reply-To: tentec at contesting.com
> Message: 13
>
>
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 30/03/2004 at 07:51 Tommy wrote:
>
>
>>Unfortunately Bob, you have a good radio that was designed many years
>>before
>>digital modes were used and at that time, the stability you are quoting
>>would be way above par for those radios. If your getting a max of 10Hz=
>
> freq
>
>>drift, count your blessings. The PTO is not going to do any better.
>>
>>Tom - W4BQF
>>
>
> Tom,
>
> Many thanks for the reply...
>
> You are right, but what intrigues - and annoys me - is that on 15m and 30m=
> the stability is more than good enough for me. If the PTO is this good on=
> these bands, how come it deteriorates when running 20m, for instance? It's=
> a mystery to me. Also, I have a Kenwood TS-120V which isn't a patch on the=
> Corsair as far as performance is concerned but which has pretty good=
> stability, better than the Corsair on 20m.
>
> 73
>
> Bob
> MM3Kdz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> End of TenTec Digest, Vol 15, Issue 79
> **************************************
>
More information about the TenTec
mailing list