[TenTec] O3 wish list

[Tony Lelieveld]

I agree.  I'd go with an external panadapter.  Why are people rumbling about 
an Orion III?  Let's get the O-II finalized first.  I am still waiting for 
an upgrade that will improve the NR part of the rig.  One that, when you 
activate it, will truly reduce the noise WITHOUT altering the audio quality 
of the voice you're receiving.

On some signals it seems to work okay but mostly it distorts the audio and 
acts erratically and I am running ver. 2.044A.  Different settings of the 
AGC threshold and manual AGC level do not seem to make much difference.

73, Tony VE3DWI / K8DWI


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Barry N1EU" <barry.n1eu at gmail.com>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] O3 wish list


> Well said and totally agree Paul.  Limited engineering resources can
> be put to much better use.  If the rig mfr provides I.F. output,
> they've done their job.
>
> Barry N1EU
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Paul Christensen <w9ac at arrl.net> wrote:
>>> high speed display is missing the point entirely. The name of the game
>>> in panadaptors is RESOLUTION and the ability to twiddle sweep speed and
>>> AVERAGING parameters in such a way that best allows you to visually
>>> identify the weak signals you're looking for.
>>
>> For the reason explained by Floyd, it seems to me that today, inclusion 
>> of a
>> panadapter into a transceiver is not a very good use of a company's 
>> design
>> resources. The inclusion of a simple 8-9 MHz buffered IF port opens up a
>> whole new world to the operating experience that can never be completely
>> duplicated with internal band scopes. Of course, that assumes a
>> mid-frequency IF is available in the design that precludes such an option
>> with traditional up-conversion designs. Ten tec was smart to add an IF 
>> port
>> to the Eagle. That one low-cost feature alone separates the Eagle from 
>> the
>> Kenwood TS-590 by a long shot.
>>
>> In 2005, I purchased an Icom IC-7800. For the two years, my thought was
>> that any manufacturer who could not, or would not, include an internal
>> panadapter would soon face extinction. I held that view until something
>> quite abrupt occurred. I experimented with an SDR-IQ on the IF port of an
>> Elecraft K3. After witnessing the panoramic detail, waterfall display
>> choices, secondary receivers (through SDR-IQ), there was no turning back.
>> Suddenly, I viewed internal panadapters as a millstone around the necks 
>> of
>> manufacturers. None of the present manufacturers have the resources to
>> provide the pan ability and control utility provided by SDR-IQ, 
>> SpectraVue,
>> LP-PAN, PowerSDR-IF, etc., nor should they. Look at the display provided
>> by Yaesu with their FTdx-5000 product. Frankly, it's a panadpater in name
>> only.
>>
>> Manufacturers only need to give us a high-quality IF port and a means for
>> rig control. The rest of the panadapter and control functions can be 
>> better
>> managed by folks like Carl, N4PY, Moe, AE4JY, and Scott, WU2X. Despite 
>> past
>> moans from Ten Tec users, I think that in the end, Ten Tec was right to
>> delay inclusion of an internal high-performance panadapter into the O2. 
>> At
>> some point, perhaps Ten Tec may want to market an external panadapter
>> similar to the Elecraft P3, where that device could be used for more than
>> one Ten Tec transceiver. Even so, it's doubtful that the device could
>> approach the low cost and high performance provided by a small netbook PC
>> and SDR-IQ or Softrock receiver.
>>
>> Paul, W9AC
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>