Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:al_lorona@agilent.com: 118 ]

Total 118 documents matching your query.

101. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:38:41 -0700
Is it full QSK? Al W6LX _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00251.html (14,434 bytes)

102. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:10:37 -0700
Tommy wrote this: Tommy has written the above. And also this: But of course, speed is the issue. Speed has always been the issue whenever the subject of QSK has come up on this reflector. Tommy is th
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00255.html (9,575 bytes)

103. RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:24:14 -0700
Yes, Steve, this is immensely helpful to the readers of this list. I've always felt that the seventeen of us have been talking about seventeen radically different ideas of QSK, and you have definite
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00260.html (8,330 bytes)

104. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:29:35 -0700
Well, then, if the radio must *wait* until the amp is ready, then by definition this is degraded QSK compared to the transceiver alone. My question is *how much* is it degraded? Al W6LX ____________
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00261.html (9,181 bytes)

105. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:45:26 -0700
Hi, Duane. Well, you've got an interesting point. If it's a fixed value, then as my CW speed increases, the relay delay time becomes a bigger and bigger percentage of my inter-dit time, and at some
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00266.html (8,692 bytes)

106. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:58:58 -0700
Fine. I couldn't really care less what the Orion can or can't do. I think you should get rid of that thing. Yeah, I think that's part of my point. Even some of the replies to this thread obviously h
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00267.html (11,214 bytes)

107. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:14:48 -0700
Tommy, this has nothing to do with whether I believe that you did something or not! Whenever I've doubted, I was doubting only the practical usefulness of something, not questioning whether you did
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00269.html (8,765 bytes)

108. RE: [TenTec] QSK with QSK-5PC (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:17:19 -0700
Tommy, I never understand you. You start off by dismissing the 'figure of merit' concept, then you conclude by giving various figures of merit for various amplifiers! I'll take the latter and pretend
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00270.html (11,822 bytes)

109. RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:18:25 -0700
Hi, Mike, Understand that confusion arises here because one must address the question, At what *speed* can you hear between the characters?, which you have not done. If I can hear between the charac
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00327.html (8,546 bytes)

110. RE: [TenTec] Hi power Ten Tec ant tuner swr drift? (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:30:01 -0700
No, not necessarily true. Normally a blanket statement like this wouldn't bother me at all, but to say that "Any tuner will get hot and consume a large percentage of your RF power" demands a little
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00329.html (10,155 bytes)

111. RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:34:02 -0700
Ha ha! That's right! Very good, Mike. Al W6LX _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00331.html (8,897 bytes)

112. RE: [TenTec] Hi power Ten Tec ant tuner swr drift? (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:20:44 -0700
Hello, Original Poster, Well, I am guilty of the same offense that seems to plague almost every question posted here... I didn't answer the original question. Good idea to call Ten Tec. They may tel
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00336.html (9,239 bytes)

113. RE: [TenTec] Re: FULL QSK? What it is (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:53:52 -0700
<snip> <snip> <snip> My friend, I couldn't have said it any better myself. Al W6LX _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.co
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-11/msg00344.html (7,956 bytes)

114. RE: [TenTec] Re: Clicky Updates (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 12:40:11 -0700
Dear Clickless, With all due respect, isn't that the same Omni that suffered from "microchirp" a couple of years ago? Isn't that the same Omni that was 20 Hz off frequency? Isn't that the same Omni t
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-12/msg00212.html (7,618 bytes)

115. RE: [TenTec] Orion (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:39:58 -0700
What's worse than the new model that still doesn't work right? It's when only *certain radios* of the new model don't work right. In that sense, what we have is the worst possible case, because it su
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-12/msg00312.html (7,236 bytes)

116. RE: [TenTec] FS: Paragon II Rare and Beautiful (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:52:54 -0700
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I like the 7 kHz AM audio response (14 kHz wide DSP filter) in the TS-870. Now *that's* really beautiful AM reception. Just the same, sounds like a grea
/archives//html/TenTec/2004-12/msg00568.html (7,626 bytes)

117. RE: [TenTec] Re; Adding 2.8 kHz filters to OMNI VI (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:06:49 -0700
That's right. The bottom line is that in the Omni VI, the audio is always routed to the DSP, which acts as a high pass filter to roll off everything below about 300 Hz. You can't turn this function
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-01/msg00216.html (8,681 bytes)

118. RE: [TenTec] Ten Tec Vee Beam? (score: 1)
Author: <al_lorona@agilent.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:39:40 -0700
Why would you automatically assume that? Al W6LX _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2005-02/msg00385.html (7,505 bytes)

Current List: 101 - 118
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
This search system is powered by Namazu