Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:ghoffman@spacetech.com: 567 ]

Total 567 documents matching your query.

121. Re: [TenTec] Balun (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 22:57:58 -0400
Yes, you are absolutely right. My memory is failing. Cebik exists and wrote on other matters as you no doubt know. Sevick of course, is the balun guru. Sorry for the confusion...sheesh. 73 de Gary, A
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00163.html (8,855 bytes)

122. Re: [TenTec] Balun (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 23:02:15 -0400
In further amplification, L.B. Cebik was an unbelievable antenna guru, and as many know, has recently gone sk. A great loss. That's why his name was at the tip of my tongue. Sevick is the man when it
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00164.html (10,004 bytes)

123. Re: [TenTec] Balun Isolator (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 00:09:21 -0400
The coax shield is like a water pipe. It has an inside diameter, and surface, and an outside diameter, and another surface. The inside surface carries (or is supposed to carry except for imbalance) a
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00195.html (10,770 bytes)

124. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 18:53:36 -0400
In the real world this doesn't often happen. I run legal limit out here, and none of my several neighbors have TVI. They have, variously, VHF old fashioned TV antennas, or older C band satellite ante
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00299.html (10,301 bytes)

125. Re: [TenTec] New Ten-Tec Website & Jupiter News! (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 23:30:22 -0400
Very cool.
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00338.html (9,105 bytes)

126. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 23:39:49 -0400
Hi Ron, Not sure what your point is. I guess maybe you just did not care for my writing style. No, I'm not young. I wish I were. Old fashioned in this context meant that as far as television viewing
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00340.html (11,950 bytes)

127. Re: [TenTec] New Ten-Tec Website & Jupiter News! (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 23:45:07 -0400
CW....is that the funny beeping sound ? I have a filter for that.... Now, kidding aside, I think its a great feature. Nope, I don't need it either. But I love it. 73 de Gary, AA2IZ majority of the ch
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00341.html (9,843 bytes)

128. Re: [TenTec] Little more TVI 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 23:55:27 -0400
I remember tuning up the Ark....but you're wrong...it was a UHF device.... ((sorry))
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00343.html (10,185 bytes)

129. Re: [TenTec] Low Pass Filter (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 16:09:31 -0400
I use two, and its probably overkill. I use one before the linear, and then I use one that comes after the antenna tuner (and linear). I'd guess I get very little additional bang for the buck that wa
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00383.html (11,337 bytes)

130. Re: [TenTec] Low Pass Filter (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:00:43 -0400
That is correct. My antennas are all resonant, and cut right close (or adjusted right close) to where I generally work in the band. In addition, the impedance of my antennas at resonance is very clos
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00386.html (11,308 bytes)

131. Re: [TenTec] Low Pass Filter (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 22:00:17 -0400
Unfortunately for us all, many linear amplifiers have some gain at VHF frequencies. In fact, much has been written about the idea that gain at VHF frequencies can cause runaway "glitches" in linears,
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00406.html (11,673 bytes)

132. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 00:39:49 -0400
Of course all of those are much higher in frequency than the HF stuff we have been discussing - no ? out. if damage. carrier. will
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00443.html (12,132 bytes)

133. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:51:04 -0400
Actually, you might enjoy reading the History of Electronic Warfare (written for the AOC) which gives tons of insight into radio and radar development in the early 1940's. Those guys were very aware
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00446.html (15,758 bytes)

134. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 15:23:38 -0400
That's right Ron. The whole point of my post was that the RF we care about is NOT a problem. Here is a snip from my post.... ......That said, the RF we have been talking about, especially at HF, is i
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00475.html (10,605 bytes)

135. Re: [TenTec] 95% Shield (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 15:34:42 -0400
Hi Carter, I am referring to RF that is MUCH higher than anything we use as hams. There is Controversy about exactly what frequency is the threshold above which it is ionizing. All are agreed that fr
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00476.html (10,342 bytes)

136. Re: [TenTec] K3 information (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 00:24:56 -0400
Seriously ?? Send RTTY with CW ? Or is this just kidding around ?
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-05/msg00523.html (9,392 bytes)

137. Re: [TenTec] another amp question (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 18:57:26 -0400
To me this whole parasitic issue is very nerve wracking. This issue seems to be that absolutely no one can say what triggers it with certainty, nor do people agree on the fix. Obviously ham radio man
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-04/msg00024.html (10,452 bytes)

138. Re: [TenTec] another amp question (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 23:41:03 -0400
I hate it when that happens ! (grin) behaved. are 4/3/2008
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-04/msg00039.html (13,341 bytes)

139. Re: [TenTec] LEGAL LIMIT PLUS AMP ALPHA 77D (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 23:21:37 -0400
In my case I have a very low noise level, a tower, a big beam, good ground, up on a hill, and so forth. I can "hear" better usually than the other guy can. So, if I run my amp, I can often compensate
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-04/msg00089.html (10,747 bytes)

140. Re: [TenTec] Hooking up Omni VII to computer ---direct--- how? (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Hoffman" <ghoffman@spacetech.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:50:03 -0400
Modern wireless routers handle 45 Mbits/sec. I can't imagine using that up in this manner.
/archives//html/TenTec/2008-04/msg00471.html (14,377 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu