Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+9Mhz\s+filters\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+9Mhz\s+filters\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: Barry N1EU <n1eu@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 07:32:04 -0800 (PST); N4TZ commented "Of course, for those interested in my original post about creating useful first IF filters for the OMNI VI, you would want to get on board Bill's train for the special order, since th; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00476.html (7,253 bytes)
2. [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: "Zivney, Terry L." <00tlzivney@bsu.edu>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:12:01 -0500; with a center frequency of 9.001500, which isn't what the Omni VI is looking for. Correctomundo, Barry! But, 9.001500 isn't correct for the Orion, either. The 9.001500 "standard" for wider TenTec fil; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00478.html (7,550 bytes)
3. RE: [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: "Rick Westerman" <Rick@dj0ip.de>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:16:55 +0100; I found this old chart in my records: TEN-TEC 9 MHz FILTERS MODEL: 217 218 219 220 -- -- -- -- -- C/F 9.000xxx MHz: 750 150 750 150 6dB BW, Hz: 500 1800 250 2400 S/F, 6/60 dB: 2:1 1.8:1 2.4:1 1.7:1 I; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00479.html (7,793 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: Dave Sublette <k4to@arrl.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:30:47 -0500; There was (is?) also the p/n221 filter. It is centered at 9.000500 and is 250 hz BW. Using this filter results in a CW offset of 500 hz instead of the "industry standard" 750 hz offset. The lower off; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00481.html (9,798 bytes)
5. [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:30:53 -0500; MODEL: 217 218 219 220 -- -- -- -- -- C/F 9.000xxx MHz: 750 150 750 150 Bad info Rick...The 218 (1800 Hz) and 220 (2400 Hz) are centered at 9.001500, so the "150" above should read "1500". http://www; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00482.html (7,762 bytes)
6. RE: [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: "Rick Westerman" <Rick@dj0ip.de>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:57:51 +0100; BILL IS CORRECT. The frequencies shown in the original doc is: 9.000750 9.00150 My tired eyes just focused on the last 3 digits and didn't see that there was one less "0" before them. SORRY EVERYBODY; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00484.html (9,154 bytes)
7. [TenTec] 9Mhz filters (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:17:55 -0500; The latest TT instruction sheet (P/N 74089-C) corrects the 250 Hz #219 filter for Shape Factor and Insertion Loss as follows: MODEL: 217 218 219 220 -- -- -- -- -- C/F 9.00xxxx MHz: 0750 1500 0750 15; /archives//html/TenTec/2004-01/msg00485.html (8,305 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]