Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Non\-digital\s+Ten\-Tec\s+transceivers\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:21:31 -1000
Hi all, I'm toying with the idea of getting a "non digital" rig. I'd like to have most of the capability of an Omni VI without any PLLs. Just crystals and a PTO. I don't care if it can operate in any
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00141.html (7,519 bytes)

2. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:29:53 +0300
There were many of them, BUT, most of them had digital displays. The actual radio was analog, but the display was digital. Off the top of my head: Original Argonauts: 505, 509, 515. Tritons: I,II IV,
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00142.html (7,966 bytes)

3. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Ed <w3nr@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:04:07 -0400
Hands down, without a second thought. Omni-A. I had one and without question was probably one of the best if not the best receiver TT made. I did the CW mod as suggested by Steve N4LQ and the improve
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00143.html (8,197 bytes)

4. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Ken Brown <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:19:41 -1000
What does this mod do? Is it a mod to an audio or RF stage? What is the problem without the mod? DE N6KB _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com htt
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00145.html (7,732 bytes)

5. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Ed <w3nr@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:26:44 -0400
Ken, here is a reference Steve made on another subject but included this blurb also. This is from May,2000 so the original posting shouldn't be too hard to find. It truly picks up the audio response
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00148.html (8,348 bytes)

6. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "James C. Owen, III" <k4cgy_list@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
Hi Ken, I think all of the TT's before the OMNI V, Paragon are non-digital except for the display on some. My choice would be 1st a Corsair II, 2nd Corsair, 3rd Omni C, 4th any other Omni A,D etc. If
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00154.html (8,891 bytes)

7. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: William Lee <n5wrx@stx.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 18:14:35 -0500
Jim, why the Omni C before the Omni D? William Lee _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00155.html (8,632 bytes)

8. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: CATFISHTWO@aol.com
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:18:52 EDT
Hi all, I'm toying with the idea of getting a "non digital" rig. I'd like to have most of the capability of an Omni VI without any PLLs. Just crystals and a PTO. I don't care if it can operate in any
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00156.html (8,434 bytes)

9. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Tod Glenn <n7jqw@cordite.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:50:53 -0600
Argosy and Argosy II. -- Tod Glenn N7JQW NAQCC #1283 SKCC #1444 FISTS #12134 ARCI #12420 n7jqw@cordite.com _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com ht
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00158.html (9,343 bytes)

10. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "James C. Owen, III" <k4cgy_list@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
Hi William, The Omni C was the last of this line of the Omni's and had all the proper mods made. It also worked properly on the WARC bands. I know C before D. The process was Omni A (analog)model 545
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00183.html (9,933 bytes)

11. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "Mike Hyder -N4NT-" <Mike_N4NT@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:14:08 -0400
The Omni-C was the first to have bandswitch positions marked for all three WARC bands. Those markings were deceptive because operation on the 17 meter band caused spurious emissions. This is because
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00184.html (10,884 bytes)

12. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Craig Roberts <crgrbrts@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:16:49 -0400
As I understand it, one of the major differences between the Corsair and Corsair II is the roofing filter (4-pole vs. 6-pole). Can a Corsair be retrofitted with the later filter easily or are there o
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00185.html (8,793 bytes)

13. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Duane - N9DG <n9dg@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
Perhaps a better way to think about it IF scheme wise is that the Corsair is like the Omni A/D/C series but has the 6.3MHz IF (started with the 580 Delta) for PBT and narrow BW IF filtering. Once out
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00189.html (10,037 bytes)

14. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: John/K4WJ <k4wj@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:34:13 -0400
Jim, It appears you didn't do your homework correctly. :-) A few years back I posted a message that I will paste below. The Omni C does have the WARC bands but as Mike, N4NT, pointed out, it isn't ve
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00191.html (14,356 bytes)

15. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: ron <roncasa@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:56:23 -0400
thanks John for that information overload (smile) I had to read it several times to follow everything but your summary at the end helped. Man, TT was sure confusing these radios with everybody, and s
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00192.html (9,577 bytes)

16. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Nicolson" <k2rig@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:50:27 -0400
Guys, I just picked up an Omni A Series B with Both filters (500hz & 1.8kc) and power supply. I'm looking forward to getting on 40 meters CW with it, I should have it by the weekend. Thanks for all t
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00194.html (10,981 bytes)

17. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "R. Brent Zook" <brent.zook@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:17:43 -0400
Speaking of the Omnis -- I have an Omni D, first (original) series, upgraded to a series B. The first series had a wonderful audio filter, great for cw. So in the upgraded Omni D, you can still hook
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00195.html (8,781 bytes)

18. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Bwana Bob <wb2vuf@qsl.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:51:30 -0400
Craig: Yes, you can put the 8-pole filter into the original Corsair. It is just a plug-in substitution. It makes a noticeable improvement in the skirt selectivity. I don't remember the part number bu
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00232.html (9,955 bytes)

19. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 21:00:22 -0400
As some on the list may recall, at one point, Ten-Tec had a "special" on the Corsair -- a free upgrade from the 4-pole to the 8-pole filter, done at the dealer. It was a good selling point; but I do
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00238.html (11,089 bytes)

20. Re: [TenTec] Non-digital Ten-Tec transceivers (score: 1)
Author: Bob Stephens <bstephens1@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 18:57:33 -0400
Don't think this has been answered (?) If not, the answer is Yes. Just pull one out and push the other in. Bob KB1CIW Corsair & Scout _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing li
/archives//html/TenTec/2006-06/msg00257.html (9,636 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu