Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Receivers\s+for\s+160\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+Receivers\s+for\s+160\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: Receivers for 160 (score: 1): Author: "Don Field" <don.field@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:02:33 +0000; Interesting thread on this subject. Seems to me the problem is that the manufacturers design modern transceivers to be all things to all men. I recall discussing this with the editor of CQ Ham Radio; /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00169.html (7,047 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: Receivers for 160 (score: 1): Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:25:24 -0500; The K2 I saw was so good because it used a reasonable noise figure CATV transistor RF amp, a medium quality Minicircuits double balanced diode mixer, and a CATV transistor bipolar amp following the; /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00173.html (7,435 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]