- 1. Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: Craig Clark <jcclark@wildblue.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:29:25 -0500
- I have looked at Sherwood's data and I am not savvy enough to understand what is being measured. I am sure there are many others like me on the Topband reflector and we need to be educated in what to
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00153.html (7,052 bytes)
- 2. Re: Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: kd4e <kd4e@verizon.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:51:35 -0500
- I agree that far too many of these debates are about "shades of grey" that have little or not practical impact on the operation by most Hams. At the end of the day the selection among a broad range
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00155.html (8,534 bytes)
- 3. Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:35:28 -0500
- understand what is being measured. I am sure there are many others like me on the Topband reflector and we need to be educated in what to look for as we evaluate what is the best "bang for your buck.
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00158.html (8,379 bytes)
- 4. Re: Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:14:14 -0500
- All a very good explanation Bill, but there is a fourth, fifth, and sixth issue. Also I think it is fair to mention people in a position to design radios often do not listen to external input and de
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00160.html (9,856 bytes)
- 5. Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: "Phil Clements" <philc@texascellnet.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:18:47 -0600
- I'm in the same boat as you, Craig. How much better is a -140 db noise floor than a -130 db noise floor? Is it enough to warrant the cost of a new radio? Same with dynamic range; how much improvemen
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00161.html (8,038 bytes)
- 6. Re: Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: James Kearman <jkearman@att.net>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:50:56 -0500
- I will raise my glass to this one in particular. "Good" AGC bypasses the best signal processor we have -- our brains -- which can use slight differences in signal amplitude to separate signals. If I
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00162.html (7,260 bytes)
- 7. Re: Topband: Sherwood data (score: 1)
- Author: Bill Barrett - W2PKY <w2pky@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:09:56 -0800 (PST)
- I have found, on the MK V, using IPO and the Ant Attenuator can help readability of weak signals by reducing the AGC action. My settings of these controls minimizes signal input as much as possible t
- /archives//html/Topband/2007-02/msg00164.html (8,420 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu