| To: | <ct-user@contesting.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [ct-user] 9.50 or 9.51 with FT1000mp - verified workingfor CQWW SSB? |
| From: | Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu> (Jim Reisert AD1C) |
| Date: | Thu, 26 Oct 2000 23:21:17 -0400 |
At 03:11 PM 10/26/2000 -0400, I wrote: >Has anyone fully tested 9.50 (released) or 9.51 (beta) with an FT1000mp in >the CQWW SSB mode and verified that everything works? Everyone says FT1000mp A-OK with 9.50 or 9.51. Thanks for the help! 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu> http://www.ad1c.com -- WWW: http://www.k1ea.com/ Submissions: ct-user@contesting.com Administrative requests: ct-user-REQUEST@contesting.com Problems: owner-ct-user@contesting.com |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [ct-user] Icom 765 comtsr setting, Craig Clark |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [ct-user] packet problem with 9.51, AA4NC@aol.com |
| Previous by Thread: | [ct-user] 9.50 or 9.51 with FT1000mp - verified working for CQWW SSB?, Jim Reisert AD1C |
| Next by Thread: | [ct-user] packet problem with 9.51, AA4NC@aol.com |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |