TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] NB verses NR

To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] NB verses NR
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:55:36 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Peter, did you insert that filter before or after the NB tap?

73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)

-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Bertini
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 5:49 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] NB verses NR

*"I know that in the 1950's Collins did actually use a separate blanking
detection receiver that ran on 9 mhz with its own antenna. I never used one
but it must have been good."*

The KWM-2 blanker ran on 40-MHz.  There was probably too much interference
in the HF region, and low VHF would give better results due to being able to
respond to locally generated noise spikes.

One thing I may have screwed up in my Omni VI is that there is either a SSB
or CW roofing filter in line with the first filter.

Pete
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>