| To: | tentec@contesting.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [TenTec] (no subject) |
| From: | We5f@aol.com |
| Reply-to: | Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com> |
| Date: | Fri, 6 Jan 2006 09:46:09 EST |
| List-post: | <mailto:tentec@contesting.com> |
Shouldn't that be CMLV?
(HI) 73, Jim KM5M
---------------------
We don't stop playing because we get old, we get old because we stop playing.
------------------------------
>>>From: "Mike Hyder -N4NT-" <n4nt_m_o_hyder@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Any reason not to use 960p/s with Omni V? (no
message)
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Message-ID: <000901c612bc$dc17d9a0$0300a8c0@DESKTOP>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
960 exceeds V by CML. This will create an inverted nomenclature designation.<
<<
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [TenTec] Any reason not to use 960p/s with Omni V? (no message), Ron Zond |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [TenTec] Any reason not to use 960p/s with Omni V? (no message), Philip Leonard WVØT |
| Previous by Thread: | [TenTec] Headphone Redux, Lee A Crocker |
| Next by Thread: | [TenTec] Heaqdphone Redux, Ken Waites |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |