On 7 Jan 2007 19:28:36 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Stan Barr wrote:

My RA-17 is racked up with a RA-1792, (synthesised solid-state, mine has
provision for remote control and modified eproms to allow tuning down to
0Hz!) the 1792 has better performance than the 17 but I still prefer
the older rx for general tuning around.

Try working one channel while an adjacent transmitter is operating a
few hundred KC away and you'll see why the RA-17 beats the RA-1792
for full-duplex radiotelephone service hands down.

Yeah, true. I regularly transmit on, say, 3.5MHz while one of the receivers
is tuned to Shanwick AT control on 5.599 without any problem, but then
that's a bigger separation and I'm only running a few watts normally.

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!

Stan Barr wrote:

Yeah, true. I regularly transmit on, say, 3.5MHz while one of the receivers
is tuned to Shanwick AT control on 5.599 without any problem, but then
that's a bigger separation and I'm only running a few watts normally.

That brings to mind... I have been listening to Shanwick weather recently,
just below 80M. Do they welcome reception reports?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 8 Jan 2007 15:28:36 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Stan Barr wrote:

Yeah, true. I regularly transmit on, say, 3.5MHz while one of the receivers
is tuned to Shanwick AT control on 5.599 without any problem, but then
that's a bigger separation and I'm only running a few watts normally.

That brings to mind... I have been listening to Shanwick weather recently,
just below 80M. Do they welcome reception reports?

I don't know, but I imagine they get a few. They probably have a
website.



--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)

The future was never like this!