mon WB6FLY
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob M.
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 5:12 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Reed vs. Reedless Boards in Mitrek Radios
You may
e your readings will be lower!
Sounds like a bit more research and investigation is in order. Could be a nice
topic for a Repeater-Builder article.
Bob M.
==
--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Eric Lemmon wrote:
> From: Eric Lemmon
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Reed vs. Reedless Boards in Mitrek R
mber 29, 2008 9:28 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Eric Lemmon
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Reed vs. Reedless Boards in Mitrek Radios
With the reedless board chip being nothing more than a simple resister
network, I wonder what your purity results might be if you built-up a 127.3
net
With the reedless board chip being nothing more then a simple resister network,
I wonder what your purity results might be if you built-up a 127.3 network
using 1, 5,and 10% 1/8w resisters for comparison as well.
--
Doug
N3DAB/WPRX486/WPJL709
Eric Lemmon wrote:
=
I recent
I recently acquired a Kenwood HM-250 Audio Distortion Analyzer, and I have
been experimenting with various CTCSS tone encoders to find which produce
the purest tones. Since I am putting together a 6m repeater using Mitrek
radios, I wanted to compare the older HLN4020B reed board to the newer
HLN41
5 matches
Mail list logo
