Harris RF-590:
* Good sensitivity down to 10 kHz
* 10 MHz reference input
* noise blanker works well
* 4 agc settings + off
* multiple filter positions
* 1 Hz tuning steps
* variable BFO pitch
* calibrated signal strength meter
* scan and other misc. bells and whistles
Only drawback I've found is filter "blow by" with very strong signals.
Probably an easy fix - I just haven't got to it.
Jay, W1VD
----- Original Message -----
From: "WE0H" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 12:14 AM
Subject: RE: LF: Receivers
I run my TS 440 on 1750 meters and noticed it has similar sensitivity
as my
HP 3586C Selective Level Meter. Good to hear another person using it
even
lower and still having good sensitivity.
Mike
WE0H
WD2XGI
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Rik Strobbe
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 2:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Receivers
Mike,
I'm using a Kenwood TS440. Sensitivity is very good at 136kHz. A small
loop (1x1m) can be used without pre-amp, if I am using the TX antenna
for receiving I need at least 30dB attenuation before the LF
noisefloor is about 10dB above the RX noisefloor (so you are sure to
have full sensitivity - you can hear any signal that comes out of the
noise - and optimal IMD behaviour)
73, Rik ON7YD
Citeren Mike Dennison <[email protected]>:
> I am compiling a list of receivers and transceivers suitable
> for 136kHz. I know most of the older radios already but
> does anyone use a radio made in, say, the last five years
> that they use sucessfully? If so, does it need an LF pre-
> amp? Is the noise blanker any good on LF QRN and/or
> Loran? Is a narrow filter fitted as standard?
>
> Your help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike, G3XDV
> ==========
>
>
>
| 