Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Timewave PK-96

Expand Messages
  • Jeff - WA4ZKO
    Tnx Jim, good info. Explains why the PK96 talked to the Spirit-2 s (real G3RUH modem) better than the 9612+ does. EQ tweaking is on my to do list ;-) 73 Jeff
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 21, 2010
      Tnx Jim, good info.

      Explains why the PK96 talked to the Spirit-2's (real G3RUH modem) better than the 9612+ does.

      EQ tweaking is on my "to do" list ;-)


      73
      Jeff
      WA4ZKO
      Packet: WA4ZKO@WA4ZKO.#NKY.KY.USA.NOAM
      http://twitter.com/wa4zko

      --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Jim WU3V" <james@...> wrote:
      >
      > The PK96 is a better match to the G4RUH spec than the 9612 is,
      > If you carefully set the eq and deviation for minimum bit error rate test it
      > will probably do better
      > James Moore NH0E
      > http://www.nh0e.net
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Jeff - WA4ZKO" <wa4zko@...>
      > To: <BPQ32@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 15:18
      > Subject: [BPQ32] Re: Timewave PK-96
      >
      >
      > >I had an PK96 in service for a couple years on a 9.6k port. Never had any
      > >issues with it under BPQ32 and we beat up on it at times. Took the KP96 it
      > >out of service when I put a 9612+ in as I wanted the two ports, one box
      > >perk.
      > >
      > > My unscientific "gut" feeling is the PK96 did 9.6k a bit better than the
      > > 9612+'s modem does. Granted I only set deviation and did not take the time
      > > to go through the TNC<>radio equalization tweaks for the 9612...so that
      > > could be some of it (to do list item).
      > >
      > >
      > > 73
      > > Jeff
      > > WA4ZKO
      > > Packet: WA4ZKO@WA4ZKO.#NKY.KY.USA.NOAM
      > > http://twitter.com/wa4zko
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Z" <Howard_Z@> wrote:
      > >>
      > >> Hi,
      > >>
      > >> Does the Timewave PK-96 work well with BPQ32?
      > >>
      > >> I ask because it will exit KISS mode if it receives
      > >> three control-c bytes.
      > >>
      > >> This is different than the Kantronics which exit KISS
      > >> mode upon receiving C0 FF C0.
      > >>
      > >> I need to replace my TNC-X tnc and am considering:
      > >> 1. KENWOOD D710A WITH BUILT-IN TNC -
      > >> I can use another radio, and it looks like a nice radio.
      > >> It does not stay in KISS mode when power cycled.
      > >> Some people complain about filter failure causing
      > >> the radio to become deaf
      > >> 2. KANTRONICS KPC3+
      > >> 3. KANTRONICS 9612
      > >> 3. TIMEWAVE PK96 - A good value.
      > >> 4. SCS TRACKER - probably very durable.
      > >> It does not stay in KISS mode if power cycled.
      > >>
      > >> For now I am using a PACTOR-3 TNC for 1200 baud packet.
      > >>
      > >> Howard
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.