); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's something I meant to ask you about, Rick, as a follow-up to an old Usenet post of yours from 1995. From looking over the block diagram in the 11729B-1 app note, it appears that there is no reason why you couldn't feed any sufficiently-clean 640 MHz signal in. Obviously, you want to drive it with the cleanest source you can find, but I don't see any other constraints.
But some of the 8662As did not have the optional (003) "specified SSB phase noise for rear-panel output" feature, including mine. They all seem to have provided a 640 MHz output at an unused internal SMB jack, though. Is there something special about the reference multiplier section in an option-3 8662A that actually improves the noise level available at this jack? I'd already added a BNC jack to the rear panel to bring the 640 MHz clock out in anticipation of buying or building a downconverter, and I expect it will work OK with this 11729C, but I am not sure whether I should expect the fully-characterized option-3 noise performance, or something worse. Any thoughts on that? >From your Usenet post I understand that there is supposed to be a feature that lets you turn the built-in 640 MHz SAW filter into an oscillator in case an 8662A isn't available, but I also understand that this is really only a utility/test function. If there's no way to phase-lock the resulting SAW oscillator, I can see why. -- john, KE5FX > Not only is an 8662A mandatory, but it must have the optional 640 > MHz output > AFAIK. > How do you propose to operate an 11729 without an 8662? It's not like you > can > feed any old 640 MHz reference into it. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.