Nothing easy comes to mind, unless you've got a service monitor. If you want to send it back I'll try it out at low signal levels. That's not part of my normal test procedure since it's supposed to be tested at the Friendcom factory. I just do a data decode test at -60 dBm with varying amounts of noise.
Scott w6cjq wrote: > > > > Hi Scott: Any other diagnostic I could run on this ? > > In [email protected] <mailto:tracker2%40yahoogroups.com>, Scott > Miller <sc...@...> wrote: > > > > No, the T2-301 never had that problem. Could be the receiver itself has > > a sensitivity problem. > > > > Scott > > > > > > Yono Adisoemarta wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That T2 board might still has the "deaf syndrome" due to wrong R and C > > > during mfg ? > > > > > > Paulus N5SNN > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > On Jul 11, 2009, at 9:09 AM, "w6cjq" <w6...@... > > > <mailto:w6cjq%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > > > > > So I had a chance to compare things I connected a sound card interface > > > to a FT8800 a VX 150HT to a MFJ TNC and the T2 301 The T2 decoded the > > > fewest amount about 50 % less than the sound card and about 40 % less > > > than the MFJ TNC set up. I live in an area where the signal comes off > > > the top of a 3600 ASL hill and gives you a full scale reading on the > > > radios so I have lots of signal to play with, just have a hard time > > > believing the T2 reciever is really not working that well, must be a > > > setting in this thing somewhere. --- > > > > > > In [email protected] <mailto:tracker2%40yahoogroups.com> > <mailto:tracker2%40yahoogroups.com>, "Lynn > > > W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)" <ldeffenb@> wrote: > > > > > > In my experience, it is unfair to compare a hardware TNC with a sound > > > card interface. The sound card seems to be able to decode a much > > > broader range of signals than the hardware TNCs. This is based on > > > KPC-3+, TinyTrak4, and T2-135 hardware TNCs. Once the radio levels are > > > tuned well, the TT4 and T2-135 (v1.2 only) can come close to what I was > > > getting from AGWPEpro, but the sound card still consistently decoded > > > 10-25% more packets even when fed by the same radio via an audio Y > cable. > > > > > > That being said, I've still retired the sound card system and am > using a > > > TinyTrak 4 as my IGate (KJ4ERJ-2/-7) and T2-135s with Nuvi 350s as my > > > trackers (KJ4ERJ-9 and KJ4ERJ-14). I just couldn't justify the overhead > > > of keeping a windows PC alive and WIRED to a radio connected to an > > > antenna on a tower in the lightning capital of the world (Florida). > > > With the TT4, I'm using a Bluetooth to serial connection between > the TNC > > > and the javAPRSsrvr server so there's an ultimate air-gap > protection there. > > > > > > Your mileage may vary, but the DSP power of a computer with sound card > > > was always better in my experience. > > > > > > Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ > > > > > > w6cjq wrote: > > > > > > Hi so I am a proud new owner of a T2-301 Prior to this I was using a > > > west mountian sound card interface with a FT8800. So here is what I > > > have noticed. I set the T2-301 up and got it talking through the com > > > port on my computer. I use Ui View 32 and noticed that I was not > > > seeing a lot of traffic. I turned on my HT and heard a lot of traffic > > > on 144.39 but the T2-301 only seems to pass about every 5th or so > > > transmission to UI-View 32. The stations do show up on the map and I > > > can transmit a query through the T2-301 it just seems to be real > > > selective about what it here and sends to the com port. > > > > > > I also monitored the unit in hyper terminal and the same amount of > > > traffic appeared > > > > > > Any thoughts on this?? > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > >
