Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
563inrad [2007/04/23 18:37] n5na |
563inrad [2007/04/25 03:58] n5na |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| Dave, K1FK\\ | Dave, K1FK\\ | ||
| Fort Kent, ME | Fort Kent, ME | ||
| + | |||
| Line 46: | Line 47: | ||
| -the implementation needed to simply take the roofing filter selection off of the N1/N2 buttons, | -the implementation needed to simply take the roofing filter selection off of the N1/N2 buttons, | ||
| - | -without incurring any additional components, with a (3) minimum of effort, and (4) with minimal impact to other operating modes and functions. These requirements narrowed the design to only one choice of front panel switch . the PROC switch, which is a "hard" switch with push-push states. | + | -without incurring any additional components, with a |
| + | -minimum of effort, and | ||
| + | -with minimal impact to other operating modes and functions. These requirements narrowed the design to only one choice of front panel switch . the PROC switch, which is a "hard" switch with push-push states. | ||
| The question has been raised on the reflector as to why not use the FM or VOICE or other main keypad switches to select the Inrad roofing filter, switches that (appear to) have less of an impact on operational modes than the PROC switch. | The question has been raised on the reflector as to why not use the FM or VOICE or other main keypad switches to select the Inrad roofing filter, switches that (appear to) have less of an impact on operational modes than the PROC switch. | ||
