24 + (UTC)
From: Johnny Siu <vr2...@yahoo.com.hk>
To: Edward R Cole <kl...@acsalaska.net>, David Anderson
<gm4...@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: "Elecraft@mailman.qth.net" <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Seems that this is a strong argument against a "satellite radio" -- if
they launch a new satellite, and it does something different, you might
not have the right bands and/or modes built in.
General purpose UHF/VHF is a different story.
On 5/25/2016 1:43 AM, David Anderson via Elecraft wrote:
some day for full
cross-band duplex.
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 11:33:24 + (UTC)
From: Johnny Siu <vr2...@yahoo.com.hk>
To: Edward R Cole <kl...@acsalaska.net>, David Anderson
<gm4...@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: "Elecraft@mailman.qth.net" <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net>
ll - watch the stampede when that happens!
73, Ed
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Message-ID: <5745951f.2090...@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
I should be the last person on
gher
> bands. KX2 will probably see some of this use as well.
>
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
> From: Phil Wheeler <w...@socal.rr.com>
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
> Message-ID: <7f
of this use as well.
>>
>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
>> From: Phil Wheeler <w...@socal.rr.com>
>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
>> Message-ID: <7f140668-ae11-ec14-9ac4-91a72
That is the point yes.
I wasn't saying it wasn't.
Excuse my previous comments which came across as confrontational, they weren't
meant to be and my only excuse is lack of coffee ;-) I was merely outlining my
thoughts which may be in agreement with what has already been said by others.
I use
: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
From: Phil Wheeler <w...@socal.rr.com>
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Message-ID: <7f140668-ae11-ec14-9ac4-91a72a13a...@socal.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; forma
;kl...@acsalaska.net>
收件人︰ David Anderson <gm4...@yahoo.co.uk>
副本(CC)︰ Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
傳送日期︰ 2016年05月25日 (週三) 6:47 PM
主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
David,
At 12:43 AM 5/25/2016, David Anderson wrote:
>When I was active on the linear tran
David,
At 12:43 AM 5/25/2016, David Anderson wrote:
When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13
I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much
better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in
particular brought out lovely expensive
But isn't that the point?
The KXn family ARE SDR, with I and Q outputs ready for excellent pandapter
display with the PXn.
Just want VHF/UHF instead of HF and it's all there.
Andy, G8TQH
Sent from my iPhone
> On 25 May 2016, at 09:43, David Anderson via Elecraft
>
When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13 I never
used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much better satellites
then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in particular brought out lovely
expensive duplex radios. Great! However then the linear sats
I hate saying "me too" but I think you've put it succinctly.
There used to be a range of VHF/UHF capable satellite rigs but these days the
user seems left to secondhand, huge base station or complex Yaesu menus (with
tiny display). Elecraft could wipe the floor.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 24
some of this use as well.
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
From: Phil Wheeler <w...@socal.rr.com>
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Message-ID: <7f140668-ae11-ec14-9ac4-91a72a13a...@socal.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/pl
;
收件人︰ elecraft@mailman.qth.net
傳送日期︰ 2016年05月25日 (週三) 8:17 AM
主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
I have changed my thinking on this.
My suggestion would be a kick butt single band 6m rig in a K3s box. All
the bells and whistles the K3s has now with the addition of
I have changed my thinking on this.
My suggestion would be a kick butt single band 6m rig in a K3s box. All
the bells and whistles the K3s has now with the addition of cross band
duplex and 100W any mode no time limit. The other bands would be
installed as transverters in a computer style
I like it!
Especially the laptop style dock.
On 5/24/2016 4:33 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
I replied in depth to Barry but let me share that more briefly with
the List:
My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a 50-MHz direct conversion
SDR (if that is practical at this time).
That would
Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
must be large enough to justify the investment. I
wonder if it really is?
73, Phil W7OX
On 5/24/16 2:33 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
I replied in depth to Barry but let me share
that more briefly with the List:
My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be
I replied in depth to Barry but let me share that more briefly with the List:
My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a 50-MHz direct
conversion SDR (if that is practical at this time).
That would establish the IF for other bands which would be
accomplished with transverters. HF would be
Ed:
Please allow me to second your suggestion for a “KXV3Sat”, though a KX2
derivative with FM + VHF + UHF and full duplex would certainly be another
option that would be very intriguing. Whether such a design built into a K2/K3
footprint (with or without HF) is feasible from an
20 matches
Mail list logo
