It came as a surprise when a 40m pile up in the recent contest resulted
in distorted audio on my K3, this only occurred when I was in the thick
of it, multiple S9+ signals in the passband, with a 250 Hz filter and
DSP bandwidth around 100 Hz. This happened on 3 or 4 occasions, no NR,
no NB. A
to put in the
errata sheet?
73
Glenn ON4WIX / OR4W
- Original Message -
From: Dave G4AON elecr...@astromag.co.uk
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 6:42 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 other CQWW contest issues
It came as a surprise when a 40m pile up
ON4WIX wrote:
While looking up more information on this issue in the latest online version
of the K3 User Manual (version D5 dated 20 Sep 2009) I read something that
puzzled me a bit: on page 54 the description of CONFIG:AGC HOLD reads SLOW
AGC hold time. Specifies the number of *seconds*
, December 02, 2009 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 other CQWW contest issues - SOFT AGC
ON4WIX wrote:
While looking up more information on this issue in the latest online
version of the K3 User Manual (version D5 dated 20 Sep 2009) I read
something that puzzled me a bit: on page 54
Hi Bill
Here's my two penn'orth:
Operating in dxpeditions I usually use around 28 to 32wpm, down to 20wpm
depending on conditions, eg 160m. In ideal conditions I would get up to
around 190 contacts per hour and my friend SWH would get around 260 at
similar speeds. The bottom line is that 3
Bill W4ZV wrote:
That's ~2.5 per minute or roughly one complete QSO every 24 seconds over
the entire 48 hour period. Perhaps now you see their obsession with
saving time by minimizing the exchange and sending it at high speeds!
Yeah, and 4L0A's obsession with saving time also involves
Bill W4ZV wrote:
Sorry you feel that way Julian but I don't believe you actually read my
message:
I always slow down to the speed of guys that call me but a very slow
caller
answering a speedy op in a big pileup is simply a QRM generator who
shouldn't be there.
I said a very
Berni G0IDA wrote:
I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW,
to ask of your experiences during the contest using the K3, the set-up
you had and to see if we worked other K3 members.
I spent a fair amount of time last weekend in the contest with my K3 and I
I also noted on Sunday morning, 08:37 am local, while listening to LZ5K that
on the 4/4 (110' top) stack he sounded good, but on the dipole (@ 150') ,
there was quite an echo, making it difficult to copy him. LZ5K wasn't the
only station I noted this on.
73,
Steve NN4X
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at
David Yarnes wrote:
Bill and All,
I'm not an ardent contester, so this is a serious question--not a
criticism.
I did jump in this year on a very erratic basis, which only yielded about
110 Q's. But I'm curious--how does ENN AU convert to 599 21? More
specifically, the E and the
Julian, G4ILO wrote:
I did understand what you wrote, Bill. I simply felt that the way in which
you expressed your opinion was offensive to those with lesser CW skills.
Not all slow operators are guilty of doing what you object to. But even if
a few do, they are still a fellow enthusiast
David Yarnes wrote:
Bill and All,
I'm not an ardent contester, so this is a serious question--not a
criticism.
I did jump in this year on a very erratic basis, which only yielded about
110 Q's.
Dave, here's something to ponder. 4L0A currently has the World high-claimed
score
. I hope to be able to purchase a K3 someday if Elecraft doesn't go
belly up first.
73,
Steve Brandt N7VS
Portland, Oregon
Steve,
I wouldn't wait that long, you may be too old to enjoy it. :-)
73,
Tony W7GO
___
Elecraft
, December 01, 2008 1:57 AM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
Dear members of the K3,
I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW,
to ask of your experiences during the contest using the K3, the set-up
you had and to see if we worked other K3 members
On 1 dec 2008, at 19.12, Jim Brown wrote:
Interesting propagation from several locations on 20M caused very
strong
echoes that ran characters together to the point that I couldn't
copy them
at all. One example was about 1800Z Sunday for signals from anywhere
NE USA
and eastern Canada
: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
If you were answered 4L0A at 15-18 WPM, he would have completed 2 QSOs by
the time you finished signing your call twice! And you would have been
QRMing everyone else in the process. He was sending at 32-34 WPM and his
canned exchange sped up to ~50 WPM (i.e. ENN AU for 599
Hi everybody,
I totally agree with all who stated a superb filtering performance of the K3 in
the real combat situation on the ground. This was my first CQWW CW contest wth
this rig and in the Low Power category (usually I do QRP). With the only dipole
antenna for 80-10m and a surrogate
Well put. I learned code from a former world war II Merchant Marine radio
operator back in the 60's. He had me copying 25 wpm code groups, not plain
language, effortlessly by the time I took my Extra class code test. I used
to be able to carry on at 25 wpm. But I found 18 - 20 wpm was a very
Dear members of the K3,
I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW,
to ask of your experiences during the contest using the K3, the set-up
you had and to see if we worked other K3 members.
I had 3 antennas to play with, all on 160m, single band entry, I had a
I spent about 6 hours on each of the two days. This time I decided to do a
single band entry, 20m, as my antennas are not good on the lower bands.
This was the first time I operated using 100W instead of QRP. Interestingly
the number of contacts I made was not that much greater than last year
Berni G0IDA wrote:
Dear members of the K3,
I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW,
to ask of your experiences during the contest using the K3, the set-up
you had and to see if we worked other K3 members.
The K3 performed flawlessly (well done
.
Milt, N5IA, XZ0A, and VP6DX
- Original Message -
From: Berni G0IDA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 1:57 AM
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
Dear members of the K3,
I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW
I operate in CQ WW casually AB mostly SP. I enjoy a run, if possible,
usually on 15 or 10m as 20m was too crowded and my 2-el quad too low.
Last Sunday my Mark V Field was replaced by K3 built on Saturday.
Interfacing by USB/serial converter with N1MM took no time.
In the morning I found a
From: WILLIS COOKE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 8:10 AM
This was not a stellar year for me in the CQWW-CW, but since
it is my favorite contest and I couldn't resist some
participation, I made 75 QSOs with my
Julian G4ILO wrote:
A couple of stations lost out on a point from me because they were sending
so fast that neither the K3 nor I could copy them. Why do people do this?
Surely the number of contacts lost because people like me who are not CW
wizards just can't copy them must negate the benefit of
Julian, G4ILO wrote:
There were a lot of key clicks in evidence and in a couple of cases the key
clicks were so strong that they actually depressed the AGC so that I had to
abandon trying to copy a couple of weaker stations. The widest bandwidth I
used was 200Hz but sometimes it was down to
Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
Julian G4ILO wrote:
A couple of stations lost out on a point from me because they were sending
so fast that neither the K3 nor I could copy them. Why do people do this?
Surely the number of contacts lost because people like me who are not CW
wizards just can't
Bill W4ZV wrote:
If you were answered 4L0A at 15-18 WPM, he would have completed 2 QSOs by
the time you finished signing your call twice! And you would have been
QRMing everyone else in the process. He was sending at 32-34 WPM and his
canned exchange sped up to ~50 WPM (i.e. ENN AU for 599
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 03:19:52 -0800 (PST), Julian, G4ILO wrote:
A couple of stations lost out on a point from me because they were sending
so fast that neither the K3 nor I could copy them. Why do people do this?
Surely the number of contacts lost because people like me who are not CW
wizards just
Vic K2VCO wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
If you were answered 4L0A at 15-18 WPM, he would have completed 2 QSOs by
the time you finished signing your call twice! And you would have been
QRMing everyone else in the process. He was sending at 32-34 WPM and his
canned exchange sped up to ~50
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 10:16:20 -0800 (PST), Bill W4ZV wrote:
It was meant to be because I heard way too much of this the past 48 hours.
Guys calling far too long (or slowly) thinking that the name of the game is
who can call the longest.
YES! The worst offenders were calling while the DX was
Simple solution: if calling at high speed gets reduced contacts, slow down,
if not, carry on. I've been on both ends of this debate.
David
G3UNA
Vic K2VCO wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
If you were answered 4L0A at 15-18 WPM, he would have completed 2 QSOs
by
the time you finished signing
David Cutter wrote:
Simple solution: if calling at high speed gets reduced contacts, slow
down,
if not, carry on. I've been on both ends of this debate.
So have I. I often reduce my speed on the second day of a contest and I
ALWAYS reduce my speed to that of any station calling me.
PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12/01/2008 01:12 PM
To
elecraft@mailman.qth.net elecraft@mailman.qth.net
cc
Subject
Re: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 03:19:52 -0800 (PST), Julian, G4ILO wrote:
A couple of stations lost out on a point from me because they were
sending
so fast
I worked 18 hours of the contest, 435 Qs, 178 mults, final score of 194,910.
The K3 performed flawlessly using it in conjunction with an Icom IC-2KL and
AT-500.
My biggest gripe is the number of long tuner-uppers on DX calling
frequencies - there's no excuse for it. If you can afford a
Hi All,
I was active as MM3T at the weekend with K3 #1293 and K2 #4688, Acom 1000,
Doublet 160/80, 1/4 GP 40 and Cobweb 20,15 and 10m. The last 3 CQWW CW I've
been using an FT1000MP MkV with inrad 4K roof filter (fully loaded) so was
keen to give the K3 the try for the first time.
My K3 has
Vic K2VCO wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
I always slow down to the speed of guys that call me but a very slow
caller
answering a speedy op in a big pileup is simply a QRM generator who
shouldn't be there.
That sounds a bit harsh, Bill!
Thank you, Vic. This elitist attitude that just
1. Number of K3's in the contest: I believe that many (most?)
participants using a K3 do not list their rig, so the count is
misleading.
2. Be sure to observe the caliber of many of the entrants using the
K3. These are not Joe Ham guysmost from the top ten boxes in
all categories. I know
Julian, G4ILO wrote:
Vic K2VCO wrote:
Bill W4ZV wrote:
I always slow down to the speed of guys that call me but a very slow
caller
answering a speedy op in a big pileup is simply a QRM generator who
shouldn't be there.
That sounds a bit harsh, Bill!
Thank you, Vic.
In both the CQWWCW and RTTY Contests I found the K3 to be too good.
In the zoo of 20 and 40m I could easily find a hole in which to CQ by
using the K3 filters and variable bandwidth controls, but in both
contests i often got pounced upon with QRL QSY. I asked myself why.
If I cant hear
Perhaps we should all use a K3 then we could squeeze more stations into
the available bandwidth...
I think you might be able to get the principals at Elecraft to sign up
to this idea.
If I am bothering YOU, but you are not bothering ME - than that is
clearly YOUR problem.
Well, it's a
At 02:46 PM 01/12/08, you wrote:
I operated QRP (as usual). 717 Qs, 79 total zones, 277 total
countries, final score = 695,624. I am thrilled to have worked 107
countries on 20m alone! QRP DXCC in one weekend on ONE BAND. :-)
de Doug KR2Q
___
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:26:23 -0800, Matt Zilmer wrote:
Well, it's a known issue. It goes two ways, too. I have a neighbor
that runs all gain controls fully clockwise, to the point that he
takes up half of 80m with splatter. This renders the K3 deaf,
because
there is serious on-frequency
but that discussion was
after the contest so I didn't get a chance to try it with the PB off.
Ralph K1ZZI
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 03:31:20 -0800 (PST)
From: G3MLO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:06:35 -0800 (PST), Bill W4ZV wrote:
said a very slow caller in a big pileup. I did not say a slow caller
with nobody else calling. I stand by my statement.
Agreed. One W7 kept calling continuously at 18 wpm when it was obvious he
couldn't hear the DX station. I heard
45 matches
Mail list logo
