I would have thought the K2 was even better in some ways: - less than a third of the receive current requirements;
- field repairable; - whilst not as tolerant of close in signals, it is still very tolerant, and a disaster scenario ought to be a cooperative environment (otherwise you have human, rather than engineering problems), unlike a contest. I'd suggest this was more an issue in regional or national control centres, where power and weight would be lesser issues. Wayne Burdick wrote: > I'm reflecting on how the K3 can > serve as a flexible station for emergency communications. > -- David Woolley "we do not overly restrict the subject matter on the list, and we encourage postings on a wide range of amateur radio related topics" List Guidelines <http://www.elecraft.com/elecraft_list_guidelines.htm> ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
