I'm trying to resolve a conflict: is the KRX3 sub receiver a "must have", or a "must have with good reasons" option?
I understand it's uses. In my case, I am mostly considering it as an added resource for working dx split pileups. I have the P3, and have found it very useful in many ways, and especially for dx - so useful, that I question how much the KRX3 will add. You more-experienced dxers maybe can help point out what I am missing. I usually can develop a reasonable "pile-up strategy" using the P3 - and that seems to work most of the time. I must lack the dexterity to make the REV routine add anything. Even with the sub-rx, I estimate that it would help in only a small percentage of the situations, particularly in those large (and ill-mannered) pile-ups where the P3 shows a solid wall of signals. (Maybe the ears might catch a faint "599" that the P3 won't show?) Most of the dxers I talk to say the KRX3 is a must. I'll probably get one anyway, but what am I missing here? Bill K6IFF -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/KRX3-What-am-I-missing-tp7571896.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ______________________________________________________________ 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
