On 2015-02-18 1:08 PM, David Cole wrote: > Clearly you are not reading, or comprehending, what is being said > here...
I am reading *and* comprehending what has been said here. I've even been guilty of not being split when I should be but *never* more than one or two transmissions and most often when the DX is not announcing that he's listening split. I make it a habit to check the Delta-F LED and/or the [SPLIT] icon before calling any station.
The problem is that the operator *is not paying attention*. The correct approach would be: every time the operator activates transmit, the rig display should show a message that says "you are in transceive (simplex) - are you sure you should not engage split? Press XMIT to begin transmitting"
> ===
Again, using the Extreme card to make a point that just does not cut the mustard on it's own...
The "need another indicator" chant is extreme in itself. If three on the K3 and two on the P3 are not enough how many does it take? How distraction needs to be added until a distracted operator becomes focused? It is not logical to believe that one can focus a distracted operator by pouring on additional distractions but if you want it simply do an option that will cause the VFO A or VFO B display (whichever is selected for transmit) to blink full time and to prevent anyone from missing that distraction inhibit transmit if the second line of the display is not showing VFO B. No matter how many guardrails you install, there will always be some fool who drives into that curve 10 MPH faster than the guardrails can handle. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 2015-02-18 1:08 PM, David Cole wrote:
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 10:55 -0500, Joe Subich, W4TV spewed: Implicit in your statement is that the transceiver, automobile, roadway or whatever should make it impossible for the operator to have an accident. That's not possible - there are those who can break an anvil. === Untrue Joe... No where do I imply that it should be "impossible" for an accident to happen. In fact I infer just the opposite, that there should be safeguards. I infer it by use of sarcasm. You are again taking everything to extremes, then arguing that issue as if the originator of the statement also took things to extremes. Please read what was typed and respond to what was typed, not your translation of what was typed. On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 10:55 -0500, Joe Subich, W4TV sprayed the Internet with: The current design that *THREE* separate indications of split operation. Any *one* of those should be sufficient. *NONE* of the proposals do anything to address the real question which should be how to notify the operator that he *should be in split*. === Clearly you are not reading, or comprehending, what is being said here... Many Ops here have said, (repeatedly), that the radio is dropping out of Split for some reason, and they are not noticing it. Hence your premise that the Ops need to be told they "*should be in split*" is deeply flawed. Clearly there is an issue Joe... There are just too many people requesting a change. On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 10:55 -0500, Joe Subich, W4TV heaved up the following: The problem is that the operator *is not paying attention*. The correct approach would be: every time the operator activates transmit, the rig display should show a message that says "you are in transceive (simplex) - are you sure you should not engage split? Press XMIT to begin transmitting" === Again, using the Extreme card to make a point that just does not cut the mustard on it's own... For those of us that make mistakes Joe, (unlike yourself evidently), there is an issue here...
______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
