Or how about K3Pro with benefits :-) 73 Jeff kb2m
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Fred Jensen Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 7:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) Why not adopt the grammar of the Lao [and Thai] languages which have no plural forms. It would be K3S, two K3S, three K3S, one hundred K3S ... I've always thought K3S was a misteak, K3.1 would have been better ... or not. 73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 6/27/2018 3:00 PM, Bob McGraw K4TAX wrote: > Would not K3S' be the plural of K3S? > > Bob, K4TAX > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 27, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Ian White <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in >> both >>> transmit and receive phase noise. >> That is far too simplistic. Anyone's personal definition of "the >> better synthesizer" will depend on what range of frequency offsets >> is more important for their particular type of operating. >> >> For HF CW in particular, phase noise at small frequency offsets is >> of paramount importance and I wouldn't argue with Don's report of "a >> huge improvement in both transmit and receive phase noise" - but >> *only* in that specific context. There are also several other >> advantages that are relevant to high-performance HF CW that could >> also justify upgrading to the KSYN3A. >> >> At close frequency offsets from the carrier, the KSYN3A does indeed >> offer a large reduction in phase noise compared with the KSYN3 >> (which itself was already good). But at wider frequency offsets, >> that situation reverses. According to the ARRL review [1], at all >> offsets beyond about 6kHz, the older KSYN3 continues to have a lower >> noise floor than the newer KSYN3A "upgrade". >> >> Performance at wider frequency offsets, 10-100kHz and beyond, is of >> much greater importance in VHF-UHF contesting. This due to a >> combination of factors. The strongest signals at VHF-UHF are often >> much stronger than on HF, due to the use of high-gain beam antennas; >> and also the weakest signals are *always* much, much weaker due to >> the lower levels of natural background noise. These two features >> stretch the requirement for dynamic range on VHF-UHF far beyond >> those for which most HF transceivers are designed. >> >> Anyone transmitting wideband phase noise has a much greater risk of >> raising the noise floor of many other stations across the whole >> contesting segment of the VHF or UHF band. Running the numbers >> reveals that anyone aiming to be a Big Gun in VHF contests has a >> responsibility to keep their wideband transmitted noise floor below >> about -130dBc/Hz at frequency offsets of 50kHz and more [2]. This >> can be a major engineering challenge, and the performance of the >> transceiver is almost always the most important building block. >> >> The KSYN3A just about meets the -130dBc/Hz noise floor target at >> frequency offsets of 10kHz or more... but according to the ARRL >> review [1] the older KSYN3 achieves it much more comfortably, with >> 10-15dB to spare. >> >> I have both a K3S and a very early-model K3. The K3S (with the >> KSYN3A, of course) is used for HF contesting where smaller frequency >> offsets are important. Meanwhile the old K3 is now used as a >> transverter driver for 144MHz and above - and for that particular >> purpose there are very good reasons *not* to replace the original >> KSYN3. >> >> 73 from Ian GM3SEK >> >> >> [1] >> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ProductReviewsForDeb/2015/pr112015.pd >> f >> >> [2] >> https://thersgb.org/members/publications/video_archive.php?id=5703 >> Sorry, this talk is accessible only to RSGB members, but in a few >> words... >> >> G8DOH runs the numbers to demonstrate that the -130dBc/Hz target >> for transmitted phase noise is necessary to avoid raising the noise >> floor of other stations many kilometres away, and also many tens to >> hundreds of kHz away across the band, whenever their high-gain beams >> happen to be pointed at each other. >> >> That calculation assumes the UK transmitter power limit of 400W PEP >> output. For the US power limit of 1500W output, keeping all other >> assumptions the same, the target for transmitted noise floor would >> need to be better than -135dBc/Hz. The older KSYN3 can still meet >> that more stringent target but the KSYN3A probably cannot. >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:elecraft- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm >>> Sent: 27 June 2018 14:23 >>> To: hawley, charles j jr; Charlie T >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] factory upgrade to K3(s) >>> >>> Chuck, >>> >>> A big reduction in receiver noise floor and a huge improvement in >> both >>> transmit and receive phase noise. It is like getting a new >> transceiver. >>> If you are strictly a casual operator, those qualities may not be >>> important to you, but if you are a DX'er or a contester, or >> otherwise >>> operate in crowded band condition, those things should be important >>> to you. >>> >>> 73, >>> Don W3FPR >>> >>>> On 6/27/2018 9:03 AM, hawley, charles j jr wrote: >>>> I decided to bypass the replacement of the synthesizers. Could >> you >>> describe the "huge" difference? >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [email protected] > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [email protected] ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [email protected]
