On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 13:06 -0800, Rick Tavan N6XI wrote: > I doubt that a receive-only K3 would cost significantly less than a K3/10.
Looking at the schematics, it looks to me like it would save the 12W power amplifier, some $2 relays, the T/R switching circuitry, and several connectors. I doubt if the savings in parts would be enough to pay for the re-engineering involved when amortized over the number of units sold. > Unless there are licensing issues in a particular country, an SWL could buy > a K3/10 with a sub-receiver and enjoy full diversity reception today. Just > be careful not to transmit. I agree. A QRP K3 with suitable options makes a pretty cost-effective high-performance SWL receiver just as it is. Al N1AL > /Rick N6XI > > On 3/9/10, Dave Rickmers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > A version minus the 12 Watt exciter would be very easy to implement, > > would it not? The SWL BCBDXer community is interested. The DSP > > synchronous detector will be a major attraction for shortwave listeners. > > > > ______________________________________________________________ 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
