Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 22:13, David Toepfer wrote: > Ham-band-only receivers in > general are more stable, precise, quiet, simple, and affordable and a > comparably designed GC RX. Isn't it telling that the Ten-Tec Orion II has two separate receivers, one amateur bands only and the other general coverage? My K2 with 160m on the amateur bands is all I need. Ian, G4ICV, AB2GR, K2 #4962 -- ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: Unique synthesizer LO ?
Thanks, Ken (and Harold, W4ZCB). This is definitely of interest. I'm familiar with G3SBI's work, but hadn't connected that to the AOR 7030. Sounds like another unique synthesizer design! 73, Wayne N6KR On Aug 1, 2006, at 7:22 PM, Ken Kopp wrote: The following from long-time friend W4ZCB The LO in the 7030 is indeed a PLL, but the design is unique and was "invented" by Colin Horrabin G3SBI --- http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] My double postings
I think I've fixed my double postings as soon as the moderator deletes my (unintended) 2nd address. (;-) The posting from W4ZCB doesn't apply to the K2, but relates to the postings on the K2's LO. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: Unique synthesizer LO ?
The following from long-time friend W4ZCB and maybe of
interest to some on the list. I'd forwarded Wayne's response
as I knew Harold ('ZCB) would be interested. Harold is one
of the designers of the original Signal One and the ETO line
of amplifiers.
Ken Kopp - K0PP
- Original Message -
I appreciate the response given by Wayne, but his response as given does
the
AOR 7030 somewhat of an injustice because of his unfamiliarity with it.
John Thorpe is the design engineer of the 7030, and he's in the middle
of
doing his follow on design right now. I saw the prototype when in
England
last month and it's gorgeous. The 7030 (over 10 years old now) and it's
successor are upscale receivers only which goes for something over
$1,000.00
The LO in the 7030 is indeed a PLL, but the design is unique and was
"invented" by Colin Horrabin G3SBI. It achieves a superior phase noise
characteristic by the use of a two tank VCO, which causes the phase
noise to
fall at the higher rate of some 30 dB per octave away from the carrier
instead of the 20 seen with a conventional single inductor oscillator.
When
Colin originally came up with the design, it was somewhat controversial
and
several folks were claiming that it couldn't perform as advertised,
despite
the fact that if they had built one, they could have measured it.
A mathematician named Tibor Hajder, a private contractor to the
Hungarian
Communications authority, proved Colins concept mathematically and
published
a paper in Applied Microwave and Wireless proving the concept. The
editor
of AM&W added the header to the article as "Occasionally, a paper is
published that is so timeless and important, it is referenced for
years.
This is such a paper."
I first met Colin over 10 years ago and we have visited many times and
have
mutually worked on several design facets of receivers. He measured a
mixer/filter I had built when he was still employed at Darsbury Labs
and had
access to the Queens finest test equipment to have a third order
intercept
in excess of +50 dBm which as far as either of us knows still holds the
record. A mixer this good REQUIRES a good LO or it's wasted. Colin is
also
the brilliant mind that brought us the "H"-mode mixer. This topology
removes
the mixer switching from the signal path and allows these kinds of
intercepts to be made. The "H" mode has been the last several ARRL
handbooks, the RSGB handbook, and is utilized in the Picastar
transceiver
which was featured in 20 contiguous issues of the RSGB's flagship pub
Radio
Communications. His twin tank oscillator is also featured in the
transceiver
named the CDG2000. (Colin is the C in there). It and the Picastar are
extremely popular homebrew projects that have been replicated all over
the
world.
Regards
W4ZCB
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
This conversation has coincided with some decisions I have been making radio-wise lately, FWIW. Also being a member of the AM/Boatanchor croud, there always seems to be a big push to get GC receivers. But I was listening to a friend recently on the air who has owned an R-390A for years (arguably the top of the top in (heavy) tube receivers) and now and finds himself not using it at all, but instead using what some would argue are lesser ham-band-only receivers. And I started thinking, how many GC receivers do I need (I already have a Drake R-8B w/ VHF converter), given the dearth of shortwave broadcasts and the apparent winnowing of shortwave proadcast content. If I am going to be engaged in QSO's or monitoring my own signals wth a receiver, I don't transmit outside the ham bands. Ham-band-only receivers in general are more stable, precise, quiet, simple, and affordable and a comparably designed GC RX. Don't get me wrong. If Elecraft came out with a GC RX kit I would certainly be in line to buy/build/use one. But don't you think they are doing a stellar job of supporting the QRP/CW/Builder communities with products we will want to buy/build/use? Do we really weant to encourage them to dilute their efforts and loose their focus on who cares most about their products? Many a company has gone broke designing something that was agreed to be great but that few bought because of the expense required to produce it. I say good job to Elecraft. I can't wait to see what you are coming out with next. David, K3TUE . ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Main tuning knob
Hello all, I'm a newbie ... building K2/100 #5665. Sold my FT-1000 to do it ... (:-)) I've seen photos of K2's with what appears to be a main-tining knob from a Yaesu FT-817. If this is correct, can someone give me the Yaesu part number? If it isn't a Yaesu knob, what is it? I have the Elecraft dimple add-on, BTW. Thanks, and ... 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
In a message dated 8/1/06 12:32:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > -Original Message- > Jim replies (>) to my original message (>>) ... > > >> - Medium size or larger controls. > > >How big is that? To me, "medium size" means 1" diameter > > for most controls and 2-3" for tuning. > > Yep, sounds sweet to me. That means a pretty big front panel, because knobs that size fill up lots of space. You wind up with a front panel that looks like this: http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX1.jpg http://hometown.aol.com/n2ey/myhomepage/ > > > The problem is that there's a conflict between that > > and the general coverage/low cost criteria. > > Well, I don't know enough to discuss this but it sure seems to me that > someone could come up with an R-4B style design using modern parts that > would be easy to build and pretty cheap. Only if it's possible. There are a bunch of issues to be resolved in such a design, and they all involve compromises. Well, you'd think it would be > > at least. Why would I think that? After all that rig was nothing more than a receiver that > > could cover a number of 500 KHz bands and it did it pretty well. And look what an R-4 cost! Adjust the price of an R-4 (ABC, whatever) to 2006 dollars and be ready for a shock. > Today's approach of using synthesizers has its drawbacks. It may give > us more bells & whistles (memories, direct freq entry) but it brought a > bunch of issues that needed to be solved as well. > Synthesizers became popular for whole bunch of reasons. One of them was cost. The R-4 family use a premixer design. There's a tunable oscillator (PTO) controlled by the tuning knob. There's a crystal oscillator with a crystal for each 500 kc. segment. The outputs of the two oscillators are mixed in a "premixer", then filtered, to generate the local oscillator signal that mixes with the incoming signals in the first mixer (a 6EJ7 IIRC). Such a design uses a lot of custom-made parts. The PTO and dial assembly are mostly precision mechanical parts. There's a custom-made crystal for each 500 kc segment. Custom-made crystals cost several dollars each in the R-4's day and even more now. Most of the coils in the premixer are custom made, as is the bandswitch. Even with Drake's buying power, all those custom parts push the price up. A big part of cost reduction is using stock parts rather than custom ones. While homebrewers can use one-of-a-kinds, surplus, and "found parts", manufacturers are pretty much forced to use current-production new parts. One of the elegant features of Elecraft designs is its almost complete lack of custom parts. In a K2, the case, circuit boards, the firmware chip and xtals are the only custom parts. The firmware chip is a stock part that Elecraft programs, and the xtals are selected microprocessor crystals. > > Consider a K2 with the transmitter section removed. > > You'd save the finals, a mixer, some control circuitry, > > and a few other things. But would you save half > > the cost of the rig? I doubt it. > > Agreed, but what if you started with a ... KX1? That rig is already > close to what I'm asking for (close enough that maybe it will be my next > rig). And look what a KX1 costs! Remove the transmitter section and you'll save some money, but you'll spend it all on other things like a bigger case and custom filters. I'm not looking for K2 contest level performance, just something > > that can tune around and do an OK job receiving and something that has > good sound. Can the KX1 drive a speaker? Simple is good. > > The KX1 is hardly simple! > > >> - Synchronous AGC > > > ?? What is synchronous AGC? > > Oops, I meant synchronous AM detection ... > > OK - whole bunch of issues with that. > > >> I guess I'm looking for a modern Drake 2B / R-4B but with full > coverage. > > > Those receivers are really good but they lack many of the above > features too. > > Actually, they have most of what I listed, except for memories and a low > price. See above for the cost problem. True they were not general coverage, but with a handful of > > crystals (remember those :-) you could teach them to cover the bands you > were interested in. To me that's good enough. > Then and now, the crystal cost was a big issue. Covering 1.5 to 30 takes 57 crystals! If the stock R-4 comes with 9 crystals, you need to come up with 48 more > > > What about things like a noise blanker, computer control port or DSP? > > > Computer control & DSP? Well, I for one would be very happy to do > without those to save some money. > There's another point: A lot of the market would want those features. Elecraft neatly solves the problem by making many features optional, which permits those who are not interested to leave them out, and also permits those who have limited resources to add them later rather than having to buy everything at once. > Thanks Jim! > Y
[Elecraft] Re: Unique synthesizer LO ?
Hi Peter, Thanks for your kind comments, and I hope you enjoy your new K2. Indeed, I noticed that at less than 5 KHz/dbc your VCXO+DAC>varicaps approach show less oscillator noise than the famous AOR7030 design ( the7030Plus should be even bit better ). However, after 15 KHz/dBc the AOR 7030 graph claims a 10 dB better phase noise. This is because the AOR data was taken in receive mode. The K2 phase noise data is from a transmit composite noise test. In transmit mode the noise floor is affected by a number of other factors, and the noise is generally worse than on receive. 73, Wayne N6KR ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: Unique synthesizer LO ?
Wayne, Thanks for your dedicated response to my phase noise question. I understand now why and how K2's LO design differs from the usual. Indeed, I noticed that at less than 5 KHz/dbc your VCXO+DAC>varicaps approach show less oscillator noise than the famous AOR7030 design ( the7030Plus should be even bit better ). However, after 15 KHz/dBc the AOR 7030 graph claims a 10 dB better phase noise. Though, I see on the 7030's graphs the DDS spurs where you are talking about ( and as you suggest, more spurs may remain unseen ). Besides, I presume the more the sweep goes to the right the less reciprocal mixing will occur / harm. I may frankly confess that I am gladly surprised by your extensive an dedicated effort you make for me to explain things. If this an omen of Elecraft's customer service, I may have taken the right decision to buy a K2. I was so fortunate to buy today a high S/N completely built/aligned/tested K2 ( ssb+nb+160Rx ) from a nice US person. He built many K2's before and sold them. Since I want more options I just ordered with you the DSP, the internal ATU, the RS232 i'face and the internal battery options. This nice OM will built all of these options for me. So, shortly I will own a K2+ which will enrichten my life :-) Thanks again, Peter PE1E Amsterdam. - Original Message - From: "wayne burdick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PE1E" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "'List Elecraft'" Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 6:11 AM Subject: Re: Unique synthesizer LO ? > PE1E wrote: > > > > > It is said that the synthesized LO of the K2 is of a unique design. > > Though, when I compare the LO phase noise specs of the K2 and the > > AOR7030, > > the latter seems to show much better specs. > > Hi Peter, > > Eric (WA6HHQ) and I designed the K2's synthesizer, so I'll try to > answer your questions. > > When we designed the K2 synth we were faced with some difficult > criteria. Since the rig is a kit, we wanted to keep cost and complexity > low and avoid using surface-mount parts. And since it's targeted at > portable operation, we also needed to minimize current drain. But we > also needed a reasonably high-performance synthesizer to match the > possibilities of our down-conversion superhet receive architecture. > > For all of the above reasons, we decided against using a DDS (direct > digital synthesizer). "High-performance" DDS chips generally are > expensive, have high current drain, and require a lot of support > circuitry. And lately just about all of them are fine-pitch SMDs. In > 1998 when we first started prototyping synthesizers, the choices > considerably bleaker. > > DDS chips have a bigger problem, which for a rig like the K2 was not > acceptable: close-in spurs that could compromise performance in high > QRM conditions. These spurs can be managed by adding a lot of > additional filtering and various techniques that are > component-intensive. For example, putting a PLL after the DDS will > help, but without great care, this can actually make things worse (the > PLL can multiply or fold back in spurs that occur way outside the DDS's > nominal output frequency). As is clearly shown in QST reviews of radios > that use DDS without a PLL (e.g., the SDR-1000), a simple low-pass > filter won't do the trick either. Numerous large spurs can be seen near > the carrier in phase noise plots of these radios. But a bare DDS is a > good choice for an "SDR," since it permits the very fast, very accurate > tuning needed for sophisticated digital modes. > > I'm not familiar with the AOR7030's synth design. But if it uses a DDS, > it must either be managing the spurs as I mentioned above, or it has a > *lot* of spurs. You won't necessarily see then in the phase-noise plot; > doing the phase-noise sweeps with a typical bandwidth of 100 Hz won't > show any but the largest spurs (such as the loop spur shown in the > AOR7030's plot). But you'll hear them in the form of reciprocal mixing. > > Back to the K2. Since we were avoiding DDS, we used a clean VCXO as the > PLL reference oscillator, tuning over a small range. To tune the > oscillator, we used a 12-bit DAC driving varactor diodes, and (as you > may recall) there's a calibration pass where we measure the VCXO and > store constants to tune it over its full range. > > Again, I'm not familiar with the AOR design, but over the range we > typically measure (carrier + 2 kHz to 20 kHz), their "smoothed" phase > noise appears to be similar to the K2's. I don't know what bandwidth > they used for their phase-noise plots, so it's hard to say whether > they're mitigating DDS spurs or not. As I mentioned, they can be hidden > by the analyzer's bandwidth. (Note that the upper curve of the two > shown for the AOR7030 is the one I'm referring to. They provided an > additional "far out" curve below it, and we don't have a plot of this > type available for the K2.) > > The other piece of the puzzle was the VCO. Somehow, using a minimum of > parts, we had to make the VCO cover
Re: [Elecraft] Looking for Web Sites
Hello, I just updated the web site with 28 new QRP related links. Some of the DX links, non-USA, sites are real interesting. There are some great projects out there to satisfy any QRP builder. If you have a web site of your own with QRP related material, please drop me an e-mail and let me know. Check out www.n3epa.org . 72 and Thanks, Ron Polityka WB3AAL www.wb3aal.com www.n3epa.org ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] XG2 Assenbled?
Is the XG2 available assembled? Thanks in advance. 73... Jon W1MNK Jon Maguire W1MNK Brandon, FL USA "The four boxes of Democracy: Soap, Jury, Ballot and Cartridge" ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
Keith KD1E wrote: Well, I don't know enough to discuss this but it sure seems to me that someone could come up with an R-4B style design using modern parts that would be easy to build and pretty cheap. Well, you'd think it would be at least. After all that rig was nothing more than a receiver that could cover a number of 500 KHz bands and it did it pretty well. Today's approach of using synthesizers has its drawbacks. It may give us more bells & whistles (memories, direct freq entry) but it brought a bunch of issues that needed to be solved as well. --- Methinks that a Direct Conversion receiver is worth considering with a pair of robust mixers up front, preferably not diode rings, and with a premix type of LO - bag of crystals or maybe a few crystals. You would probably have to settle for 50 - 60db of unwanted sideband suppression in CW and SSB modes if not using audio notching, but you get CW, USB, LSB, AM, and a form of Binaural output. Bandwidth determined by filters at audio. All quite simple. Amen to your comment about synthesizers, although improvements are being made. 73, Geoff GM4ESD ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: Unique synthesizer LO ? [additional data]
Peter, I took a closer look at the AOR 7030 phase noise plot. Out to 5 kHz or so the K2 is noticeably better (11 dB better at 2 kHz). Farther out the 7030 has the advantage. But remember that the 7030 measurements were made in receive mode, whereas the K2's were made in transmit mode, where all sources contribute to raise the noise floor. Hence the term "composite" used by QST in their product reviews. 2kHz4 6 K2 -115 -125 -128 7030-104 -120 -128 73, Wayne N6KR PE1E wrote: It is said that the synthesized LO of the K2 is of a unique design. Though, when I compare the LO phase noise specs of the K2 and the AOR7030, the latter seems to show much better specs. --- http://www.elecraft.com ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
-Original Message- Jim replies (>) to my original message (>>) ... >> - Medium size or larger controls. >How big is that? To me, "medium size" means 1" diameter > for most controls and 2-3" for tuning. Yep, sounds sweet to me. > The problem is that there's a conflict between that > and the general coverage/low cost criteria. Well, I don't know enough to discuss this but it sure seems to me that someone could come up with an R-4B style design using modern parts that would be easy to build and pretty cheap. Well, you'd think it would be at least. After all that rig was nothing more than a receiver that could cover a number of 500 KHz bands and it did it pretty well. Today's approach of using synthesizers has its drawbacks. It may give us more bells & whistles (memories, direct freq entry) but it brought a bunch of issues that needed to be solved as well. > Consider a K2 with the transmitter section removed. > You'd save the finals, a mixer, some control circuitry, > and a few other things. But would you save half > the cost of the rig? I doubt it. Agreed, but what if you started with a ... KX1? That rig is already close to what I'm asking for (close enough that maybe it will be my next rig). I'm not looking for K2 contest level performance, just something that can tune around and do an OK job receiving and something that has good sound. Simple is good. >> - Synchronous AGC > ?? What is synchronous AGC? Oops, I meant synchronous AM detection ... >> I guess I'm looking for a modern Drake 2B / R-4B but with full coverage. > Those receivers are really good but they lack many of the above features too. Actually, they have most of what I listed, except for memories and a low price. True they were not general coverage, but with a handful of crystals (remember those :-) you could teach them to cover the bands you were interested in. To me that's good enough. > What about things like a noise blanker, computer control port or DSP? Computer control & DSP? Well, I for one would be very happy to do without those to save some money. Thanks Jim! 73! - Keith KD1E - - K2 5411 - ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Melbourne Fl Hamfest
Does anyone know if Elecraft is planning on attending the Platinum Coast Hamfest in Melbourne, Fl this October? Planning on taking my Extra down there, and thought a K2 might be in order as a prize to me from me for passing?! -Pete wd4lst K1 #2194 Pete Axson WD4LST 17901 NE 18th Ave Citra, FL 32113 ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] J-F's photos
Man! J-F, your photo "Hams at Work" belongs on the cover of QST. Excellent work, OM! John AB8WH PS, I think I just found a new screen saver...is that OK? ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] LP-100 Digital Vector Wattmeter Kit - 2nd production run announcement
I am now taking orders for the second run of the LP-100 wattmeter. I will deliver the last few from the first run today or tomorrow, and place the orders for the second run early next week. I have posted ordering info on the LP-100 web page, including PayPal buttons. If you haven't been there, check out the website for the latest info, pictures and comments from builders of this fun kit, links to eHam.net reviews, the LP-100 Yahoo Group, etc. For those of you who don't know about the LP-100, it is a digital watt/SWR meter that covers 160-6m from 50 mW to 2500W, and includes a number of unique features like impedance display (R+jX and Z/phase). It is an intermediate level kit, with most SMT parts pre-installed. Most builders report about 8 hours assembly time. Many of the first run customers are Elecrafters, of course. My website is www.telepostinc.com, and there are links to the LP-100 at the top of the page. If you want to contact me about the LP-100, please email me off-list. 73, Larry N8LP ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] RE: half price ordering
On Monday 31 July 2006 at 1842 Jack Lowdon (W4DT) wrote ... I want to pre-order Rev.G products. How to get the 50% discount on the order page? --- - - - --- Jack, We did two things when we announced our new rev. G PCB: 1) We permanently lowered the prices of all of our remaining original rev. D PCB based kits by $4.00. This amount was equivalent to half of the original price of our "Bare Boards Only" kit, which had been $7.95. 2) We briefly offered a pre-production sale on our new rev. G PCB based kits at these same prices. That sale was only for one week, and it ended at 1159 UTC on Sunday July 23rd. --- - - - --- We had hoped that with sufficient interest during our sale, that we would have been able to double our production volume and permanently offer our rev. G based kits at our temporary half-off sale prices. Unfortunately, interest during the sale wasn't sufficient to do this. Now for the good news. Our post production rev. G prices are still lower than our original rev. D based kit prices were, by an average of about $2.00. We were able to keep our prices so low because our PCB vendor offered us a generous discount off their standard one-time (Non-Recurring Engineering) production setup fee. Even more good news is that our PCB vendor also offered us a two-week turnaround at their four-week price, so we now anticipate deliveries of rev. G beginning in early, rather than mid-September as was originally announced. There's even more good news. Originally, rev. G had ground planes on just the bottom copper layer. However, after consulting with an RF Engineer, a second ground plane was added to the top copper layer as well. --- - - - --- For even more details, here's the URL of a recent Reflector post describing some of the differences between rev. G and our original board ... http://www.ac6rm.net/mailarchive/html/elecraft-list/2006-07/msg00537.html Another 11th hour improvement to rev. G was making the breakaway tabs 20% smaller. This should make it a "snap" to break apart the individual boards after you've installed and soldered the parts. 73, Gary, KI4GGX K2 #4067 ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] ECN 20M session for 30 July from VY2/W1OH
Well, I tried!VY2/W1OH here on vacation east of Charlottetown, PEI. Have the KX1 (#1317) at about 4 watts plus a real antenna: 80M doublet fed with twinlead at about 55 feet, and facing west about 100 yards from saltwater! Unfortunately, the band was changing rapidly, I guess, at our sunset (fabulous sunset, BTW! Always great here!) . One moment Kevin was reasonably strong, and had just got my call, I think, then poof! QSB took signals right out and I didn't hear more than a couple of peeps after that - oh, well!Great fun to try from Prince Edward Island, especially after a weekend with a bit of IOTA then the FOBB contest! For some pictures and a writeup of my stay at the same place and setup (but pre-KX1) last summer (2005), see my website: http://gimli.whoi.edu/pei05-w1oh.html Prince Edward Island 2005 - VY2/W1OH 73, geoff - VY2/W1OH (for about 5 more days) -- * Geoff Allsup, W1OH [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Research Engineer Upper Ocean Processes Group Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Woods Hole, MA, USA * ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver?
Keith, I am a bit surprised with Your 1kHz display resolution requirement > its not too much, no? K2 has 10Hz tuning resolution... 72, Petr OK1RP > Původní zpráva > Od: Darwin, Keith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Předmět: [Elecraft] Elecraft GC receiver? > Datum: 31.7.2006 21:25:08 > > We all want a K2-B (K2 with big knobs & display) and I'm sure Elecraft > Engineering is working on it as we speak. > > So how about another idea. I want a separate receiver in the shack. > Something to use as a backup. Something I can use to monitor my the TX > signal from my K2 so I can hear what it is really doing. Features would > include: > > - Medium size or larger controls. > - General coverage SW receive (1.5 - 30 MHz) > - 1 KHz display resolution. > - Low noise, great sound so you can really tell what your TX signal > sounds like. > - AM / SSB / CW coverage > - wide / medium / narrow filters > - Low cost ($300) > > Nice to have includes > > - Analog S-Meter. > - Memories > - IF shift > - External mute > - Fast / Slow / Off AGC speeds > - RF gain control > - Synchronous AGC > > I guess I'm looking for a modern Drake 2B / R-4B but with full coverage. > > - Keith KD1E - > - K2 5411 - > ___ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > > > Petr Ouředník 00420608230010 (private) [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.qsl.net/ok1rp ___ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
