[Elecraft] K3 utility to monitor extended display of characters sent from K3S keyer problem

2018-03-02 Thread Tom Norris 
I'm beginning my learning curve with my new K3S Kit (after a trip to
Elecraft for them to correct the 400hz filter I put in backwards! Otherwise
it was a good, fun build). I'm wanting to practice CW sending and I am able
to see my K3S paddle input characters in the K3S VFO B. But I am not able
to receive the K3S paddle entered characters in the K3 Utility display. I
can enter and transmit characters via the keyboard in the K3 utility, see
them in the K3 Utility window and the K3S VFO B.  I've tried the various
K3S Text Decode settings but was no help. I'm sure it's a setting
someplace, I've tried to search the archives but the posts I've found do
not address that part of the problem.
Thanks, Tom NB5Q
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV 


It's great to say what should have been done, particularly when the
original design is 35+ years old (Yaesu transceiver/FL-7000).  It
is not practical to make a change to all the legacy hardware so any
equipment supporting Yaesu format "Band Data" needs to be designed
to be +12V tolerant and any transceiver generating "band Data" needs
to source +12V for logic high and provide open circuit (or a weak
pull down) for logic low.

If a given piece of hardware doesn't meet those specifications, the
manufacturer clearly needs to label it as *not compatible* with the
Yaesu products.

This is not a matter of "standards" as there were none when Yaesu
designed its transceivers and amplifier.  For many years, those who
built their own hardware to interface with the Yaesu rigs built to
the Yaesu specification ... and if the current crop of third party
hardware was designed to meet Yaesu's specification there would not
be an issue of incompatibility with multiple receivers connected to
the "Band Data bus".

While you may not like the approach of "first to use" setting the
"standard", that "standard" has been there for 35+ years. It's a
little late to "wish it away" particularly since Yaesu still make
transceivers and amplifiers that continue to use "voltage source =
logic high/high impedance = logic low".

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 3/2/2018 7:19 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
I believe that logic can quickly merge into the idea that "the first to 
introduce BCD Band Data" will "set the standard".  I for one do not 
believe that is the best approach, and certainly not sufficient to 'set 
a standard', which may have serious flaws when extended beyond that 
manufacturer's realm.


The Yaesu method (I cannot call it a standard) will inter-operate with 
other Yaesu gear and 3rd party gear designed to inter-operate with it, 
but that does not constitute a "standard"


The "standard" for data communication has been established in the 
digital world for many, many years, and pre-dates the Yaesu system.


Drivers do not source voltage (they use open collector and open drain 
devices), and there is one pullup resistor at the end of the signal line 
- there may be multiple receivers monitoring the signal line, but there 
can be only one driver active at a time - which for a multiple driver 
situation means an external source of control is necessary for gating 
the drivers.
I was working with those "rules" when designing computer console 
circuits for a IBM large system back in 1969, and the same principals 
had been devised since the advent of IBM SLT logic modules in the late 
1950s.


So if anyone wants to apply "the first guy sets the standard", I think 
Yaesu was not the first, but they made the mistake of having the drivers 
source voltage.  That is only practical for very short signal lines and 
a very limited number of receivers listening on the signal line(s).


Efforts to continue the "Yaesu method" will result in further confusion 
as amateur box to box communications develops further and more and more 
incorporates design principles previously applied to computer systems 
and communications lines.  Even the IBM terminal communications plugged 
the "pullup" resistors at only one terminal (they were called line 
terminators) - at the end of the communications line.  That is a long 
established principle that works even today if done right.  What I am 
saying is that Yaesu did not "do it right" and creates limitations to 
expansion and the advancement of technology within the amateur community 
today.


So get out the cutters and remove the collector and drain resistors from 
the Yaesu drivers, and put pullup resistors only at the far end of the 
lines, and you can have the Yaesu "system" without any of the problems.


There are other systems that do allow multiple drivers on the same 
signalling line(s) - I2C is one example - whichever driver grabs the 
signalling first gets priority is a simplified version of the operation. 
  Ethernet is another example, but in any of these systems, the protocol 
must define which driver gets priority.  That requires a bit more 
sophistication than a simple driver on the communication line.


I believe the original K3 "did it right" to use open drain drivers on 
the band data lines - but succumbed to the hue and cry that it did not 
work with the various versions of the Yaesu system and Elecraft then 
added pullup resistors to the drivers.
The result has been a bastardized "system" that in many cases requires 
the addition of steering diodes and/or the removal of pullup resistors 
from external devices to make it work right.


73,
Don W3FPR

On 3/2/2018 6:17 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:


As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is 
proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious

converters (which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious
amateur).

Yaesu's transceivers were the *first* to use BCD "band data".  As such,
it should be incumbent

[Elecraft] Shack project

2018-03-02 Thread Charles Carlon 
Time to update and organize the Shack. I currently have 

Icom 756 Pro III
Icom 7100
KX3 with Panadaptor  
 Ameritron 811

Work SSB and digital modes
QRP with the KX3 battery and solar
Not a contestor and not good enough yet for CW

Upgrade options 
Sell 7100 and buy KPA 100 or Icom 7300
Sell 756 and buy KPA 100 or Icom 7300
Sell both and buy both
Really love the KX3 and Px3. The KPA 100 would be good fo field day and field 
setups but would not be able to connect to the 811
The 7300 would add the panadaptor and be able to connect to the 811 but not 
have the portable options of the KX3

What do I loose if I give up the 756?  

Charlie
N7CAC

Sent from my iPad
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Cady, Fred 
Right on Don.

73,

Fred KE7X



From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net  on 
behalf of Don Wilhelm 
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2018 5:19 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

I believe that logic can quickly merge into the idea that "the first to
introduce BCD Band Data" will "set the standard".  I for one do not
believe that is the best approach, and certainly not sufficient to 'set
a standard', which may have serious flaws when extended beyond that
manufacturer's realm.

The Yaesu method (I cannot call it a standard) will inter-operate with
other Yaesu gear and 3rd party gear designed to inter-operate with it,
but that does not constitute a "standard"

The "standard" for data communication has been established in the
digital world for many, many years, and pre-dates the Yaesu system.

Drivers do not source voltage (they use open collector and open drain
devices), and there is one pullup resistor at the end of the signal line
- there may be multiple receivers monitoring the signal line, but there
can be only one driver active at a time - which for a multiple driver
situation means an external source of control is necessary for gating
the drivers.
I was working with those "rules" when designing computer console
circuits for a IBM large system back in 1969, and the same principals
had been devised since the advent of IBM SLT logic modules in the late
1950s.

So if anyone wants to apply "the first guy sets the standard", I think
Yaesu was not the first, but they made the mistake of having the drivers
source voltage.  That is only practical for very short signal lines and
a very limited number of receivers listening on the signal line(s).

Efforts to continue the "Yaesu method" will result in further confusion
as amateur box to box communications develops further and more and more
incorporates design principles previously applied to computer systems
and communications lines.  Even the IBM terminal communications plugged
the "pullup" resistors at only one terminal (they were called line
terminators) - at the end of the communications line.  That is a long
established principle that works even today if done right.  What I am
saying is that Yaesu did not "do it right" and creates limitations to
expansion and the advancement of technology within the amateur community
today.

So get out the cutters and remove the collector and drain resistors from
the Yaesu drivers, and put pullup resistors only at the far end of the
lines, and you can have the Yaesu "system" without any of the problems.

There are other systems that do allow multiple drivers on the same
signalling line(s) - I2C is one example - whichever driver grabs the
signalling first gets priority is a simplified version of the operation.
  Ethernet is another example, but in any of these systems, the protocol
must define which driver gets priority.  That requires a bit more
sophistication than a simple driver on the communication line.

I believe the original K3 "did it right" to use open drain drivers on
the band data lines - but succumbed to the hue and cry that it did not
work with the various versions of the Yaesu system and Elecraft then
added pullup resistors to the drivers.
The result has been a bastardized "system" that in many cases requires
the addition of steering diodes and/or the removal of pullup resistors
from external devices to make it work right.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 3/2/2018 6:17 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
>> As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is
>> proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious
>> converters (which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious
>> amateur).
> Yaesu's transceivers were the *first* to use BCD "band data".  As such,
> it should be incumbent on anyone using that interface to be electrically
> compatible with Yaesu's interface (source +5/+12V for logic high, open
> circuit for logic low).  Even the amateur DOS based logging software
> that provided "band data" on a computer LPT port duplicated that
> interface.
>
__
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 fc...@montana.edu
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Don Wilhelm 
I believe that logic can quickly merge into the idea that "the first to 
introduce BCD Band Data" will "set the standard".  I for one do not 
believe that is the best approach, and certainly not sufficient to 'set 
a standard', which may have serious flaws when extended beyond that 
manufacturer's realm.


The Yaesu method (I cannot call it a standard) will inter-operate with 
other Yaesu gear and 3rd party gear designed to inter-operate with it, 
but that does not constitute a "standard"


The "standard" for data communication has been established in the 
digital world for many, many years, and pre-dates the Yaesu system.


Drivers do not source voltage (they use open collector and open drain 
devices), and there is one pullup resistor at the end of the signal line 
- there may be multiple receivers monitoring the signal line, but there 
can be only one driver active at a time - which for a multiple driver 
situation means an external source of control is necessary for gating 
the drivers.
I was working with those "rules" when designing computer console 
circuits for a IBM large system back in 1969, and the same principals 
had been devised since the advent of IBM SLT logic modules in the late 
1950s.


So if anyone wants to apply "the first guy sets the standard", I think 
Yaesu was not the first, but they made the mistake of having the drivers 
source voltage.  That is only practical for very short signal lines and 
a very limited number of receivers listening on the signal line(s).


Efforts to continue the "Yaesu method" will result in further confusion 
as amateur box to box communications develops further and more and more 
incorporates design principles previously applied to computer systems 
and communications lines.  Even the IBM terminal communications plugged 
the "pullup" resistors at only one terminal (they were called line 
terminators) - at the end of the communications line.  That is a long 
established principle that works even today if done right.  What I am 
saying is that Yaesu did not "do it right" and creates limitations to 
expansion and the advancement of technology within the amateur community 
today.


So get out the cutters and remove the collector and drain resistors from 
the Yaesu drivers, and put pullup resistors only at the far end of the 
lines, and you can have the Yaesu "system" without any of the problems.


There are other systems that do allow multiple drivers on the same 
signalling line(s) - I2C is one example - whichever driver grabs the 
signalling first gets priority is a simplified version of the operation. 
 Ethernet is another example, but in any of these systems, the protocol 
must define which driver gets priority.  That requires a bit more 
sophistication than a simple driver on the communication line.


I believe the original K3 "did it right" to use open drain drivers on 
the band data lines - but succumbed to the hue and cry that it did not 
work with the various versions of the Yaesu system and Elecraft then 
added pullup resistors to the drivers.
The result has been a bastardized "system" that in many cases requires 
the addition of steering diodes and/or the removal of pullup resistors 
from external devices to make it work right.


73,
Don W3FPR

On 3/2/2018 6:17 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:


As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is 
proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious

converters (which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious
amateur).

Yaesu's transceivers were the *first* to use BCD "band data".  As such,
it should be incumbent on anyone using that interface to be electrically
compatible with Yaesu's interface (source +5/+12V for logic high, open
circuit for logic low).  Even the amateur DOS based logging software
that provided "band data" on a computer LPT port duplicated that
interface.


__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Joe Subich, W4TV 


As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is 
proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious

converters (which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious
amateur).

Yaesu's transceivers were the *first* to use BCD "band data".  As such,
it should be incumbent on anyone using that interface to be electrically
compatible with Yaesu's interface (source +5/+12V for logic high, open
circuit for logic low).  Even the amateur DOS based logging software
that provided "band data" on a computer LPT port duplicated that
interface.

Absent any documented standard for the interface, any product developer
who claims to support "BCD band data" should be expected to properly
emulate the Yaesu "ports" so that their receiver works with any Yaesu
transceiver and/or their transceiver properly drives any Yaesu amp
(FL-7000/Quadra).

The issue is accessory makers who are not +12V tolerant and those who
apply voltage to the BCD lines ... and transceiver makers who provide
"band data" ports that do not source +5/12V for logic high.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 3/2/2018 4:43 PM, ab2tc wrote:

Hi all,

Of course this assumes that the sole transmitter on the bus obeys the rules
as well, which is to be an open collector or open drain (or relay contact to
ground). I am sorry if I omitted that point.

As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is
proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious converters
(which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious amateur).

My main point is that the amateur community should move towards following
the "standard". If all devices followed that "standard" they would all work
together and there would be no problem with one device powering another.

AB2TC - Knut


ab2tc wrote

Hi all,

I was reluctant to respond again to this long thread, but I will.

If all receivers on the bus (yes, it is a bus)  were to obey the rules to
have a pullup resistor and a steering diode we would not have the problem
of
"false power" to devices on the bus. This would be proper engineering
practice which has unfortunately been ignored by the the ham community for
years.

AB2TC- Knut



--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:



Elecraft@.qth




This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to



lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble






--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
__
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 li...@subich.com


__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT 

Actually, we're talking about exactly the same thing.

I should have included  tags.  Sorry for the omission.

On 3/2/2018 2:03 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

On 3/2/2018 1:48 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.


Actually, what we're describing here is the LACK of a Standard -- each 
company decided in isolation how to implement things like this.

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Jim Brown 

On 3/2/2018 1:48 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.


Actually, what we're describing here is the LACK of a Standard -- each 
company decided in isolation how to implement things like this. I serve 
on the Standards Committee of Audio Engineering Society, and we develop 
Standards by consensus, through a process that accepts engineering (and 
sometimes applications) input from anyone who wishes to participate. 
Many of our Standards took years to formulate.


The situation with ham gear is that, most likely for competitive 
reasons, each company developed their way of doing things on their own. 
This happens fairly often in the world of consumer products. Over a 
period of nearly 20 years, I rarely saw representatives of Japanese 
companies in Standards meetings, while US and EU companies and users are 
represented. Indeed, I mostly remember the Japanese companies presenting 
papers on their new developments.


73, Jim K9YC

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT 

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.

73 -- Lynn

On 3/2/2018 1:43 PM, ab2tc wrote:

My main point is that the amateur community should move towards following
the "standard". If all devices followed that "standard" they would all work
together and there would be no problem with one device powering another.

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Advice needed: Remote Station Enhancement

2018-03-02 Thread ab2tc 
Hi all,

Of course this assumes that the sole transmitter on the bus obeys the rules
as well, which is to be an open collector or open drain (or relay contact to
ground). I am sorry if I omitted that point.

As far as older Yaesu transceivers are concerned, their design is
proprietary and cannot be brought into the mold without serious converters
(which should frankly be easily constructed by the serious amateur).

My main point is that the amateur community should move towards following
the "standard". If all devices followed that "standard" they would all work
together and there would be no problem with one device powering another.

AB2TC - Knut


ab2tc wrote
> Hi all,
> 
> I was reluctant to respond again to this long thread, but I will.
> 
> If all receivers on the bus (yes, it is a bus)  were to obey the rules to
> have a pullup resistor and a steering diode we would not have the problem
> of
> "false power" to devices on the bus. This would be proper engineering
> practice which has unfortunately been ignored by the the ham community for
> years.
> 
> AB2TC- Knut
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:

> Elecraft@.qth

> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to 

> lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble





--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
__
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

[Elecraft] KPA1500 arrived

2018-03-02 Thread Carl Yaffey 
#38 arrived today in fine shape. Just worked 3C3W on 20M CW


Thanks Elecraft gang!
73

Carl Yaffey  K8NU
Recording studio.
cyaffeyno_s...@gmail.com 
614 268 6353, Columbus OH
http://www.carl-yaffey.com
http://www.grassahol.com
http://www.bluesswing.com

__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft KX2 compared with the latest "Ultra Portable"

2018-03-02 Thread Chris Hallinan 
Curious what you use for an antenna at hotel rooms?  Many hotel rooms have
windows that don't even open.

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 10:10 AM, Irma & Linas(LY2H) 
wrote:

> I have both the FT- 817nd ( since ten years)  and the KX-2 ( since about
> two years).
>  The '817 used to be an unbeatable champion in the QRP rigs class for many
> years due to its versatility, all-band (160m -70cm) all mode features. It
> travelled with me all accross Europe and did a great job in casual
> hotel-style operation but also in a big contests' QRP category with very
> good results. With a third-party DSP filter (Bhi-Dsp module) installed this
> rig was and still is a very welcome in my shack,  last but not least due to
> its VHF/UHF full-feature coverage including  sattelite operation .On the
> downside , the FT'817 needs quite a lot of energy to produce its 5W and
> that makes the operation from its internal battery practically useless. The
> lack of a built in ATU is another minus, eventhough the Elecraft's T-1 mini
> tuner comes as a great solution for this  :)). Tiny display is yet another
> minus.
>
> As it comes to KX-2 it is my favourite and major  rig now for all of my HF
> QRP activities, incl working mobile. The first thing wich struck me,
> compare to the FT817, was a KX-2 internal battery which REALY worked for
> many hours uncharged! Even if in a hotel room or in the car I prefere to
> run it on the battery since it much more convienient, less wiring and QRM
> from the switching power supply ( only few brands of ps are almost no
> noise). The power consumption both on RX and especially TX in the KX2 was
> another pleasant surprise! What it takes for the FT-817 to produce 5 W is
> enough or even less for KX-2 to yeald up good 10W! This comes as a great
> advantage when taking part in the QRP contests, since a 10W amplifier
> stands easily the heavy-duty style contest operation when run at the 5 W
> level. For a casual operation when the 5W QRP is not a requirement I like
> it very much to have 10-12 W in such a compact box. I also like the large
> display and great functionality in KX-2 , like built in messages for CW and
> even SSB. The message feature makes it much more fun when operating mobile
> or in the contest ( especially voice messaging , since I hate shouting cq
> for hours :)). The DSP filtering  makes the receiver's general performing
> far better to my opinion  then the FT-817 especially in a crowdy
> environment like FD or a contest. Being a programmable SDR rig, the KX-2 is
> easily upgradable ( and I like it very much!) for more and better features
> which is out of question for an old ( good!) analogue FT-817. The only
> thing which the KX-2 lacks on HF is a 160 m band ( and I don't understand
> why). As it comes for the VHF/UHF I don't miss it in the KX-2 since it
> would be rearly used by the HF hams anyway and it would result in the
> bigger size and the price of the rig. There is a KX-3 for that, :) and I
> personally still have the FT-817 packed carefully in case I feel a desire
> to grab my VHF yagies and rush to a VHF field day, :)).
> __
> 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 challi...@gmail.com
>



-- 
Life is like Linux - it never stands still.
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft KX2 compared with the latest "Ultra Portable"

2018-03-02 Thread Hajo Dezelski 
Hello,

one thing which was not mentioned here:
As far as my memory serves me well: The FT-817 was not usable with QSK
operation and the relais made noise like an old sewing machine.

73 de Hajo
Gruss
Hajo

---
Cela est bien dit, mais il faut cultiver notre jardin.

http://hajos-kontrapunkte.blogspot.de/


On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:10 PM, Irma & Linas(LY2H)
 wrote:
> I have both the FT- 817nd ( since ten years)  and the KX-2 ( since about
> two years).
>  The '817 used to be an unbeatable champion in the QRP rigs class for many
> years due to its versatility, all-band (160m -70cm) all mode features. It
> travelled with me all accross Europe and did a great job in casual
> hotel-style operation but also in a big contests' QRP category with very
> good results. With a third-party DSP filter (Bhi-Dsp module) installed this
> rig was and still is a very welcome in my shack,  last but not least due to
> its VHF/UHF full-feature coverage including  sattelite operation .On the
> downside , the FT'817 needs quite a lot of energy to produce its 5W and
> that makes the operation from its internal battery practically useless. The
> lack of a built in ATU is another minus, eventhough the Elecraft's T-1 mini
> tuner comes as a great solution for this  :)). Tiny display is yet another
> minus.
>
> As it comes to KX-2 it is my favourite and major  rig now for all of my HF
> QRP activities, incl working mobile. The first thing wich struck me,
> compare to the FT817, was a KX-2 internal battery which REALY worked for
> many hours uncharged! Even if in a hotel room or in the car I prefere to
> run it on the battery since it much more convienient, less wiring and QRM
> from the switching power supply ( only few brands of ps are almost no
> noise). The power consumption both on RX and especially TX in the KX2 was
> another pleasant surprise! What it takes for the FT-817 to produce 5 W is
> enough or even less for KX-2 to yeald up good 10W! This comes as a great
> advantage when taking part in the QRP contests, since a 10W amplifier
> stands easily the heavy-duty style contest operation when run at the 5 W
> level. For a casual operation when the 5W QRP is not a requirement I like
> it very much to have 10-12 W in such a compact box. I also like the large
> display and great functionality in KX-2 , like built in messages for CW and
> even SSB. The message feature makes it much more fun when operating mobile
> or in the contest ( especially voice messaging , since I hate shouting cq
> for hours :)). The DSP filtering  makes the receiver's general performing
> far better to my opinion  then the FT-817 especially in a crowdy
> environment like FD or a contest. Being a programmable SDR rig, the KX-2 is
> easily upgradable ( and I like it very much!) for more and better features
> which is out of question for an old ( good!) analogue FT-817. The only
> thing which the KX-2 lacks on HF is a 160 m band ( and I don't understand
> why). As it comes for the VHF/UHF I don't miss it in the KX-2 since it
> would be rearly used by the HF hams anyway and it would result in the
> bigger size and the price of the rig. There is a KX-3 for that, :) and I
> personally still have the FT-817 packed carefully in case I feel a desire
> to grab my VHF yagies and rush to a VHF field day, :)).
> __
> 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 dl1...@gmail.com
__
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

Re: [Elecraft] Sale - XV50 Transverter

2018-03-02 Thread Don Wilhelm 

Ken,

A slight correction - the K2 does NOT need the K60XV option for 
transverter operation, although it makes things easier.
The XV50 can be driven by any transceiver that produces 1mW up to 8 
watts.  The jumpers in the XV50 must be set properly to control the 
power input range.


73,
Don W3FPR

On 3/2/2018 10:12 AM, Ken Jones wrote:

Hi All,


Have the subject transverter I'm not using. Works well. No scratches, dents or 
dings.

Comes with the original manual and the three connecting cables for the K2.

For the K2 you need the K60XV option.

The "builder alert" bypass cap change has been done and the sheets included.

The XV "Manual Errata", Rev B-1 has been incorporated and the sheets included.

Will be packed well. Did lots of E-Bay packing.

Asking 140.00 + 15.00 shipping (US only).

Pay-Pal is fine or a postal Money Order.


Thanks for reading, Ken, W2GIW, Sewell, NJ

OK in QRZ
__
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 donw...@embarqmail.com


__
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

Re: [Elecraft] KX3 ACC1 to PC and expert 1.3K-fa ?

2018-03-02 Thread Andre Bourbon 
Hi Igor ,

 

Tnx for info .

On this moment I test the KX3 with the expert 1K-fa .

The settings for elecraft are not in the menu ( 1k-fa).

On the 1.3K-fa there are cat settings for elecraft .

I will try it when my 1.3K-fa is arrived , end of March .

 

73’ André   

C5YK / C5S / (exC56YK ) / ON7YK

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net 
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Igor Sokolov
Sent: vrijdag 2 maart 2018 4:03
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX3 ACC1 to PC and expert 1.3K-fa ?

 

I have the same setup. KX3 and Expert 1.3

 

IW2NOY is correct. Expert only has to listen on CAT. Remove TX line 

connection from Expert to TRX otherwise you will have collisions when 

Expert and computer both are polling TRX for frequency.

 

I use Elecraft setting for CAT on Expert.

 

 

73, Igor UA9CDC

 

 

01.03.2018 15:58, Andre Bourbon пишет:

> Hi,

> 

> Tnx

> 

> I have already test this configuration like you propose.

> 

> Removed  the TX (pin9) on the DB15 only pin 1(rx) and 4 (gnd)

> 

> But the expert need as cat config  Flex  radio  when he is on the KX3 , tx 
> and Rx must be connected .

> 

>   

> 

> KX3 is not like K3

> 

> 73’ André on7yk

> 

>   

> 

>   

> 

> From: Graziano Roccon [mailto:graziano.roc...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
> Graziano Roccon IW2NOY

> Sent: donderdag 1 maart 2018 11:08

> To: Andre Bourbon

> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net

> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX3 ACC1 to PC and expert 1.3K-fa ?

> 

>   

> 

> Hi,

> 

> Serial communications is thinked for two buddies with crossed tx and rx., not 
> for three.

> 

> You have too many tx on the same cable.

> 

> Remove the tx from the db15 of expert you don't need it. For the expert is 
> enough READ (rx) the frequency that set the CAT coming from the PC (TX).

> 

> Remove the tx from the expert db 15 and try again.

> 

> I have similar setup but with k3s instead of kx3.

> 

> There are cable schemas on my site, if you want give a look.

> 

> Good luck, 73 de IW2NOY

> 

> http://www.iw2noy.it/index.php?id=87

> 

> 

> 

> Inviato da BlueMail 

> 

> Il giorno 1 mar 2018, alle ore 09:53, Andre Bourbon  
> ha scritto:

> 

> My setup is : KX3 --- PC Expert Ampli 1K-fa or 1.3k-fa

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Using the ACC1 port :

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Kx3 Connect to my pc with KXUSB cable and DX-lab logging prg -  band

> 

> 

> changing is ok

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> KX3 connect with my Expert ampli DB15 ( txd,rxd,gnd ) ( flex radio cat

> 

> 

> settings )  -band changing is ok

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> I will do it now together :

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> I put 1 cable wired on parallel : txd, rxd, gnd

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   1 cable goes from the KX3 to the expert ampli

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   1 cable goes from the KX3 via KX3USB to the pc

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> band changing  totally NOT working any more .

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Its look like there is a conflict or the voltage from the kx3 is to low to

> 

> 

> change the band info to the pc and on the same time to the cat port (Expert

> 

> 

> ampli.)

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Any advice, or solution ???

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> André ON7YK

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>   

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> ---

> 

> 

> Deze e-mail is gecontroleerd op virussen door AVG.

> 

> 

> http://www.avg.com

> 

> 

> 

>_

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 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 grazi...@roccon.com

> __

> 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 ua9...@gmail.com

 

__

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 andre.bour...@on7yk.eu

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help:

[Elecraft] Sale - XV50 Transverter

2018-03-02 Thread Ken Jones 
Hi All,


Have the subject transverter I'm not using. Works well. No scratches, dents or 
dings.

Comes with the original manual and the three connecting cables for the K2.

For the K2 you need the K60XV option.

The "builder alert" bypass cap change has been done and the sheets included.

The XV "Manual Errata", Rev B-1 has been incorporated and the sheets included.

Will be packed well. Did lots of E-Bay packing.

Asking 140.00 + 15.00 shipping (US only).

Pay-Pal is fine or a postal Money Order.


Thanks for reading, Ken, W2GIW, Sewell, NJ

OK in QRZ
__
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

[Elecraft] Elecraft KX2 compared with the latest "Ultra Portable"

2018-03-02 Thread Irma & Linas(LY2H) 
I have both the FT- 817nd ( since ten years)  and the KX-2 ( since about
two years).
 The '817 used to be an unbeatable champion in the QRP rigs class for many
years due to its versatility, all-band (160m -70cm) all mode features. It
travelled with me all accross Europe and did a great job in casual
hotel-style operation but also in a big contests' QRP category with very
good results. With a third-party DSP filter (Bhi-Dsp module) installed this
rig was and still is a very welcome in my shack,  last but not least due to
its VHF/UHF full-feature coverage including  sattelite operation .On the
downside , the FT'817 needs quite a lot of energy to produce its 5W and
that makes the operation from its internal battery practically useless. The
lack of a built in ATU is another minus, eventhough the Elecraft's T-1 mini
tuner comes as a great solution for this  :)). Tiny display is yet another
minus.

As it comes to KX-2 it is my favourite and major  rig now for all of my HF
QRP activities, incl working mobile. The first thing wich struck me,
compare to the FT817, was a KX-2 internal battery which REALY worked for
many hours uncharged! Even if in a hotel room or in the car I prefere to
run it on the battery since it much more convienient, less wiring and QRM
from the switching power supply ( only few brands of ps are almost no
noise). The power consumption both on RX and especially TX in the KX2 was
another pleasant surprise! What it takes for the FT-817 to produce 5 W is
enough or even less for KX-2 to yeald up good 10W! This comes as a great
advantage when taking part in the QRP contests, since a 10W amplifier
stands easily the heavy-duty style contest operation when run at the 5 W
level. For a casual operation when the 5W QRP is not a requirement I like
it very much to have 10-12 W in such a compact box. I also like the large
display and great functionality in KX-2 , like built in messages for CW and
even SSB. The message feature makes it much more fun when operating mobile
or in the contest ( especially voice messaging , since I hate shouting cq
for hours :)). The DSP filtering  makes the receiver's general performing
far better to my opinion  then the FT-817 especially in a crowdy
environment like FD or a contest. Being a programmable SDR rig, the KX-2 is
easily upgradable ( and I like it very much!) for more and better features
which is out of question for an old ( good!) analogue FT-817. The only
thing which the KX-2 lacks on HF is a 160 m band ( and I don't understand
why). As it comes for the VHF/UHF I don't miss it in the KX-2 since it
would be rearly used by the HF hams anyway and it would result in the
bigger size and the price of the rig. There is a KX-3 for that, :) and I
personally still have the FT-817 packed carefully in case I feel a desire
to grab my VHF yagies and rush to a VHF field day, :)).
__
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

[Elecraft] K3_630 meter

2018-03-02 Thread Ken Roberson via Elecraft 
Hello all,There is a photo of the 630 meter station on my web-site.Also info on 
antenna and remote tuner.
Thanks 73 Ken K5DNLwww.k5dnl.com
__
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