Re: [Elecraft] [K2]PSK31 QRP?
At 07:49 AM 11/21/2013, you wrote: For some reason I've become interested in trying PSK31 with my K2/10. Receive works well, but haven't tried transmitting yet because my laptop has only USB connectors. Before buying an interface, would appreciate knowing whether others have had success with QRP level PSK31. Which interfaces play well with the K2? 73, Curt KB5JO Hi Curt PSK31 has become my mode of preference. I operate QRP 1.5w idle es abt 3-4 w peak. I originally operated with a home brew 100w linear (tube type) with about 20w peak output ... but the amp took up most of the desk space so I de-commissioned it almost 2 years ago with the intention of getting a modern solid state amp. In the meantime i continued to operate barefoot (QRP). I hardly noticed a difference. I still worked some DX and anyone I called came back to me. Calling CQ almost always brings a response. My antenna arrangement consists of 2 dipoles (20 15) at the top of my 50ft tower . nothing extraordinary. The USB version of SignaLink does and excellent job as an interface. If I had a less efficient antenna system I might go for a 100w linear. As it is QRP works wonderfully and I have a nice clean operating desk hi hi. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Thoughts on the KXPA100 [was: QRP]
At 02:55 PM 6/18/2013, Wayne Burdick wrote: Many competing 100-W amps don't cover 160-6 meters, or don't make it to 100 W on 6 meters. Many have poor IMD performance on some bands (we bought one of each and tested them in our lab; some were truly awful). None of them offer a companion internal ATU. 73, Wayne N6KR Hi, A very nice looking amp. A few questions: I assume from the detail description that the KXPA100 face plate sans the built in ATU would have just the upper row of lights, Power out, ATT, TX, ON and the OFF/ON slide switch. I assume that the sans built in ATU version would automatically bypass the amp when in the OFF position. I also assume that the attenuation, ATT light is activated automatically as is the band selection. At what power level will the automatically switched ATT kick in? At the moment my favorite antenna tuner (manual) is the ezee match which is very easy to tune and has 2 separate antenna inputs. Physically the KXPA100 would fit very nicely on top of the AT case (exactly 6 in wide and 12 in deep). I assume, that should I wish to add the built in ATU in the future that it would include a new faceplate with the added lights and buttons. Thanks 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Point me to the note for sending CW when in, SSB mode
At 01:04 PM 6/15/2013, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: Some of the early commercial (1960's) SSB rigs offered CW capability with a built-in audio oscillator that fed into the transmit audio. That is not MCW, but pseudo CW. It would be CW if the audio oscillator was a perfect sine wave and the carrier and opposite sideband suppression were perfect so that the only RF transmitted was the sideband produced by the audio oscillator. But, of course, it never is... 73 Ron AC7AC Hi Ron The old Collins KWS-1 sent CW in this manner. Always sounded good. I use the same technique with my Flex-1500. I spend most of my time on either CW or Digital (PSK these days) and rag chewing my preference. I am an old CW hand but I was never in love with sending CW ... but love copying it hi hi. I use MixW and simply switch from PSK to CW and leave PowerSDR in DGU mode. I have asked many operators at the other end to check my signal for problems of any kind and have never had a report of signal that wasn't clean and easy to copy. It makes operating so simple and it certainly gives the guy at the other end a break hi. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4
Hi I'm sure Elecraft is picking up a few interesting suggestions from this thread so I might as well throw my ideas in as well. I really like computers and a clean desk. I would like to be able to have complete control of an excellent radio such as the K3 from my computer and to be able to locate my radio out of site. In fact I would like to locate the radio at the back of the house downstairs where the antenna cables come in from outside. The radio would then NOT NEED ANY CONTROLS just control and power cable connectors. The radio could then be sold at a reduced price. The 'black box' radio would be totally functional as the present K3 and the computer control software in effect would act as a 'dumb terminal' and I am sure any number of 3rd party developers would bring out attractive versions (such as N4PY). The old Ten Tec Pegasus followed this design. For those who really like the feel of the knobs and switches of a 'real radio' a radio front like the K3/0 could be made available and could have complete control of the 'black box' located under the desk. It seems that elecraft is already a long way along this path. In addition to the K3/0 a K3/-1 might be considered (a K3/-1 being the black box). Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] OT: Elevated vs. Buried Radials
At 08:37 AM 5/18/2013, Joel Black wrote: Is the only benefit portability? Thanks, Joel - W4JBB Hi Joel As you mentioned ... physical, portable, and safety issues aside the difference between raised and buried radials is the difference in how they perform their function; that is how they effectively balance the antenna currents in the vertical radiating element and allow maximum radiation (usually vertically oriented). Example: imagine a 1/2 wave dipole horizontally oriented in free space above earth producing a horizontal oriented radiation pattern. Now bend the 1/2 wave 90 deg so one side is vertical while the other side remains horizontal and you now have a combination of horizontal and vertical radiation while the radiation efficiency remains the same. In order to eliminate the horizontal component install a second horizontal 1/4 wave element installed 180 deg opposite the first horizontal wire and the horizontal radiation component cancels leaving only the vertical component. This configuration is a vertical ground plane antenna and is quite efficient even though approximately half the radiated power is lost in the cancelled out horizontal portion. Now assume for whatever reason you want the feed point to be at ground level and you lower it more and more. As you do so the efficient 2 element ground plane (1/4 wave each) comes closer and closer to ground level and the resonant efficiency of the ground plane becomes lower and lower due to the interaction with the earth until the resonant length of the ground plane becomes irrelevant. Now in order to handle the RF current flow necessary to allow maximum current flow in the vertical radiating element a different method is required. you now actually need to allow current to flow from the ground System to the earth itself.Different radial properties are required and resonance is no longer required.. To a large degree RF current flow now depends on characteristics of the earth and the mass of the coupling material that you use to come in contact with it. This is true of all vertical antennas. Some tricks are employed to reduce this ground effect which is at maximum if the vertical element is 1/4 wave (low impedance feed point). For example if the element length is increased the feed point impedance is increased and the current flow required for a given power is reduced. There are any number of articles on how to do this. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Is ham radio a sport ??
At 08:44 PM 3/20/2013, you wrote: The link is to a 1958 Sports Illustrated article, about Ham Radio being a sport. If you have seen it before, sorry for the bandwidth, but I found it interesting reading, maybe some others will also... Interesting. A sportsman in its most general sense is someone who as an individual or member of a group participates in an activity for pleasure. Often (but not necessarily) these activities are athletic in nature. A very general term having different connotations in different contexts and times. Amateur Radio could be considered a Sport compared to commercial radio and a Ham a 'Sportsman' as compared to a commercial radio operator. One of the connotations of a sportsman is that he is an Amateur. I think this usage in this context would be more common in the 1930's (or the 50's) than today. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] CW Decoding - Your Brain is best
At 05:08 PM 11/8/2012, Jim Dunstan wrote: At 03:56 PM 11/8/2012, you wrote: I respect the hams that have spent many hours developing and improving their CW skills ... until they attempt to discourage hams who choose to come at CW with a different approach. The conjecture that those of us using decoders cause more problems than those audibly decoding is just that - a conjecture. Inexperience is very likely a more important factor. Please note that many accomplished CW ops use keyers when it's to their advantage - during CW contests. Software-generated code has no fistand is therefore more readable. And many CW contesters can achieve higher speeds with accuracy using a keyer and software than they may be able to do by hand. I disagree to some of your statement. In particular that computer generated cw ... that comes without fist is more readable.. I am from the old school ... I was a commercial CW operator at the end of the era. The 'fist' as u describe was similar to a speaking accent. Some accents are easier to understand than others (from a personal point of view). The fist was very important ... it defined who you were. The official policy of the service was that operators should use a manual key. However almost everyone on the net (used a keyer - bug in those days) which added to but didn't create the different 'fists'. There were some great 'fists' ... some that u could sit back and read like music. To be able to send with such a fist was really a 'gift'. Such a gifted 'fist' is by far superior to computer generated cw using an unimaginative algorithim. If you can listen to a wonderful 'fist' and compare to a computer generated signal ... u would immediately recognize the difference. So i encourage cw ops to develop their own 'fists' ... who knows they may be one of those gifted with the magic 'fist ... the fist that allows you to sit back and enjoy listening to it. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Audio line out for digital modes
At 04:58 AM 10/29/2012 -0700, you wrote: A very easy way of avoiding interference with your present computer audio is to use an external audio adapter such as turtle Beach. These audio adapters are really mini sound cards that plug into one of your USB ports. The one I use is only audio out ... which I use to send audio to the Signalink gizmo. Audio that comes from the Signalink gizmo I connect to my regular Line in connector. The Turtle Beach adapter I use is only audio out. You can get them with both audio in and audio out which would allow you to avoid using both the audio in and out on your main computer sound card. By the way they are very cheap and usually self install when you plug them in to one of your USB ports. No need for the 100W iron. Jim, VE3CI I'm considering going to digital modes with the SignalLink USB gizmo. Connecting via the headphone out or speaker out will kill the speaker audio. I'd like to add an audio line out, not necessarily gain-controlled, but capable of operating into the SignalLink's 600 ohm impedance. Might bring out through the disused external speaker jack. Any suggestions before I take on the ol' 100 W iron? Chris NQ8Z __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Windows vs Mac
At 09:44 AM 8/24/2012 -0400, you wrote: Hi Not sure what long in the tooth means exactly related to your present computer. However I know what you mean about the attractiveness of the Mac computers and Apple products in general. Your present computer seems to be filling the bill for you at the present time (ham wise) and it must also fill family needs (apparently). I suggest leaving the present computer in its 'HAM' role in the shack (some upgrades may be possible) and going to a Mac computer of some kind. It will be primarily the 'family' computer and will give you the opportunity to explore its HAM potential in more detail. It is always a positive thing learning to use a different operating system. In the end you will have some answers to your questions, a good family computer, and a dedicated computer in the shack. Which Mac computer to buy is a different question. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Portable Antennas (near end fed)
At 03:16 PM 5/11/2012 +, va3...@gmail.com wrote: I for one am in a quandary on what to get at dayton A buddipole, alex loop, or g4tph. Being a road warrior, need a good working interior (most times hotel rooms are not accessible to the outside) portable. And a partridge in a pear tree as well :-) Robert a 'kosher' ham Sent from my BlackBerry device Without doubt the best kind of antenna given the environment you describe is a small tuned loop. How well it works will depend on how well it is built (literally). The quality of the loop material and the tuning capacitor will determine the overall efficiency (and effectiveness) of the antenna. The buddipole in either the vertical or dipole arrangement will only come into its own when outside and away (to some degree) from interfering structures. I have had success with a tuned small loop indoors but not so with center fed or end fed dipoles. However they (longer dipoles) work well even a few feet outside the building ... eg. I used a bent up wire dipole made of invisible fishing wire suspended a couple of feed away from a balcony with thin bamboo poles ... it worked vy well on cw and PSK. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] question for psk users
At 07:45 AM 5/2/2012 -0400, you wrote: Hi, Brian is right. Just as you should drive according to conditions you should operate according to conditions. Under certain propagation conditions all signals are received within a narrow signal strength range. Under these conditions it possible to set the receiver to operate with a wide 3 khz BW and click and read many PSK signals at the same time with the ability to pounce when a QSO ends. These conditions are not due to all the stations operating at 20W ERP and almost any receiver works well under these ideal PSK conditions. However more often than not there is a large signal strength range which doesn't allow operation with a 3 khz BW ... and the difference in station signal strength at the receiver is most often due to differences in propagation rather than the power the station is running. Under these conditions the operator needs a better receiver and an operating practice that is more 'nimble' hi hi. As Brian put it you can't change propagation nor can you control the power the other operator is using or the direction he points his directional antenna hi hi. If you want to check the PSK band during a time with both strong and weak signals you need to be able to move and adjust your bandwidth like a maestro !! A pan adapter is a great tool under these conditions. Of course one could simply stay narrow and call CQ ... but it is more fun to use the dodge and pounce technique hihi Jim, VE3CI Guys, This rational is bogus. The PSK users have to get used to decoding one signal at a time with narrow filters if that's what is necessary. To expect to have 2 or 3 KHz free of strong signals is crazy. Dealing with this reality puts the burden on the receiving end. No way can you control what the rest of the wold does. This isn't the Magic Kingdom. Given that PSK is a narrow bandwidth mode, why not use that to your advantage? Other modes deal with strong adjacent signals, why not PSK? You bought a K3 for its high dynamic range and high adjacent signal handling capability. Why not use it for this purpose? Of course the argument ignores all the laws of physics and propagation.I suggest you run some VOACAP prediction calculations with 25 watts and look at what you can't work with 25-75 watts. You may not be interested in working the other side of the world, but others are. PSK isn't magic. 73 de Brian/K3KO On 5/1/2012 11:46 PM, Jon Perelstein wrote: Eric KG6MZS asked why wouldn't you run more than 70w on PSK Because with the close spacing of signals in the various PSK sub-bands, a signal of more than about 50watts will completely annihilate all the other PSK signals and make that sub-band unusable for everyone else. The rule of thumb for being polite on PSK is to operate 25-30w max. I won't claim that there aren't some who are operating more (you Cuban stations know who you are), but many/most of us will avoid QSOs with people who are obviously running 50w+ 73s Jon, WB2RYV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Off list responses
At 02:13 PM 5/2/2012 -0700, you wrote: Public responses to public questions is just good list etiquette. 73, Ron AC7AC -Original Message- Yesterday I posed a question and received eight (8) email responses. I note that only one response was on the list. Is this the norm? I thought responses should be made on the list for all to learn from. Bill W2BLC Hi, I don't believe it is purposeful ... that is, the personal rather than public response. Someone already noted that when they respond from their Email client it addresses to the individual rather than the public list. I subscribe to a number of different lists and the reply from my Email client (Eudora) always goes to the public list except for this one. I have to remember to make the effort to substitute the list address instead of the that of the sender of the original post. The way my email client is setup works with all other lists. No big deal ... just an observation. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Off list responses
At 09:22 AM 5/3/2012 -0500, Michael Schulz wrote: There's an easy fix for that :) Short term: just hit Reply-all which will also put the list address in cc Long term: change the settings for the Reply-To: field in the mailman configuration (has to be done by the list owner) and all replies automatically go to the list. 73 Mike K5TRI Hi Mike I just hit Reply-all and you will read this message twice Hi Hi once directly and then on the list ... one of the few times I have used Reply-all ... I'll have to remember that in the future. Tnx Jim, VE3CI I don't believe it is purposeful ... that is, the personal rather than public response. Someone already noted that when they respond from their Email client it addresses to the individual rather than the public list. I subscribe to a number of different lists and the reply from my Email client (Eudora) always goes to the public list except for this one. I have to remember to make the effort to substitute the list address instead of the that of the sender of the original post. The way my email client is setup works with all other lists. No big deal ... just an observation. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] what am I doing wrong?
At 05:30 PM 4/23/2012 -0700, you wrote: Hi First thing is to listen in to PSK conversations. I assume you have no problem hearing PSK signals. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] BL2 w/Multi-Band Dipole
At 09:13 AM 4/2/2012 -0700, you wrote: Hello Everyone! I am planning on building a multi-band dipole fed with 450 Ohm ladder line soon. I have a K1 K2, both with the ATU's installed, and the BL2 switchable balun. I was wondering if I could connect the balun directly to the back of the K1/K2 when I use this antenna? My other option would be to use one of my 18 foot RG8X jumpers between the rig and the balun. I know someone here has done it, or at least knows whether this will work or not. I am also posting this question to QRP-L, so I apologize if you see this message twice. Thanks ES 73, David KC9EHQ Hi David When feeding a multi-band dipole with parallel feed line the first choice is to bring the feed line all the way to the ATU or balun at the operating position. If the feed line is properly dressed (that is, care is taken to maintain balance) there will very little RF radiation from the feed line. Since you are running QRP this strategy is further re-enforced ... since you want maximum efficiency. The farther you separate the balun from the operating position with coax the greater will be the RF loss due to the characteristic of coax cable. The usual reason for this separation is the difficulty that is often encountered in bringing the parallel line into the shack. One tip on easing the parallel feed line from outside house to the operating position is to transition the 450 ohm feed line to 300 ohm twin lead the short distance to the balun connected to the radio. The 300 ohm twin lead is not as efficient at the 450 ohm line but much more efficient than making the transition with coax. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Kx3 power output
At 12:50 AM 3/3/2012, you wrote: Hi Rich, A very thoughtful response. PSK31 is one of my favourite modes. I have used several different xcvrs ... at the moment I am using a Kenwood TS-50 and I have setup another xcvr (an old Ten Tec) as a monitor. As you point out the signal must be kept below S9 in the monitor rcvr in order to get an accurate read on the IMD of the transmitted signal. I did the tests into a dummy load. The TS-50 is primarily designed as a mobile SSB xcvr ... however I find it provides excellent IMD (in the -30db area) when I set it for full power and set the PSK31 audio level that produces 15 watts RF output. Beyond the level the IMD figures drop rapidly. I generally operate in the 10-15 Watt output level and I seem to be able to work anyone I hear ... including a lot of DX (with my rotatable dipole at 16M height). I expect the KX3 will work vy well at 5 watts output. When the KXPA3 comes out I would expect to be able to generate a clean signal in that 15-20 watt range.. Jim, VE3CI The question and response below only consider thermal limitations. There are also signal quality limitations in some data modes, PSK31 in particular. PSK31 is very intolerant of non-linearity. The crest factor of PSK31 can be up to 2, i.e. the peak power can be twice the average power. Since it is clipping of the peaks that causes splatter or IMD, with most transmitters you need to keep the output power below one-half the rated maximum in order to ensure linearity. Linearity is not nearly as much of a problem in RTTY, but it matters in PSK31. If you have the means to measure IMD of your transmitted PSK31 signal, you can test this. A couple of years ago I did some tests using a PSKmeter (a device that monitors a transmitted PSK31 signal and reports the level of IMD products in the signal) observing the output of my K3 in PSK31 with the K3 in DATA A mode. What I found was that IMD levels were low at powers below 5 watts (KPA3 not in line) and at powers above 12 watts but below 50 watts (KPA3 in line), but as the power was increased above the 5 watt or 50 watt level, the measured IMD started to increase quite rapidly. The reported IMD at full power (10 watts without the KPA3 or 100 watts with the KPA3) was high - much higher than I would consider acceptable. I did not do similar tests in the K3's PSK D mode, but I have no reason to believe they would be better. See W7AY's measurements of PSK31 quality in PSK D vs. DATA A (for power levels below 5W and 50W) at http://homepage.mac.com/chen/Technical/K3/Digital/digital.html. I would suggest to anyone who plans to transmit PSK31 at powers greater than the recommended 5 watt (one-half full power) level that they should monitor the quality of their transmitted signal to ensure that the signal quality is acceptable. The simplest low tech way to do this is to have another station report IMD figures for your signal at various power levels. Note that the other station should be located such that the signal they receive from you is neither too strong (a very strong signal can produce IMD in the receiver) nor too weak (the signal must be well above the noise level for the reported IMD measurement to be meaningful). In RTTY such precautions do not appear to be necessary. Qualitative observations of the spectrum of my K3's RTTY signals in both FSK D and AFSK A modes did not show a significant observable difference between the signals at 50 watts and the signals at 100 watts. 73, Rich VE3KI Wayne Burdick wrote: Jim Dunstan wrote: The KX3 specifications indicate a nominal 10 watts output. When operating a mode such as PSK, which presents a continuous output, what is the recommended power output? We recommend using 5 W for data modes and keeping transmissions reasonably short. However, you can definitely use full power (up to 12 W) if the duty cycle is low, such as during hunt-and-pounce in a contest. Of course as the duty cycle goes up, so will the PA and case temperature, and eventually the KX3 may automatically roll back your power output. I just did a test using the built-in PSK-D mode, alternately transmitting and receiving for 20 seconds each (simulating short contest contacts). At 12 watts (20 meters), the temperature never got high enough to roll back power during ten minutes of this. I then tested the KX3's high-efficiency TX mode, which reduces current drain by roughly 50% for a given power level. This mode kicks in at at 5.0 W or less in CW/FSK-D modes, and at 3.0 W or less in all other modes. So I set power to 3.0 W in PSK-D mode, which is amazingly effective given the S/N ratio of PSK31, and transmitted continuously. After 5 minutes the PA temperature was still increasing slowly, but I'm guessing I could have gone on for another 5-10 minutes. The lesson, here, is to let the other station transmit once in awhile :) Wayne N6KR
Re: [Elecraft] Kx3 power output
At 09:58 AM 3/3/2012, you wrote: Rich is absolutely right on this. Also, since the original question was regarding the KX3, I expect the KX3 to behave the same way. Set the drive level for the appropriate ALC meter response, and then set the output power level where you want it. 73, Bruce, N1RX Hi Bruce, I expect you are correct ... a different method of setting the output. The strategy described by chip is the method I use with my old Kenwood TS-50. But since the TS-50 has no ALC indication I used the monitoring method to determine the amount of drive that initiates a drop in IMD. The TS-50 is rated at 100W PEP output on SSB ... however careful monitoring indicates the IMD drops dramatically beyond 15W output! I operate between 10 and 15 watts and get great reports. I will have to get used to KX3 method of controlling power output. Jim, VE3CI While this method of control for PSK31 (set power to maximum and use audio drive controls to adjust output) works well with many rigs, it does not work with the K3. If the ALC meter is showing fewer than 4 bars, output power will be unstable, and if the power control is set to maximum, the K3 will do its best to achieve that power level, which is not what you want. With the K3 in DATA A (or AFSK A), the recommended procedure is to set the audio drive at the level that results in 4-5 bars on the K3's ALC meter, and then use the PWR control to adjust the output power. You can think of the 4-5 bar point on the K3's ALC meter as the point where ALC is just starting to activate. With the K3 in PSK D mode, neither of these methods is possible. In PSK D there is no audio drive to adjust; the only control available is the PWR control. 73, Rich VE3KI __ 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 __ 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
[Elecraft] Kx3 power output
Hi The KX3 specifications indicate a nominal 10 watts output. When operating a mode such as PSK, which presents a continuous output, what is the recommended power output? 10watts ? or something less. given the normal amount of time between xmission and reception in an average QSO?? Can the KX3 handle 10w output under these conditions or should the power be reduced to a lower value? Jim/VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] KPA500
Hi, Out of curiosity ... those fortunate owners of the KPA500 could take a look and let me know what output they produce when the input to the amp is exactly 5W. Thanks Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] KPA500
At 03:22 PM 1/14/2012, you wrote: Hi Doug, I don't think it is necessary to go through the bands ... I expect the power gain will decrease slightly as the frequency goes up. It appears that the power gain is at least 10db and as much as 13db. It is possible to use the amplifier in the normal manner with standard 100 watt radio as well as some of my favourite QRP radios. My venerable Ten Tec Argonaut would easily become a 25 to 50 watt radio !! Thanks Jim, VE3CI Hi Jim: The answer is going to vary slightly by band - which one is of interest or do you want them all?? 73, Doug VE3MV - Original Message - From: Jim Dunstan jduns...@tbaytel.net To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2012 1:56 PM Subject: [Elecraft] KPA500 Hi, Out of curiosity ... those fortunate owners of the KPA500 could take a look and let me know what output they produce when the input to the amp is exactly 5W. Thanks Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] ladderline and balun question
At 04:12 PM 1/11/2012, you wrote: Gents, I have a ladder line and balun question that I hope someone can guide me thru. A 1 wavelength loop represents approximately 100 ohms non reactive impedance. Feeding this antenna on its fundamental frequency is relatively straight forward ... and it can be done with coax ... using some tricks to get it down very close to 50 ohms. However if, as is commonly done the loop is used on harmonics making it multi band the situation is much more complex and the feed is changed from coax to parallel feed line as you have done. The impedance at the feed point increases with harmonics with the addition of an increasing reactive component. It is common in such antenna systems to make the transition from the parallel feed line to coax as it approaches the shack since it is generally easier to physically route it through walls etc ... and it is thought that it radiates less than the parallel line (usually not the case). It is possible to actually measure the complex impedance at the end of the parallel line using an analyzer but inevitably there will be a mismatch to the coax whether using a 4:1 or 1:1 balun. which will cause radiation from the coax line. It is simply a matter of determining if the amount of radiation from the coax section is tolerable or not. It is possible to bring the parallel feed line right into the shack and connect it directly to an impedance coupler and in fact this was the usual method for many years ... and I have done this with no adverse RF effects in the shack. The easiest method of using a large loop on its resonant harmonics is to install the antenna coupler right at the feed point and use coax for the full feed line length. It is possible to make some guesses as to the impedance at the end of the feed line at the different frequencies given the length of the parallel feed line. The experience you describe would indicate the impedance is rather low as the 1:1 balun worked well. The most common strategy for this arrangement is the cut and try method. Stick with what works there are no magic rules of thumb. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] OT - sound cards
At 01:29 PM 1/9/2012, you wrote: Hi, My observation of built in sound cards both desktop (also an HP) and laptop (Asus netbook) is that they are not very good from a noise point of view. I have acquired an M-Audio D-44 which i use in my station desktop computer. It is a PCI card with an external breakout box making it very convenient from a radio shack point of view. The radio can be almost 5' away from the computer. I have compared it to built in sound cards for recording and digital operations. The D-44 is clearly superior. When operating digital modes I have compared it to the built in sound cards as well as the external units such as the Signalink. The waterfall on the screen is best with the D-44 ... by a long shot ... even when compared to the external units like the Signalink. The M-Audio was originally used by me for music recording ... then it was recruited for my early SDR experiments ... and now it is used for digital mode radio operations. The only shortcoming is that it is far from portable hi. The little Signalink works well with my laptop for portable work ... but not quite as clean as my D-44. M-audio still makes good sound cards (the D-44 is now obsolete). Jim, VE3CI A lot of computers (especially HP) are notorious for that. It is a hardware design flaw as Joe W4TV has described. If you disconnect the power supply from your laptop (i.e. run on battery power) and try it again you'll probably notice a significant improvement in the noise level of your recorded audio. What does that tell you? I had to resort to using an external sound card to digitize audio and then suck it into the computer via USB. Something like the M-Audio or similar devices that you can find at Guitar Center for recording musical instruments. Using one of these the audio is clean. Good luck in your efforts. Regards, Al W6LX __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] OT- sound cards
At 02:14 PM 1/9/2012, you wrote: I think it was a D-44 that I used years ago for a music computer setup. It was a card connected to a big external dongle. yes, the breakout box was on the end of a 5' cable and used 1/4 jacks (8 of them) !! AFAI remember I had no problem with noise, but I didn't use any microphone level signals. I could obviously dig it up and put it in my current main computer if there is a Win 7 driver for it. I freely admit to trying to benefit from others' experience before expending my own elbow grease ... -Erik K7TV I find the M-Audio web site very good for software support. I would not be surprised if they have W7 drivers and interface for the D-44. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Horizontal Delta Loop Questions
At 08:13 AM 1/5/2012 -0700, you wrote: Hi, I'm a CW operator who dwells in the lower end of the HF bands. My current antenna is a 200' horizontal delta loop 40' high, fed with 87' of 450 ohm ladder line. This connects to a 4 to 1 balun (common mode choke?) which is attached to my Dentron Jr. Monitor tuner via 5' of RG213. Looking at a spreadsheet, I see that a full wave loop for 80 meters is 287' and 143.57' for 40 meters. A hypothetical question to the wise ones on this list is would I expect any practical improvement in performance of my antenna system (on 40 meters and above) by reducing my 200' delta loop to 143.57' and feeding it with 71.78' of ladder line so that the sum of the antenna length plus twice the ladder line length is 287'? This seems to make theoretical sense since the entire system would be resonant at 7mhz and integral multiples thereof. However, the performance of my current 200' loop appears to be quite good from 80 to 6 meters and my small tuner matches whatever impedance this system is presenting to it so I'm hesitant to take a pair of snippers to my antenna. Changing the length of the feed line will not change the dimension or performance of the loop. A loop of dimension (X) will present a feed point impedance (Y) at particular frequency (Z). Attached to the loop at the feed point is a 450 ohm balanced feed line (as pointed out in your case). There will be an impedance mismatch which will produce standing waves on the feed line which will produce varying RF current/voltages along its length. A matching device at the end of the feed line must convert the resultant impedance to the 50 ohm unbalanced impedance accepted by your radio. If the resulting impedance falls outside the range of your coupling/matching device changing the length of the feed line may solve the problem and bring the impedance back into the range of the matching device. However this will not change the performance characteristics of the loop. However, 1, 2, 3 wavelength loops have interesting characteristics on the fundamental and multiple frequencies. A 1 wavelength loop radiates broadside to the loop and more off the sides on multiple wavelengths. A 140 ft horizontal loop is a 'cloud burner' on 40m and a much better dx performer on 20m and up. Making the loop 1.4 wave lengths on 40m probably won't make much difference on 40m but I am not quite sure what will happen to the radiation angle at harmonic frequencies. Probably not a great deal of difference. I would like to increase the length of the loop to 287' feet and feed it with 71.78' of ladderline but that is another story. Also, would I expect to be able to tune any of the these three antennas on 160 meters if I were to purchase either a KXAT100 or KAT500 tuner which presumably have a wider tuning ranges than the Dentron Jr. Monitor tuner? There is no doubt that a 280' loop will provide much better dx performance on 40m and up. Choosing the feed line length with the intent of changing the antenna radiation pattern is not fruitful. However certain line lengths present a better opportunity of matching the end to the radio. Check the antenna handbook for suggested line lengths that fall into this category. Another caveat is that a particular antenna tuner may not work beyond a certain power level. It doesn't mean that the impedance is different between the different power levels ... but that the resulting RF voltages or currents my go beyond the component capabilities ... eg arc over or melt hi hi. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4:1 balun
At 03:03 PM 12/9/2011 -0800, you wrote: In the 1960's one very popular and cheap H.F. antenna was the folded dipole. Often they were made from the ubiquitous 300 ohm twin lead used on TV antennas and fed with the same twin lead since the impedance of a folded dipole is close to 300 ohms. The first time I saw 4:1 baluns being sold to Hams was to make it easy to connect the 300 ohm feeder to such a folded dipole to the output of a rig designed to feed 50 ohms. As Hams migrated away from rigs with tunable output networks to rigs with fixed tuned outputs, MFJ and others produced a line of antenna tuners specifically designed to correct feed line mismatches since that could no longer be done at the rig. They included the popular 4:1 balun for those who were feeding various open wire lines (typically 300 to 600 ohms but which may have significant SWR - so the impedance might vary much more). It seems that many Hams considered the 4:1 ratio some sort of magic number, when all it was intended to do was provide a good transfer between 300 ohms and 50 ohms. Ron AC7AC Hi Back in late 50's early 60's I bought my first balun from Heathkit ... made from special Bifiler wound Airdux coils which could be connected in either 1:1 or 4:1 configuration. I still have that balun in its 5x9x9 aluminium case. I used it with my first Xmiter which was homebrew, 300 watts, and plate modulated AM. I used a folded dipole made of 300 ohm twinlead fed by the same twinlead and the balun in a 4:1 configuration. The dipole was strung between 70ft towers. It was a wonderful setup at a wonderful time (from a propagation point of view). The ZL's and VK's were like locals! es we used to chat about the best way to grow tomatoes hihi These days I still use a balanced feed system with either 300 or 450 ohm feed line ... but with fixed impedance output xmiters and vy much lower power. I no longer use fixed resonant folded dipoles ... but a nonresonant dipole that is useable on multiple bands with a matching unit at the shack. The matching unit I use is a link coupled L network .. often referred to as a Z-match. The system seems to be vy efficient as I have no problem working the world with 20 watts. SSB for local contacts and nets and CW/PSK for DX. No problems with RFI !! Back in the day .. my 300 watt AM xmiter was a TV killer but then no one in out neighborhood watched TV during the day (week-ends excluded) and the (1 station) shut down at midnight. I just had to stay up late and/or skip school hi hi. Jim, VE3CI -Original Message- I can attest to what Vic says. I have an 88-foot long doublet, hung about 45 feet up, fed with 85 feet of 600-ohm ladder line. At the shack end I have a 1:1 balun, and then about six feet of RG/8X running to the K3. The K3's tuner likes the combination. I tried replacing the 1:1 balun with a 4:1 from the same manufacturer. The K3 was quite unhappy with the change in components. The 4:1 went back on the shelf, the 1:1 went back inline. YMMV Jim / W6JHB __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4:1 balun
At 09:12 AM 12/10/2011 -0800, you wrote: The down side of the 300 ohm twin lead folded dipole is that 300 ohm twin lead usually is made from small wire and not mechanically very strong, so it is not durable for fixed stations with varying weather conditions and the wire is too small for anything but low power. With either the 300 ohm twin lead or a folded dipole fabricated from #14 or heavier conductors a 4:1 balun is needed to tune well with a 50 ohm output or to transition to coax. Then it is about as good as a well made dipole. Willis 'Cookie' Cooke K5EWJ Trustee N5BPS, USS Cavalla, USS Stewart Hi, No problem using good quality 300 TV twinlead with high power. Remember current is much reduced when feeding into a 300 ohm load vs a 75 ohm load. As I mentioned, I consistently used such an arrangement with a 4:1 balun feeding the folded dipole at 70 ft running with 300watts and fully plate modulated AM. In addition since the twinlead is operating with no standing waves there is no chance of magnified voltages and currents as a result of phase shifting. Never had a problem with RF power. Now to be fair TV twinlead was commonly available in at least 3 grades ... heavy, medium, or light. I am not sure what is available today in what is called TV twinlead. I understand it is possible to buy 300 ohm twinlead that is manufactured for power handling I don't know if anyone uses it for making folded dipoles (I suspect not). If one were to construct such a folded dipole for any HF band I can guarantee they will not have any power handling problems to today's legal power limit. I have also used TV twinlead to feed non-resonant doublets (100 inverted vee is a favourite) and used a 100watt AM transmitter (DX-100) with a balanced transmatch again, never had a power problem with the feed line. This arrangement is a bit tricky. Choosing a useable feed line length solves any power problems. However, you are correct about mechanical reliability. I did have to fix the antenna several times a year. At one time the cable manufacturers also made 75 ohm twinlead in both a lightweight and heavy duty version. The 75 ohm versions were more susceptible to current/heat damage due to the much greater current feeding an antenna with with a 75 ohm resonant impedance. The light weight version was only good for 25 to 50 watts but great for portable work as it was very light. It used to be the standard configuration for commercial portable radio service used by northern trappers es miners. Their radios only ran 3 to 5 watts. I used the heavy duty 75 ohm twinlead to feed a cubical quad for years ... again 100watts AM. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Vibroplex - seen on ABC Pan Am (OT)
At 08:51 AM 11/7/2011 -0500, you wrote: With good CW ops you can just save all the dah's till the end and send them all at once; if the other guy is any good he knows how to put them all back in the right place. [See QST March 1964 Love them Dits... 73, Drew AF2Z A lot of truth to the above statement. I worked professional CW communications on point to point land nets and all the ops used bugs (no electronic keyers in those days) and all had recognizable fists. The fists that were the most comfortable emphasized the dashes and speeded up the dots. How they did this really created the distinctiveness of the individual's 'fist'. All were recognizably different from one another but certainly not variable on a scale of sloppinesss'. Pride came from ability to communicate not from the similarity to perfectly formed characters. Normal text was sent as in normal speech. However if sending special non-normal information ... such as a serial number ... the op would slow down and send well formed letters just as in normal voice one slows down and gives attention to clear enunciation. If all the text was sent this way (computer like characters) i can assure you it would be found boring. Something like listening to slowly enunciated speech in language lessons on Voice of America. That is okay for someone learning the language but really boring for someone who knows it. The CW equivalent would be the code practise sessions on W1AW a CW op would have to really 'pay attention' to copy it. So calling someone's fist sloppy would be like saying someone with a different accent speaks with sloppy language. Someone just learning the language CW or otherwise is considered a 'novice' and they speak as a novice. Likewise not really 'sloppy'. There are 'purists' who have fixed ideas of what the language should sound like and consider their idea of the ideal should be a developmental goal. I assure you that in reality that goal is futile. Learn the language and develop your facility to communicate in whatever community you frequent that is the only goal. If you change the community/environment then you no doubt will have to adjust your language facility. If you leave the 'novice' CW community and move in to a higher speed community I assure you will have to adjust ... and almost certainly perfectly formed speech/characters will fall by the wayside. As usual a lot of listening comes before venturing some input of your own!!! CU Jim, VE3CI On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:20:49 -0400, Ken VE3HLS wrote: It sounds like everyone is saying sending sloppy code is desirable. How odd; I always thought hams took pride in their sending. Well formed, well spaced characters are much easier to copy. I find nothing quaint or charming about sending dits at 30wpm and dahs at 10 wpm, which is typical of what I hear. Either slow down the dits or speed up the manually sent dahs. I know there are limits on how slow you can send dits with a bug, but if you can't slow it down enough then consider using another instrument for sending code or resign yourself to the fact that VE3HLS will never answer your CQ (that should be pretty easy to live with)! :-) dah dah dididit dididit dah dah! :-) Ken, VE3HLS __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] K3: COM1 and COM3 question
At 07:49 AM 11/2/2011 -0700, you wrote: I've long ignored that one K3 has always communicated thru COM1 to its computer and the other thru COM3 to its computer. Afaik they ain't broke; anybody have an explanation, please? Brgds, Dave Windisch, N3HE Hi No problem, and not unusual. The computer OS assigns the COM number to devices, in this case the Serial Ports, and assures they operate without conflict with any other device in/attached to the computer. Generally the serial port is often but not always set as COM1. If you attach a device to the serial port and it works right away ... then they are both set to the same COM number. If the COM numbers are not the same they will not communicate and you will have to change the number either at the computer or the device/program. Communications between computer and device using COM1 to COM1 is the same as COM3 to COM3. Now if you swap computers/radios in your shack you will also have to change the COM# on the radios (best place to make the change). Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] K3: COM1 and COM3 question
At 05:38 PM 11/2/2011 -0400, you wrote: Jim, Sorry to disagree, but there is no way to set the COM Port on either the K3 nor the P3. Setting the baud rate - yes, but the computer (or the computer application software) determines which COM port is to be assigned to a particular connector or cable. 73, Don W3FPR I am sure you are correct. I don't own a K3. But the original post mentioned two K3 operating positions each controlled by separate computers. One computer uses Com1 on the RS232 port and the other uses Com3. There was no question ... but a request for an explanation. Perhaps you can provide the explanation. Thanks Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] RF on pipes
Yes, as in coax for an example. when transmitting eg via coaxial cable which is properly installed the rf currents flow on the inside surface and not on the outside surface. I mention proper installation .. In which case steps are taken to keep the inside and outside surfaces separate (at rf). In your example, plain copper pipe wil have a total surface of the inside + outside. If you solder on caps then you will have just the outside. Jim VE3CI Sent from my iPod On Jul 9, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Clint clint.st...@sbcglobal.net wrote: This is a bit OT but it does concern my K3. Hopefully this will not open too big of a can-o-worms. As an experiment to try and achieve a very low impedance ground system, I am using 1 inch rigid copper tubing for my station and Vertical Antenna grounds and ½ copper refer tubing to tie together my ground rods and the mains ground. ANYWAY, I know that RF travels on the outside skin of a conductor. My question is: Does it also travel on the inside skin? In other words, would the impedance be the same on a round hollow tube as it would be if the tube was slit and laid out flat? Thanks, Clint KI6SSN __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Straight key first? (was: Re: K3 in the Media)
At 06:06 PM 6/28/2011 -0700, you wrote: The hardest CW to copy (for me anyway) has insufficient spacing between letters or words. This is exactly what a keyer does NOT help you with! The operator has to learn to recognize what good CW sounds like. Does sending with a straight key help with that? Maybe, but I doubt it. Many of you have heard old-timers with bugs sending with the banana-boat swing (dits way too fast for the dahs) or the Lake Erie swing (think about sending from a rolling ship). These are generally considered 'bad CW', but they aren't difficult to copy. The techniques of sending with an iambic paddle, a bug and a straight key are very different. I don't think learning one helps you with the others. Hi I worked in Commercial CW communications at the tail-end of the era in the 50's and early 60's. At one point while in the Arctic we communicated with 2 stations in the south, Winnipeg and Ottawa. Between the 2 stations there would be 8 to 10 different operators. I could tell immediately who was on shift by the sound of the 'fist'. Almost all of the operators used a bug (each carried his in it's own case ... like professional pool players). A new man was immediately recognized ... and the usual response was to speed up hi. Personal communications was frowned upon. However on a night shift there would be a lot of banter ... (you would think we had QSK hi) You had to be careful though .. in those days we actually had Radio Monitoring Stations. It was possible to actually get a ticket for illegal traffic hi hi. The person giving the citation had to be a CW op as well and vy mean. I agree that certain kinds of swing with faster dots than dashes makes copying easier. Perfect CW ... as generated by a computer I find becomes harder to copy once the speed goes up beyond 20 WPM. I like an electronic keyer setup to simulate a bug (old habits I guess) with electronic dits and manual dashes. I can use a squeeze type setup ... but find I have to shift to the bug style in order to be more comfortable and to get into the 'swing' of things hi. As far as the straight key I don't know of anyone who continued to use one once they moved out of Radio School. Strange thing though in Radio School all CW reception was recorded with pencil and paper. The really good ops made the transition to the typewriter ... since all messages must be as received ... es not paraphrased hi hi. As mentioned my experience is at the tail end of the era. Some of the old hands (really old hands) talked about how they were sometime forbidden to use a bug as communications was considered to be more accurate with a straight key. Most of these experiences were railroad telegraphers and marine operators . The transmitter we used in the Arctic was a 300 watt Collins with full AM modulation. It was strictly forbidden to use AM. Although I recall using it on a few occasions hi hi. (where did the microphone come from ?) Sorry for rambling on. I was very fortunate to have learned CW and how to type (in a girls class in High School). I don't know one CW op with Alzheimers hi hi It is great for the grey matter. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] KSB2 Question
At 12:34 PM 5/29/2011 -0700, you wrote: Hi All! I have subscribed to this list in the past when I was working on my K1-4 a few year back. I just recently broke down and bought a K2 (10 W) s/n 7164. I'm long overdue to get one, but I figured it was now or never. I am planning on using this rig as a CW only QRP radio. I am not even going to install the mic connector. I have some sheet metal I am going to use to cover the holes for the options I did not get. I am mostly a CW only operator (kind of strange for a 34 y/o), but I do like to listen to SSB when I am just messing around in my shack. I was wondering if the KSB2 option would be worthwhile to get, AND does it affect the K2's performance if you don't align it for transmit? Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks 73, David, KC9EHQ K1-4 s/n 2051 K2 s/n 7164 (starting build soon!) Hi David' Aside from SSB the KSB2 module is required for the DATA mode. I also like CW ... but with low pwr PSK31 is a wonderful mode and personally wouldn't want to do without it. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [KX3] Quesiton on PC Control
At 09:00 AM 5/27/2011 -0700, you wrote: What does this mean and how does this work? See the following quote Accessory/RS232 port for computer control using supplied cable Is there a port on the rear for a serial connectionor what? I did not look at that when I saw it at Dayton. Can this be clarified? Lee - K0WA Hi Lee There are 3 connectors (1/8 stereo ?) in a row on the left side marked ACC, KEY, PHONES. The first connector marked ACC gives RS232 access. Since it is not the traditional 9 pin RS232 connector (which would be rather large for such a small radio) a special RS232 cable is required to interface with an external computer. A stereo plug could carry data in/out quite easily. It also mentions that the KX3 uses the same commands as the K3. I assume that digital/control software like MixW would be able to work with the KX3 in much the same way as the K3. In addition to these 3 connectors there are 2 more (1/8 stereo ?) connectors ... one for the Mic/PTT and RX I/Q which could be used for other interesting functions ... like a pan-adapter ? Jim - VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Elecraft General Interest: SFGate: Robert Helliwell, radio science pioneer, dies
At 10:49 AM 5/26/2011 +0100, you wrote: With great delight over the years, he regularly welcomed visitors to his lab to listen to what he called his whistlers, the eerie electrical warbling generated by lightning flashes in Canada's Arctic and that had Hi, Just a short line (off elecraft topic ... forgive me) ... when I was15 years old I bought my first CK-721 transistors (Raytheon) and built a 'whistler receiver after reading a Scientific American article. Maybe the article was written by Professor Helliwell ... I can't recall. The receiving setup is a large 4' diameter loop of many turns (maybe 30-50) of copper wire (salvaged from old transformers) connected to a diode detector and high gain audio amplifier. Essentially an audio frequency crystal set followed by a high gain audio amplifier. I hung the loop vertically in the attic. It was possible to hear whistlers from storm centers long before you could hear the thunder. Whistlers appear to be electromagnetic waves that fall within the the audio frequency spectrum, but they cannot be detected directly by the ear. By the way the CK-22 which I originally ordered was priced at over $20.00 ... by time I sent away for one, similar CK-721's were already surplus and I could get a handful for $5.00 ... an early indication of the speed of technological change !! Back to Elecraft topics hi Jim VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] OT - Why so much Off topic??
I agree with Ken Alexander VE3HLS. My mail program has a decent filtering system. Since this reflector has such diverse topics I have taken the trouble of making filters for those of special interest to me (conversely helping me avoid those that are not) which only takes a minute of my time. I use the now free program Eudora with the result I don't have to deal with topics that don't interest me. Beside, there is so much traffic on the reflector that it can be tedious going through everything. As Ken mentioned, I now have a filter for topics containing KX3 as it interests me. So give it a try. Jim Dunstan VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] KX3 roofing filters
At 04:37 PM 5/26/2011 -0400, you wrote: Ah. Extremely important point. NOT at all apparent from the KX3 page, especially when used to the one filter, one bandwidth paradigm. As it stands it reads like four available, but only one installable. On the web page, you may want to change... Narrow roofing filter option with four bandwidths (500 Hz, 1500 Hz, 2700 Hz, 3800 Hz) for excellent dynamic range ... to something like... Narrow roofing filter, single option containing four bandwidths (500 Hz, 1500 Hz, 2700 Hz, 3800 Hz) for excellent dynamic range 73, Guy Hi, My interpretation is that the narrow roofing filter option is variable with 500, 1500, 2700, and 3800 hz steps that follow the DSP filter as it's bandwidth is changed. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] KX3 roofing filters
At 03:30 PM 5/26/2011 -0700, you wrote: Jim Dunstan-2 wrote: My interpretation is that the narrow roofing filter option is variable with 500, 1500, 2700, and 3800 hz steps that follow the DSP filter as it's bandwidth is changed. These filters are ahead of the DSP at baseband. They protect the ADC from overload and should result in better Blocking Dynamic Range (BDR), which has been a weakness of most SDRs. 73, Bill Hi, Yes, that is what I understand. I didn't mean that the filter comes after the DSP ... it comes before the DSP filter ... but it's bandwidth is adjusted according to the DSP bandwidth as the DSP bandwidth is changed the roofing filter will follow. The filter is at a vy low frequency prior to the ADC ... I am wondering what kind of filter it is as it certainly can't be a xtal filter at this vy low frequency has to be some kind of software controlled filter. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] The no-serial port conundrum
At 12:09 AM 3/21/2010 -0700, you wrote: You will have to purchase a USB to RS232 adapter ... which are commonly available. It will come with a CD with drivers etc... However, if you have an operating system XP and up you will not need to install a driver ... As soon as you plug it in there is a 99% chance it will automatically detect the device, identify it correctly, and install it. It will then simply say your adapter is ready for use. The drivers are generally supplied for older OS's such as Win98. However, you will be using some kind of software that will be using the RS232 port and it will have to be told which Comport to use (the one your computer assigned to the adapter). To determine the Comport # you will go to your computer 'Device Manager' where you will see listed the 'Ports (Com)'. Click on it and you will see the name of your adapter and the Comport # assigned to it. For example it might say 'Prolific Com4' ... which is the name of the adapter and the RS232 port # assigned to it. Note the number and use it when setting up you digital or control software that will be using the comport. (Prolific just happens to be a particular brand of adapter). Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] USB to serial angst
At 11:08 AM 3/13/2010 -0800, you wrote: All in favour of a USB port on the K3? For what purpose? If a USB port is provided for the sole purpose of sending control data then there is little if any advantage over the RS232 port aside from the fact your computer may not include one. If the radio is provided with a USB port then it should use the full potential and include the provision of in/out AF streaming as well. It is possible to use the USB port to both send and receive control data for CAT operation and stream in/out AF. After all if we're talking about 'flaky' devices ... the sound card provided by most computers is at the top of the list. If they (radio manufacturer) were to implement such a USB port then plugging it in would show up as a sound card in the computer. However, the majority of radios don't do this ... and implementing a USB port on this half basis in no improvement. Then we could forget about un-necessary, expensive , flaky and crash-prone USB to serial adapters. THe serial port with its RS-232 interface is obsolete. It dates back to the 70's if not earlier and was superseded by USB. eric By the way I have never paid more than about $20.00 for any RS232 card or external adapter ... and never had a problem installing or using any of them let alone crashing. The whole PC basically dates to the 70's. and it seems a miracle they can do what they do. 73 Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] CW/PTT
Hi, A K2 question. Will the CW key line at the key jack act in the same way as the PTT line at the 8 pin mic connector when the radio is in the SSB mode. Conversely, will the PTT line at the mic connector key the CW line when in the CW mode ? It appears they are the same line. Tnx Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] building a K2
Hi, If I order a package including K2, KPA100, KSB2, KNB2, and K160RX and start to do the assembly I wonder if in the assembly process I will come to certain stages where there will be a question whether a certain module is going to be installed. If yes, do this and if not do that. I understand that if certain modules are installed after basic assembly some back tracking is required. I love building equipment ... over the years i have built any number of kits ... mostly the old Heathkits as well as any number of homebrew transmitters and receivers. It will be like old home weak ... to see how the K2 comes together and works compared to the old HW100 which worked wonderfully for many years. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] OT - Interesting Accident with Homebrew Vertical
At 11:06 PM 2/3/2010 -0500, you wrote: Bob, Indeed elevated radials *are* a part of the antenna (actually radials in the ground are too). Elevated radials must be tuned (while buried radials do not need to be). To do that properly, connect each one - one at a time - and resonate it with the vertical element. When all have been tuned, then they can be connected together. To cancel the horizontal radiation component, the radials should be oriented in opposing directions - any pair should be in a straight line. 4 radials arranged 90 degrees apart is normally sufficient, and in a pinch, 2 placed 180 degrees apart are sufficient. Hi, Just as a side note I have used verticals with ground plane radials ... in pairs (4 radials work fb) ... to eliminate the horizontal radiation component. However an interesting version is a vertical with only 1 radial ... in other words an L antenna vs the more common inverted L which is usually worked against ground. I have used such an L antenna with the base about 15 ft off the ground ... the vertical portion apporx 26ft of self supporting (more or less) aluminium and the horizontal portion about 30 ft of copper wire. I fed the antenna with ladder line to a balanced antenna tuner. It has an almost omni directional pattern with both hi and low angle radiation. It is what you might call the middle of the road antenna ... e.g. general purpose. Very efficient on all bands and works well for local contacts with very good propagation at a distance. The antenna used to be featured in older antenna handbooks but disappeared as coax cable feed started to become the norm. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Attenuator and RF Gain Settings
At 07:10 PM 2/2/2010 -0500, you wrote: Brian, That is an illusion - yes the K3 gets more quiet (on noise) if the AGC Threshold is reduced. BUT what that indicates is that the AGC is being activated by the noise and the K3 is reducing the gain due to AGC action. The lowest AGC Threshold that is usable for any given level of atmospheric noise is the threshold setting just higher than the setting which begins to reduce the noise. In other words, listen to a spot on the band where there are no signals, then start at the highest Threshold setting of 008. Reduce the value of the AGC Threshold until you sense that the noise level starts to go down - then move the Threshold up to the next level. That setting will produce the most usable sensitivity for that band, that antenna, and at that particular point in time (atmospheric noise levels do change with time). If the resulting noise level is bothersome, then take other steps to reduce that response - Preamp off, ATT ON, and reduce the RF Gain (in that order) until you can just barely hear the noise. That will result in the most sensitive setting for the receiver. Remember (as Jim Brown just posted) - that atmospheric noise is just another 'signal' to the receiver that is to be amplified (it is coming in on the antenna port). One must condition the receiver to place that noise level at (or just above) your threshold of perception to reduce your fatigue level when listening to any band. That is what the preamp, attenuator, and RF Gain controls are for. Hi, I am not an Elecraft owner ... yet ... However I have built (homebrewed) many receivers over the years ... and building a good AGC system is one of the hardest parts (biggest challenge in modern parlance). One of the things I learned after many years is how to make the AGC sensitive to noise. Most of the receivers I built and commercial ones I have used basically relate the AGC level exclusively to received signal. However in designing the AGC detector time constants I found it very useful to have receiver gain controlled by noise level to some degree. As background noise goes up ... receiver gain goes down to a degree ... and as the background gets quieter gain should go up a little. I never did get it just right ... and the general front end attenuator and RF gain control always got used a lot hi hi. I find the topic very interesting and I find it very encouraging the effort put into AGC design in the K3. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] Fwd: Re: antenna farm
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:38:33 -0500 To: Clint clint.st...@sbcglobal.net From: Jim Dunstan jduns...@tbaytel.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] antenna farm At 10:17 AM 12/14/2009 -0800, you wrote: So my questions are: 1) What length would be best and give me the use of the most bands? Remember, I have a limited space. 2) How far from the dipole should a reflector be. It should be about 5% longer and grounded, right? 3) The auto-tuner on the K3 is amazing. Is it easier for it to tune an antenna that is to long or to short? I'm guessing long but I am not certain. 4) Any suggestions on which band/antenna length is best for these targets? I am mostly active late afternoon and evening (till about 10 PST) and mornings after 6. Thanks, Clint KI6SSN I believe you missed out the most important question concerning a dipole height !! The radiation pattern of a dipole is basically broadside ... and maintains that pattern (with increased broad side gain) as it is made longer up to approximately 1 wavelength or a bit more. After this length the (horizontal) radiation pattern starts to break up into multiple lobes (making the pattern unpredictable). That eminent antenna Guru ... Cebik ... studied this phenomena and stated that the dipole/doublet can maintain the predictable radiation pattern over a 4:1 frequency range. Given this 4:1 range you could choose 10m as the highest frequency making 44 ft the doublet length covering 40-10m or choose 20m making the 88 ft doublet covering 80-20m. In both cases it becomes difficult (but possible) to feed the antenna at the lowest frequency (40m in the first case of 44 ft ... and 80m in the second case of 88 ft). However 44ft is great for 30-10m and 88 ft is great for 40-20m. You have to realize that the doublet in either length is non-resonant ... and will have to be fed either with an antenna coupler ... such as those made by SGC followed by coax... or a low loss balanced feed line and antenna tuner. I personally like the 44 ft version as it can be constructed as a rotatable dipole I feed mine with open wire line to a balanced tuner in the shack. it is mounted at 55ft height ideal for 10 15 mtrs very gud at 20m and just gud at 40m. I use a different wire antenna for 80m. I can rotate it ... but rarely need to do so. except when propagation is clearly needed north and south ... otherwise it is always broadside to east and west. I have no difficulty working DX 30-10m and occasionally with 40m. However getting the doublet up in that 50-70 ft range is much more important than which way it faces. Here in N.A. getting the wire broadside to E.W. is all you need for a start. there are some Antenna reflectors that discuss this topic regularly. Jim, VE3CI __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4687 (20091214) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] 150 watt boots for 160m
At 09:53 AM 12/11/2009 -1000, you wrote: A good article on the value of a DB is an old timer in QST I think it was, Station design for DX I guarantee you that if you improve your station by 1Db or more you will tell the difference, have done it and it works. A whole new layer of DX opens up for every DB you can find. I see comments all the time that lossy feedlines or matching or this and that only costs a couple DB and you cant hear that. Amen I dont hear you in the pile ups. I bet the number of weak signal contacts have increased ... not because of increased power or improved receivers ... but because of the online service of QRZ.com hi hi I wonder how many DB they add. Many stations know my name and qth before I send it! Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] 150 watt boots for 160m
At 03:55 PM 12/11/2009 -0700, you wrote: Is it really necessary to continue this thread? My inbox is seeing entirely too much drivel like this thread and others on this reflector. Bob W6TR Hi I think this is one of the more interesting threads it is certainly on a par with (with due respect) K3 Diversity use with QRN or ethernet to serial converter hi hi Besides I delete 90% of the postings and keep those of particular interest to me for future reference goes fast hi. I believe it goes to the heart of some basic Amateur Radio philosophies ... the philosophies of power, competition, and achievement. Certainly not drivel. Personally I am a rag chewer and radio experimenter... I guess I don't have that competitive gene hi hi I have an academic interest in getting the most out of the least ... so I enjoy the thread as far as technical suggestions on how to eek out additional power ... but no interest in breaking into the pileup that for me is an academic interest ...(I usually don't operate on week-ends as there might be a contest hi hi) although I do receive satisfaction in completing a weak signal contact. I notice that the boots were for 160m and I think I know why. Most operators use some sort of vertical antenna which by definition will have a high level of background noise. the problem with weak signal operation on 160m is this background noise. Even if the signal could be raised 3 db over the noise you will have such a headache you won't last too long hi hi. The answer is to use a separate receive antenna not to raise the received signal strength ... but to increase the ratio of signal to noise. Completing a QSO is a 2 way street. I believe the radio should have provision for a receive only antenna as well as noise reduction circuits. I believe I have improved my 160m weak signal operations more through improving my station receiving capabilities than increasing power. Certainly the efforts bring greater rewards. Just as a sidelight ... I always enjoyed 160m from way back when I used to call in to an early morning net ... shortly after milking time almost all the participants were farmers. Everyone operated AM back then hi hi ... and i used a Heathkit DX-100 AM transmitter and a military BC348 ? receiver. The equipment has changed but the fun remains. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] CW ... PTT key line
Hi, Will the PTT line at the mic connector key the K2 when it is placed in the CW mode ? Thanks Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] CAT
Hi Is it possible to send a PTT and,or the CW keying commands to the K2 via the RS232 port if the K2 has the KIO2 module installed . using software such as MixW. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] K160M
Hi, The K160m module apparently has a second receive only antenna input. Will this for example, allow me to connect to my 40 M transmit antenna via the main antenna output on the K2 and receive via a second (quieter) receive antenna via the second antenna input on the K160M module ? Jim, VE3CI __ 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
[Elecraft] Fwd: Re: My Proposed K3 Configuration so far...
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:21:25 -0500 To: Grant Youngman n...@tx.rr.com From: Jim Dunstan jduns...@tbaytel.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My Proposed K3 Configuration so far... At 07:45 AM 11/20/2009 -0600, you wrote: It is curious why so many people have no problems at all with the Prolific-based KUSB, and others have constant issues. I've used a bunch of equivalent adapters for a long time -- on an Orion, GPS stabilized time base, and other things. Once I changed PCs, I could no longer get them to work properly, even with what were the current drivers, old drivers, whatever. The OS's were the same, the update levels were the same, only the PC platform itself was different. Couldn't get them to work at all on a Mac (although others have wthout a problem). So I went to new brand with a different chipset (keyspan) and they work, but I'm still surprised everytime the DO work :-) Fortunately, if one one doesn't work reliably, it doesn't break the bank to try something else. Grant/NQ5T On Nov 20, 2009, at 7:12 AM, Lionel Lhermitte wrote: Hi all, Few minutes ago, I just ordered a full K3 kit with KUSB option.so not very happy to hear that ! Regards, Lionel, F6FCD, France Hi Lionel, I understand your experience completely. I have 4 computer systems networked and I use each of the 4 computers for different functions (eg. Ham radio control etc on one ... multi-media on the second ... a laptop which I can use for mobile purposes, and separate backup machine that keeps separate backups of data and images ... located in a separate and safer location. I run Windows XP on all of them and after re-installing the OS many times I have learned some basic rules the hard way. 1. always partition the HDD and make the primary partition no larger than what makes the OS and programs comfortable. I usually make it 50GB ... which is more than enough for just about any computer function. 2. I immediately install an image/clone type backup program such as Acronis True Image, and immediately after the first install make an image of the OS partition. 3. My original XP installation disks are SP2 (service pac 2). I found that the best performance was achieved with as few MS updates as possible !! 4. As you install additional programs (or incorporate updates) and things seem to be stable ... Make another 'image backup file'. If you don't like the results ... you can immediately go back to the previous state by replacing the OS with the previous Image. This can be done very quickly as the image is relatively small as you have already separated it from any large data files (e.g. you have a separate OS partition). 5. I use a good Tuneup Utility to keep the OS partition clean of unused files, defraged, and the Registry clean. The image files have notes that record what is new in each Image. 6. This also insures easy recovery from major system problems such as incurring some insidious virus, a stupid operator error, or mechanical failure of the HDD. Using this system is easy once you get into the routine if something works ... it always works. If something doesn't work ... you can go back to the state where it did work ...!! All data such as logs, multi-media files, pictures, E-mail, etc.. are kept on separate partitions and are backed up in a more traditional manner. Just a side light ... I use XP SP2 on a machine I use for some pretty demanding work ... control programs as well as full SDR. I found that the original install (not updated to SP3) is faster and more reliable (I am still using P4 machines all with 2GB of RAM) all of which I picked up cheap as dirt hi hi. Jim, VE3CI __ 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] BL-2 Balun Heating
At 10:02 PM 11/19/2009 -0500, you wrote: I recently built a BL-2 Balun. It is connected between my Palstar AT1KM tuner and my doublet antenna. The antenna consists of a 100' wire up 25' and fed by 95' of 600 ohm open wire feeder. I'm using the 1:1 setting on the balun. There is a 4 section of RG-213 between the balun and a coax input of the tuner. I'm driving it with 125 watts from a TS-850. After no more than a few minutes of CW or RTTY transmission, the balun is too hot to touch, the SWR rises and the power goes down. The balun is obviously saturated. Does anyone have an idea how I can reduce the overheating? I've tried adding a heat sink but it doesn't make any difference. Tnx for reading! Gary N2UM Hi Gary, You could place the balun (in the 1:1 configuration) on the other side of the tuner ... that is between the xcvr and the tuner. One side of the balun output would connect to the center pin of the input coax connector and the other side of the balun output connects to the tuner ground (frame). The tuner frame would of course be isolated from any ground especially the radio. The output of the tuner (no balun on the output) would connect directly to the 600 ohm feed line one side of the line connects to the center of the coax output center pin and the other side of the line connects to the tuner ground. The arrangement will work perfectly as a balanced tuning arrangement for the feed line and at the same time place the balun where it should be in the low impedance 1:1 circuit point ... with the result it will operate with efficiency and be cool as cucumber. At the moment it is not a 'balun' problem ... but a circuit problem. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] BL-2 Balun Heating
PS I believe the BL-2 is rated at 150 watts so running at 125W is already at the limit even when it is placed in the ideal point in the circuit ... (50 ohms resistive). Place it in a point in the circuit where the resistance varies up or down from the ideal of 50 ohms and then make it complex with added reactance and the unit could make like a toaster element. Of course if you operate QRP you will be just fine as long as you tolerate the RF power loss in the balun. Just imagine trying to make the circuit work at 1KW. Nothing like power to illustrate weakness. Jim, VE3CI __ 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
