from:"Stephen W. Kercel"

I was wondering if anyone on the reflector has tried to observe a 
transmitted keying waveform using the technique described on page 25.50 of 
the 2005 ARRL Handbook, and depicted in Figures 25.86 and 25.87.


The Handbook makes no mention of what the Keying Test Generator is or how 
to correctly set it up. I'd be most grateful if someone could explain what 
a Keying Test Generator really is.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


Don:

Thanks very much. Yes, the ARRL setup is serious overkill. However, I have 
a Tek 465, and I thought it would be kind of nifty to try to set it up to 
look at my keyed waveform.


As for the matter of running a 50 Ohm source into a high Z scope input, Tek 
has a slick solution. They use these 50-Ohm 2-Watt terminators that you 
apply right at the BNC connector at the scope input. Essentially, the 
source, the 50-Ohm load and the high-Z scope impedance are tied in 
parallel. Of course the gotcha is that you have to use some fairly 
expensive high-power attenuators to bring the transmitter output down to 2 
Watts into the terminator. (The reason for running high power through 
attenuators instead of simply cranking down the rig power is that the test 
is intended to observe the keying waveform at full power.)


It had occurred to me that a cheaper strategy would be to run the rig into 
my Heath Cantenna (remember those?) and connect a regular high-Z 
compensated scope probe (the probe is good up to 100 MHz) across the dummy 
load resistance. Is there some gotcha to doing that? Maybe that is not such 
a good solution; 100 watts RF into a 50 Ohm load will have a voltage of 
something like 200 Volts peak to peak, and I expect that that is way more 
than the scope could handle. I also expect that to observe full power, 
you'd need to construct a high-Z voltage divider to tie across the dummy 
load, being very careful to keep its reactance low.


I also dimly recall that there was a piece in QST a few months (years?) 
back describing a little sampling device (something like a directional 
coupler) that you could insert in the coax line. The device was supposed to 
have trivially small insertion loss, but let you look at your on-air output 
on the scope direct and in real time. Any chance you remember when that 
came out?


The reason the ARRL test is so fancy is that it is intended to measure 
timing, the time delay between key down and the beginning of occurrence of 
RF output, and the shortening of the first dot in semi-QSK schemes.


Thanks for your help with this.

73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 02:24 PM 2/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:

Steve,

The setup pictured is IMHO overkill, but it covers all bases for any kind of
transmitter.  No doubt the ARRL Lab has a semi-permanent setup for this
test, but all that equipment may not be required depending on what you wish
to conclude from your test

The Keying Test Generator is nothing more than a keyer - but that one has a
special output for triggering the 'scope.  In most cases, the 'scope can be
triggered on the channel that the keyer output is connected to.

The setup shown requires a 'scope with a 50 ohm input to properly load the
attenuator.  Commonly available 'scopes have a high impedance input rather
than a 50 ohm input.  If the 'scope and probe input will accept the voltage
level presented by the transmitted signal, the attenuator may be replaced
with a dummy load (keeping the power output under the speced limit for the
'scope).  In fact if all you want to look at is the shape of the output
waveform, you only need one channel connected directly to the RF output (and
a dummy load)- just trigger on the input and display 2 or 3 dot times.

If you need to measure the relative timing of the RF envelope with respect
to the keying, a dual trace 'scope is needed.  Trigger the 'scope on the
channel connected to the keyer output (trigger on the negative going slope)
and you can read the delay from the onset of keying to the beginning of the
RF wavefront.

That is about all I can tell you other than those test setups shown will
work and can tell you all you need to know about the keying characteristics
of any transmitter.

73,
Don W3FPR



 -Original Message-

 I was wondering if anyone on the reflector has tried to observe a
 transmitted keying waveform using the technique described on page
 25.50 of
 the 2005 ARRL Handbook, and depicted in Figures 25.86 and 25.87.

 The Handbook makes no mention of what the Keying Test Generator
 is or how
 to correctly set it up. I'd be most grateful if someone could
 explain what
 a Keying Test Generator really is.

 73,

 Steve Kercel
 AA4AK





___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement

Thanks to several commentors. Looks like I need to check the resistance of 
my 30-year-old cantenna.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 04:11 PM 2/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:

Steve,

I have no problem with my 10x probes at 100 watts and a 50 ohm load.  I use
a Tek 465 here too.  But watch that Cantenna - check its actual resistance,
they tend to climb in resistance as they age - just helped a guy out whose
Cantenna was now a good 68 ohm dummy load.

Yes, I know about those 50 ohm terminators - but as you know, they are power
limited, and not commonly available except from Tektronics.  The UHF 'scopes
(or rather vertical plug-ins) that I have encountered have only 50 ohm
inputs, and not many hams have those available.

I didn't really say so in my post to the reflector, but if you are going to
catch the first pulse, you will need a storage 'scope of some variety.
Which reminds me - if you are looking at the time delay between keying and
RF, put your 'scopes' vertical amplifiers on chop rather than alternate -
that will assure you the keying input you are looking at does indeed produce
the RF that is shown on the other channel.  If the timing of each pulse is
exactly the same it won't make a difference, but it is good to double check
anyway.

73,
Don W3FPR

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stephen W. Kercel
 Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 3:31 PM
 To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


 Don:

 Thanks very much. Yes, the ARRL setup is serious overkill.
 However, I have
 a Tek 465, and I thought it would be kind of nifty to try to set it up to
 look at my keyed waveform.

 As for the matter of running a 50 Ohm source into a high Z scope
 input, Tek
 has a slick solution. They use these 50-Ohm 2-Watt terminators that you
 apply right at the BNC connector at the scope input. Essentially, the
 source, the 50-Ohm load and the high-Z scope impedance are tied in
 parallel. Of course the gotcha is that you have to use some fairly
 expensive high-power attenuators to bring the transmitter output
 down to 2
 Watts into the terminator. (The reason for running high power through
 attenuators instead of simply cranking down the rig power is that
 the test
 is intended to observe the keying waveform at full power.)

 It had occurred to me that a cheaper strategy would be to run the
 rig into
 my Heath Cantenna (remember those?) and connect a regular high-Z
 compensated scope probe (the probe is good up to 100 MHz) across
 the dummy
 load resistance. Is there some gotcha to doing that? Maybe that
 is not such
 a good solution; 100 watts RF into a 50 Ohm load will have a voltage of
 something like 200 Volts peak to peak, and I expect that that is way more
 than the scope could handle. I also expect that to observe full power,
 you'd need to construct a high-Z voltage divider to tie across the dummy
 load, being very careful to keep its reactance low.

 I also dimly recall that there was a piece in QST a few months (years?)
 back describing a little sampling device (something like a directional
 coupler) that you could insert in the coax line. The device was
 supposed to
 have trivially small insertion loss, but let you look at your
 on-air output
 on the scope direct and in real time. Any chance you remember when that
 came out?

 The reason the ARRL test is so fancy is that it is intended to measure
 timing, the time delay between key down and the beginning of
 occurrence of
 RF output, and the shortening of the first dot in semi-QSK schemes.

 Thanks for your help with this.

 73,

 Steve
 AA4AK


 At 02:24 PM 2/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:
 Steve,
 
 The setup pictured is IMHO overkill, but it covers all bases for
 any kind of
 transmitter.  No doubt the ARRL Lab has a semi-permanent setup for this
 test, but all that equipment may not be required depending on
 what you wish
 to conclude from your test
 
 The Keying Test Generator is nothing more than a keyer - but
 that one has a
 special output for triggering the 'scope.  In most cases, the
 'scope can be
 triggered on the channel that the keyer output is connected to.
 
 The setup shown requires a 'scope with a 50 ohm input to
 properly load the
 attenuator.  Commonly available 'scopes have a high impedance
 input rather
 than a 50 ohm input.  If the 'scope and probe input will accept
 the voltage
 level presented by the transmitted signal, the attenuator may be replaced
 with a dummy load (keeping the power output under the speced
 limit for the
 'scope).  In fact if all you want to look at is the shape of the output
 waveform, you only need one channel connected directly to the RF
 output (and
 a dummy load)- just trigger on the input and display 2 or 3 dot times.
 
 If you need to measure the relative timing of the RF envelope
 with respect
 to the keying, a dual trace 'scope is needed.  Trigger the 'scope on the
 channel connected to the keyer output (trigger on the negative

RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


Roger:

The topic is extremely timely. I expect there are a lot of Cantennas still 
floating around out in Hamdom. One is tempted to naively treat it like a 
precision 50 Ohm RF load.


I measured the DC resistance of mine with a DMM and the reading was 46.1 
Ohm. I dimly recall doing some noise bridge readings at various HF ham 
frequencies a few months back, and it seemed to me that the readings all 
came out reasonably close to 50 Ohms. When things quiet down, I suppose I 
should revisit the readings with a bit more of a critical eye.


I do not dispute than many Cantennas eventually evolve into a 68 Ohm load.

I built mine in 1977 (it is only 28 years old and not 30 as I said 
earlier). I was inactive from 1983 through 2004. When I have been active it 
has been mostly QRP and never above 100 W. Thus, I never really got the 
puppy hot, and that may explain why the resistance is still close to 50 Ohms.


For what its worth, the resistor has been continuously immersed in oil, and 
I have never changed the oil since I built the device.


BTW. Does anybody know if the reactance also tends to creep with age/use? I 
cannot think of a good reason why it should, but RF properties are strange.


73,

Steve
AA4AK

At 01:10 PM 2/9/2005 -0800, you wrote:

Steve,

Regarding the Heath CantennaI have been scratching around with power out
readings recently and after a search of the archives for the word cantenna
yeilded some intersting results.
What I thought over all these years (since 1964) a 50 ohm load was actually
a
68 ohm load after many years in oil and many heating cycles.
Thought that topic would be timely again here on the reflector.

Roger WA7BOC K2#755




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


Mark:

Yes, you're right; the 465 does have a 20 V/div max using 10:1 probes.

The lesson from you is essentially that when all else fails, read the 
instructions. According to my probe manual, the probes are actually good to 
500 V up to 10 MHz, then they derate to about 175 V at 30 MHz. They are 
much more than adequate for observing the output of a full-featured K2.


Yes, I remember hot carrier FETs and the lethally high voltages required 
to operate them.


73,

Steve
AA4AK



Sheesh...these young uns!  200V P-P should be no problem for a 'scope.
(If you look carefully, the probe is probably a 10:1 voltage divider.)
To show 200V p-p as a full scale deflection (assuming 10 divisions
vertically on the screen) would require 20v p-p per division. Just set
the vertical scaling at 20v p-p/div. If you're using official Tek
probes, you can ignore the 10:1 built into the probe because the scope
will compensate for it automatically. If the thing doesn't have
scalings up to 20v p-p you would need the high voltage probe set, but
I don't remember using them for normal (non broadcast) transmitter
service.

Shouldn't be a problem -- after there are those of us who used this
scope, (and its predecessors) to trouble shoot vacuum tube equipment.
(Remember vacuum tubes? sometimes known as 'thermionic FETs'? They
take high voltages!)



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


Bob and Bob:

Thanks to both. The advice is very useful.

73,

Steve
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement


Hi Roger:

Actually, I'm quite happy with my 46.1 Ohm reading. After 28 years of 
mysterious chemical reactions, my Cantenna impedance is still well within 
10% of its nominal value. I wonder if a brand new MFJ dry dummy load would 
be that close.


My Cantenna also contains the Heath-recommended transformer oil. It is (was 
back then anyway) readily available from commercial electrical suppliers. 
(BTW, I hope yours is not using askarel; it contains PCBs. Although it was 
illegal to use askarel in 1978, Heath still published performance figures 
for Cantennas filled with askarel.)


Although I see no present need to overhaul my Cantenna, I'd definitely be 
interested in seeing your pictures. If there is a way to post them to the 
reflector, I expect that other participants would like to see them as well.


You do raise a valuable caution. Cantenna impedance values apparently range 
fairly widely over the map. If people are trying to measure the power out 
of a K2 (or whatever rig) by using a voltage measurement and assuming a 
50+J0 load impedance, they should only do so if the measurements of the 
impedance of their specific Cantenna are close to that value.


73,

Steve
Way Down East and bracing for the Nor'easter of '05
AA4AK


At 07:48 PM 2/9/2005 -0800, you wrote:

Hi Steve,
I have never changed the oil either, mine is actual transformer oil as my
father worked for the local utility company as the time.
I was having KPA100 difficulties and decided to attach the MFJ analyzer to
the cantenna just to check it out...imagine my surprise when it read 68
ohms. I then put the leads from my Fluke dvm on it and it read the same.
So what I thought was 50 watts was really 36using P = V^2/50 and in this
case 50 was really 68.
I have the unit apart, there is a deposit of some kind on the body of the
resistor. One has to reverse assemble the resitor holder from the lid in
order to get it all apart. I am going to take photos of the unit if you are
interested in seeing what I have.

I since borrowed a Bird dummy load, 51.2 ohms and a Bird wattmeter and now
have the KPA100  KAT100 all recalibrated as well as found one end of C5C
not soldered!! Smooth sailing now!!

73, Roger WA7BOC, way out here in Montesano, WA.
and on the home e-mail address!

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stephen W. Kercel
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 2:05 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Keying Waveform Measurement




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Calibration Standard

2005-02-13 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

The ARRL Handbook says that a cheap way to get a voltage calibration 
standard is to use a brand new D cell. It is supposed to have a voltage of 
1.56 Volts. Assuming that one wanted to use a set of D cells as a voltage 
standard (say for checking a DMM), is there a way to store them to minimize 
the rate at which the voltage runs down? Can one store them in a 
refrigerator or freezer? Does it do any harm? Does it do any good?


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Calibration Standard

2005-02-13 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Don:

That is really cool. I'm definitely figuring to build one of those.

73,

Steve


At 12:35 AM 2/14/2005 -0500, W3FPR - Don Wilhelm wrote:

Steve,

I don't have a direct answer to your question - I do believe that
information is old and tha actual voltage depends on the battery type
(zinc/carbon, alkalyne, etc), BUT ---
Look on my website www.qsl.net/w3fpr for an easy to build calibrator for
your DMM.

73,
Don W3FPR

 -Original Message-

 The ARRL Handbook says that a cheap way to get a voltage calibration
 standard is to use a brand new D cell. It is supposed to have a
 voltage of
 1.56 Volts. Assuming that one wanted to use a set of D cells as a voltage
 standard (say for checking a DMM), is there a way to store them
 to minimize
 the rate at which the voltage runs down? Can one store them in a
 refrigerator or freezer? Does it do any harm? Does it do any good?

 73,

 Steve Kercel
 AA4AK





___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Re: Battery Storage

2005-02-14 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Julius and others:

Thanks very much. Yes, I think Don has the right idea.

73,

Steve


At 06:29 AM 2/14/2005 -0800, J F wrote:

Steve,
Storing a battery in a refridgerator will slow down
the chemical process, and add life to it. I've not
tested for voltage consistency over time. I beleive
Don, W3FPR, on this reflector has a little unit that
provides a reference voltage that is quite accurate.
You may wish to look into builing it, and not worrying
about the voltage consistency of a store bought
battery.
73,
Julius
n2wn



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Battery Storage

2005-02-14 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Ron:

Very informative.

Thanks,

Steve


At 10:27 AM 2/14/2005 -0800, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:

The old rule of thumb for an old dry cell providing 1.55 volts is based on
the materials used, not the age or condition of the cell. A zinc-carbon cell
produces very close to that voltage as long as the chemicals hold out.

What changes with the aging of those cells is their internal resistance. It
climbs as the chemicals are depleted.

The Heathkit IM-11 tube-type VTVM specified using such a cell and provided a
calibration marker on the scale where 1.55 volts should appear just above
the 1.5 volt full scale range. It had an 11-megohm input resistance similar
to 10-meghom input resistance of most modern DMM's so any droop was
insignificant as along as the cell had not been allowed to deteriorate
completely. The meter also used a 1.5 volt flashlight battery (zinc-carbon
cell) for the Ohms scale, so one got the reference cell for setting the
calibration and the Ohms bridge battery all at the same time. I used to
check the calibration of my IM-11 whenever I changed the Ohms battery.
Whether or not the battery had been on the shelf a month or a year made an
insignificant difference because the meter drew only 0.00015 mA! (1.5 volts
/ 10 megohms). So the internal resistance in any cell still functioning
wasn't going to cause any detectable change in the output voltage at such a
tiny current.

Those batteries are still readily available. Just find the cheapest
flashlight battery in the store and make sure it does not say anything about
being alkaline. Many stores don't carry them because alkalines are so cheap
themselves, but I see them around all the time marked with Extra High
Energy or Heavy Duty. Of course those terms are meaningless but they have
to say *something* about the battery. They'd never sell if they advertised
them as crummy batteries that will run down quickly and may ruin your
equipment!'

The problem with those batteries is that, given enough time, they will leak
a highly corrosive acid that will destroy whatever they are in. That's
because one of the materials that is consumed by the cell is the case
itself. The case is the zinc electrode. Even disconnected, there's some
leakage current flowing through the electrolyte. You can slow it done by
chilling it, perhaps, but sooner or later the acid will eat through the
case. It's a paste so it moves slowly but it'll destroy everything it
reaches.

The more current being drawn, the faster the zinc case is eaten. That's why
us OT's all knew that the moment we found a flashlight using the old
carbon-zinc cells that had been left on for a few weeks, we had a corrosive
mess inside the case when we opened it. The best approach was to toss 'em
out.

Ron AC7AC



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Separate Groups Would be a Mistake

2005-03-20 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


For what its worth, I'm with Eric on this one.

(Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Elecraft, and do not currently 
even own any Elecraft products. However, I am presently in the process of 
putting together the capability (i.e., acquiring test equipment and tools, 
setting up an undisturbed construction space, et cetera) to build a K2.)


I do think that the emergence of Elecraft is a significant development in 
the ham community, essentially putting the amateur back into amateur 
radio. This list is a community exploring the not-always-separable nuances 
of participation in the Elecraft tribe, as well as other beyond appliance 
operating aspects of ham radio. I often gain insights (as I'm sure others 
do) from the juxtaposition of seemingly irrelevant and disconnected posts. 
That synergy would be destroyed by some arbitrary fractioning of the list 
into disjoint parts.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 09:36 AM 3/20/2005 -0800, you wrote:

 I think it would be a mistake to pull out an Elecraft technical forum. I'm
involved with intranet design (not the technical side, the conceptual side).
Many corporate customers want to include forums for their group to discuss
common interests and problems. Very briefly, the more compartmentalized they
become, the less successful the forums. The pressure initially is for more
specialized forums. The trend is towards fewer or one general forum with a
broader focus.

Here's why. A successful forum is a community. It isn't just the occasional
interesting topics and posts that hold the group together. It is also the
chatter. Far from being off-topic, most chatter serves to bind the group
into a community. There are lulls  between really interesting completely
on-topic posts, and the chatter keeps the community together so that it is
there for the next new thing.

It's the same in other facets of our lives. We don't just talk about
religion at church functions. We don't just talk about ham radio at club
meetings. What a boring world if every group limited their discussions in
that way. Sure, you have to keep things mostly on topic, but you have to let
things stray a little (this group is very even-handedly moderated)

Something as specialized as a pure technical forum on Elecraft equipment is
going to attract a relative few. My guess is it wouldn't even attract many
of those on here who are very technically competent. It will not attract the
great majority of Elecraft owners who want to know how their rig works, but
mainly just want to enjoy their radios. There will be the occasional hot
technical topic (e.g. phase noise), but chances are good there will be
relatively long periods of time when nothing is happening and members will
drift on to other interests. The few remaining will not be involved in
heated technical discussions because it will be the same small group that
already knows what the others are interested in.

I say keep it together. Sometimes I have an interest in what the geeks are
saying. I understand the highlights and maybe learn something I can use.
Some I delete when I see the call sign. I learn most from guys like Don
(W3FPR) and Ron (AC7AC) and many others in their offers of troubleshooting
help. Not that I have always experienced the problem or expect to, but by
getting insights into how the rig works when it is working like it was
designed. I learn from just about everyone.

I also learned that there is a delete button. With only a couple of dozen
posts a day, it is not much of a burden.

Eric
KE6US

- Original Message -
Here is the polite question to Wayne and Eric and others from Elecraft to
maybe open another forum with pure technical stuff because deletting all the
messages wich are not of my interests is very time consuming for me and i am
shure my writing for the others is also.
Hope the voice will be suported and heard :) .

CU!

S55M-Adi

- Original Message -
 You and your European friends are exactly correct that most of the stuff
on
 the Elecraft site is not really technical nor about specs etc. ...
 I, like you and a few others, would rather exchange information about how
 the radio can be made better in handling big signals etc.



 Anyhow, I hope you all are successful in coming up with another reflector
 for technical discussions on the K2. Please let me know, as I would like
To subscribe.
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help:

Re: [Elecraft] Re: magnetic fields and phase noise?

2005-03-20 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

I've seen several mentions of mu metal in this discussion. I offer a few 
thoughts for what they are worth.


Some years back, when I worked in the Electromagnetic Compatibility Group 
at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, we occasionally used mu-metal. The idea 
is that it directly suppresses magnetic field independent of electric 
field, and is thus supposed to be an effective shield for near-field 
situations where the constrained relationship between the electric and 
magnetic field breaks down. (Magnetic shielding of propagating waves is not 
a problem; kill off the electric field, and the magnetic field vanishes for 
free.)


Mu metal is expensive, difficult to find, hard to work with if you can find 
it, and if subjected to mechanical shock, it can lose its mu-ness.


Personally, I would only use it as a last desperate measure.

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK



At 01:54 PM 3/20/2005 -0500, you wrote:

Earl W Cunningham wrote:


It has been suggested that mu-metal shielding might alleviate the
problem.  I'm considering making mu-metal bottom and side covers for my
K2.


If I were having that problem, I'd be thinking about shielding the 
*source*...because it would likely affect other equipment in my shack.


 73 de Maggie K3XS



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Resistor Color Code Guide

2005-04-09 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Rich:

Here's a handy link:

http://www.electronics123.com/amazon/tools/resistor/calculator.htm

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 06:03 PM 4/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:
I'm slowly but surely gathering the tools and such so I'll have every 
thing necessary to build a K2.


I remember in my earlier ham days that I had a little chart from 
RadioShack.  You dialed up the colors in the correct order and it gave you 
the value of the resistor.  It may come in handy during the build.


I don't think RadioShack carries these any longer, per a quick phone call 
I just made.  Are there any other sources for something like this?



Rich Thorne
ARS: N5ZC
AMA: N5ZC
Amarillo, TX

___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] about this K2 mojo

2005-04-13 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Ron:

Cool! I'd always wondered where the idea came from.

Steve
AA4AK

At 10:25 AM 4/13/2005 -0700, you wrote:

Ron, WB1HGA asked:

Pardon my ignorance fellas, but what is a mojo?

---

That question comes up often, Ron.

A mojo is an object containing magic. In native American lore, it's often
a small leather bag worn on a leather thong around the neck in which
particular items with spiritual powers are placed: a talisman.

Somewhere in the past someone decided that the Elecraft rigs were Ham radio
mojos, Hi!

Ron AC7AC


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers

2005-04-14 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

There is an interesting piece in the May 2005 QST. It has product reviews 
on four different antenna analyzers.


Two that were included are the MFJ-269 and the Autek VA-1. I have heard 
endless horror stories from many hams about both, abysmal quality control, 
virtually useless tech support and so on. None of these negatives are 
mentioned in the QST product review.


There is also a new product favorably mentioned in the review, the Palstar 
ZM-30. Since the MFJ and the Autek are apparently both junk, despite being 
favorably reviewed in this article, I'm not sure whether I can trust the 
product review on the Palstar.


Anybody have any experience with it? Is it any good?

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers


Charles:

Thanks for your message. I did not take it as a flame.

However, speaking of fire, before I lay out hundreds of dollars for such a 
widget, I'd like to make a prudent effort not to get burned.


The record with both MFJ and Autek appears to be a mixed bag. I've heard 
both good stories and bad. However, as some of the other posts to this 
thread indicate, even among Elecrafters, not everybody seems to have had as 
good luck as you have had with these two manufacturers.


73,

Steve


At 08:09 AM 4/15/2005 -0400, you wrote:

Steve,

I take issue with your statement that both the MFJ-269 and the Autek VA1 
are apparently junk.  I have the Autek and the MFJ-259B, the model 
without UHF, and both are quality although inexpensive instruments.  I 
have used the VA1 for approximately 3 years and the MFJ for 2 years and I 
have never had any problem with either.  I have found the MFJ to be good 
on battery usage, as is the Autek.  I recommend both to an average ham who 
doesn't need laboratory precision and has the need for the occasional use 
of an antenna analyzer.  In fact the readings obtained by the ARRL Lab 
show amazing accuracy for such relatively inexpensive units.  If you don't 
need the sign of the complex impedance, the less expensive Autek RF1 is 
fine.  I had one of those too, but I needed the functions of the more 
expensive VA1.


I have no knowledge o the Palstar.

This is not a flame, but an attempt to set the record straight.

At 12:31 AM 4/15/2005, Stephen W. Kercel wrote:
There is an interesting piece in the May 2005 QST. It has product reviews 
on four different antenna analyzers.


Two that were included are the MFJ-269 and the Autek VA-1. I have heard 
endless horror stories from many hams about both, abysmal quality 
control, virtually useless tech support and so on. None of these 
negatives are mentioned in the QST product review.


There is also a new product favorably mentioned in the review, the 
Palstar ZM-30. Since the MFJ and the Autek are apparently both junk, 
despite being favorably reviewed in this article, I'm not sure whether I 
can trust the product review on the Palstar.


Anybody have any experience with it? Is it any good?

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com


73,  Chas,  W1CG



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers


Hi Joe:

I do not own a MFJ-269. I lusted after one for a while, but there are so 
many bad stories posted on so many different ham Web sites that I decided 
not to buy one. Now, I'll admit that you do hear the occasional good story 
about MFJ, but the reported experiences (even on this thread) constitute a 
mixed bag.


Having come to the conclusion that if I did buy a 269 I might get lucky and 
I might not, I decided to do without the MFJ-269. Instead I bought a 
MFJ-207 on eBay. It was cheap, and had it not lived up to the task, I would 
not have lost much. It turns out that I got a good specimen. I only use it 
to adjust my antenna tuner without the need to put a transmitted signal on 
the air. The 207 is up to that task.


The possible availability of a genuinely reliable and not too expensive 
device for measuring R+JX impedances at HF has rekindled my interest in a 
fancier instrument.


In the case of the MFJ-269 versus the Palstar I note the following points. 
The list price of the Palstar is ten dollars cheaper than the MFJ. Reported 
experience with the MFJ is unmistakably a mixed bag; some hams love it and 
some  hate it. The reports on the Palstar constitute a much smaller sample, 
but those reports thus far are uniformly positive. The fact that the 
Palstar is a reboxed AA-908 seems to be a decided positive; I've never 
heard a bad story about the 908.


Thanks and 73,

Steve
AA4AK





Howdy Steve:

Not sure if you own an MFJ analyzer...I have owned the model 269 for 
several years now without problem.  It is an excellent tool for antenna 
measurements.


I am fully aware that MFJ quality leaves something to be desired (Mighty 
Fine Junk:-) but the 269 has been a reliable performer for meso I 
wouldn't discard it out of hand..perhaps you can pick up a used one to 
play with and see if it meets your standardsthey usually re-sell 
quickly so you wouldn't lose much.


   73, Joe W2KJ




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers


Weymouth:

Actually, the Kuranishi is included in the review, and quite favorably rated.

Steve


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna analyzers


Jim:

Yes, I'd like to have a CIA-HF. However, the company that made them got 
bought out. As far as I know, they are no longer being manufactured.


Once in a very rare while you can find one on eBay, but they are very 
difficult to find.


73,

Steve
AA4AK






I also have access to a friend's CIA-HF, which I have used
extensively. Its graphical display is QUITE helpful, and is worth
the extra money over the MFJ.



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers


Vic:

Your point is well taken.

73,

Steve
AA4AK


while others are the guys who have a permanent 'attitude' (just read some 
of the postings on eHam.net if you want to see what I mean)




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Antenna Analyzers

2005-04-16 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

I apologize to those who found my statement Since the MFJ and the Autek 
are apparently both junk to be excessively prickly. It was an unfair 
thing for me to say.


Steve Kercel
AA4AK 



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna analyzers


Toby:

The Garant-Funk site has lots of information, but it does not look like 
they sell over the Web.


The AEA site has the CIA-HF, but also does not sell over the Web. Their Web 
site suggests contacting their sales rep which further suggests to me that 
they sell in bulk to retailers. I might give them a call on Monday.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 07:56 AM 4/17/2005 +0200, you wrote:
Yes, I'd like to have a CIA-HF. However, the company that made them got 
bought out. As far as I know, they are no longer being manufactured.


I don't know wether the CIA-HF has been discontinued, but similar units 
are still being built:


http://www.garant-funk.com/frames.html
http://www.aeatechnology.com/html/product.htm

An Elecraft kit would almost always be better... ;-)


73 de toby

___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna analyzers


Toby:

Actually, your suggestion that Elecraft develop an antenna analyzer as a 
kit sounds like a good idea.


The AA-908 apparently sold 500 copies on a subscription basis; my naive 
impression (I'm an engineer and not an expert in assessing markets) 
suggests to me that there is a ham market for such a kit.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 07:56 AM 4/17/2005 +0200, you wrote:
Yes, I'd like to have a CIA-HF. However, the company that made them got 
bought out. As far as I know, they are no longer being manufactured.


I don't know wether the CIA-HF has been discontinued, but similar units 
are still being built:


http://www.garant-funk.com/frames.html
http://www.aeatechnology.com/html/product.htm

An Elecraft kit would almost always be better... ;-)


73 de toby

___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Antenna analyzers


Jim:

Thanks.

I've never dealt with Burghardt, but I've heard many good things about them.

73,

Steve


At 09:16 AM 4/17/2005 -0500, you wrote:

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 09:29:47 -0400, Stephen W. Kercel wrote:

The Garant-Funk site has lots of information, but it does not look like
they sell over the Web.

The AEA site has the CIA-HF, but also does not sell over the Web. Their Web
site suggests contacting their sales rep which further suggests to me that
they sell in bulk to retailers. I might give them a call on Monday.

Burghardt is a dealer for current AEA analyzer products, and you can see them
listed, with prices on their website. My experience, and that of my 
friends, with

Burghardt is that they are a very good citizen in the ham world.

Jim Brown  K9YC


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Now that we know


A prudent precaution.

Steve
AA4AK

At 11:09 PM 4/17/2005 -0400, you wrote:
I understand, for safety reasons, the Farragut Amateur Radio Transmitting 
Society was forbidden using spark equipment.


dave belsley, w1euy




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Bird 43 service

2005-04-27 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

Ted:

From the Bird Web site

http://www.bird-electronic.com/absolutenm/templates/news_no_left_nav.asp?articleid=4zoneid=2

I have copied the following information:

For Product Service and Calibration:
Bird® Service Center
30303 Aurora Road
Cleveland (Solon), Ohio 44139
Telephone: (866) 695-4569
Fax: (866) 546-4306
Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website:
http://www.bird-electronic.com/servicewww.bird-electronic.com/service

To contact your Local / Global Service Center click
http://www.bird-electronic.com/sales/here.

From first hand experience, I'll tell you that Bird technical support is
highly competent, and easy to deal with.

Trying to recalibrate a Bird is a professional and not an amateur task.
Also, It does not come cheap. You'll probably pay more for the
recalibration than you did for the original meter on the used market.
However, since you do not currently believe the readings that you're
getting, the meter is not doing you much good in its present condition.

One other comment: It is extremely inadvisable to buy a used Bird slug,
unless you know the detailed history of it (often not the case). Quite
often, used Bird slugs have been abused (accidentally running a KW through
a 50W slug, et cetera), and are damaged. You can by brand new slugs from
Henry for about $90 each. Perhaps other list members could point you to
better deals.

Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in either Bird or Henry. I'm
merely a very happy customer.

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK

At 01:36 AM 4/27/2005 +, you wrote:

Hi folks:
I'm going to build the 100w amp this summer, and need to get my Bird 43
wattmeter working. Its intermittent on the pickup--I've tried cleaning all
surfaces and plugs with alcohol. Perhaps the pickup element (I think it
has one) is faulty? Any suggestions as to servicing this unit, or to whom
to send it, or how to check the plugs (all used equipment). I'd like to
see this thing working reliably before beginning work on the Elecraft amp.
Off reflector replies OK! Thanks.

Ted WB3AVD
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] RE: Can Elecraft take over the global HF ham radiobusiness ?

2005-05-01 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Nigel:

Actually, there are at least two points in building something even if one 
could buy something similar for less money. 1) If you build it yourself, 
you know the rig in a sense that never happens with purchased gear. 2) 
Servicability; if you build it, you can probably fix it when it breaks, and 
they all break eventually.


Speaking strictly for myself, in the case of the K2, I've seen numerous 
postings on eBay for completed working K2s at good prices. I've never even 
been tempted to bid. Although it is taking me a bit longer than I expected 
it would to get set up to build a K2, I intend to build one as soon as I 
can, and I would not dream of buying a finished K2. (At present, my main 
rig is a Ten Tec Argosy, and the K2 is a more than worthy candidate to 
replace it.)


Admittedly, I am not most people. Furthermore, I'd guess that the typical 
members of the reflector are also not most people in this respect. After 
all, we signed on in order to talk about building radios.  I'd be surprised 
if most people on the reflector would prefer to buy than build.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 12:46 PM 5/1/2005 +, you wrote:

Most people, I would imagine, build primarily as a means of saving money.
There's no point in building something if I can buy something similar for 
less money.


Craig Rairdin wrote:

As for the radio being in a kit form, that is actually a HUGE selling 
point, regardless of the time and effort required to build it since all 
hams that I have met so far would really love to be able to build their 
radios instead of buying a ready made appliance,


--

Nigel A. Gunn. 59 Beadlemead, Milton Keynes, MK6 4HF, England. Tel +44 
(0)1908 604004

e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wwwhttp://www.ngunn.net  or  http://www.ngunn.demon.co.uk
Amateur radio stations  G8IFF, KC8NHF
Member of  AMSAT-UK #182, ARRL, GQRP Club, QRPARCI, SOC #548  RAYNET
  Flying Pig #385, Dayton ARA #2128, AMSAT-NA  LM-1691,



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

RE: [Elecraft] Tuner efficiency question


The comparison of balanced tuners is in the September 2004 QST.

It is worth mentioning that there is a strong correlation between tuner 
efficiency and money. According to the ARRL lab data, a $900 Palstar is 
substantially more efficient (Surprised?) than a $200 MFJ.


Side note: I dimly recall that there is an outfit in Germany that has been 
making balanced tuners since before balanced became cool. They are very 
expensive ($1.5 K - $2K), but I suspect that they are much more efficient 
than the specimens tested in the ARRL lab.


A comparison of unbalanced tuners is in the February 2003 QST.

Again, it is worth mentioning that there is a strong correlation between 
tuner efficiency and cost. According to the ARRL lab data, a $600 Ameritron 
is substantially more efficient than a $330 MFJ. (All the more remarkable, 
seeing that apparently the same people make both.)


Comparing the two different reviews reveals another detail. Commercially 
available balanced tuners, as a class appear to be lossier than unbalanced 
tuners. (Speculation: Since both the loss and cost are dominated by the 
inductor quality, and the balanced tuner needs two of them, I expect that 
the manufacturers are tempted to cut corners on the inductor quality for 
the balanced tuner.)


Other point worth noting: Losses are much more severe when the load 
resistance is substantially lower than 50 ohms. All the tuners show their 
worst performance at R = 6.25. With R = 400 all the tuners do much better, 
despite the fact that the SWR is 8:1 in both cases. (Almost certainly this 
is caused by the resistive voltage divider effect. The resistance in the 
tuner inductor is in series with the load impedance.)


Comment on baluns: If you drive a ferrite core to saturation, it will 
overheat. It doesn't really take much to do it; a few minutes of normal CW 
operating with 100 watts into a 5:1 SWR on 20 meters will do the trick for 
me. Once the core overheats, the inductance changes and you lose your match 
(quite severely, in my experience). You are much more likely to drive a 
balun core into saturation on the high SWR output of a tuner than on the 
low SWR input of the tuner.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Tuner efficiency question


Dave:

Personally, I've always thought that balanced was cool. I was using 
balanced lines 20+ years ago. The sense that I had from my fellow hams at 
the time was that practically everybody else thought that they were 
decidedly uncool.


It is only in the last year or so that I've noticed them becoming rediscovered.

73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 09:41 AM 5/13/2005 -0400, you wrote:
Side note: I dimly recall that there is an outfit in Germany that has 
been making balanced tuners since before balanced became cool.


Balanced didn't become cool; balanced always was cool.  Balanced is only 
being rediscovered by the generation (or two (or three)) that thought that 
coax was the only means for feeding a wire.



best wishes,

dave belsley, w1euy



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Tuner efficiency question


Stuart:

The Johnson differs from modern balanced tuners in that it used link 
coupling (a tuned transformer with inductive coupling) rather than a 
matching network.


It also had the advantage over home brew link couplers that you tuned it 
with knobs instead of moving little clips around on the big coil.


73,

Steve
AA4AK



At 02:14 PM 5/13/2005 -0500, you wrote:

The MFJ balanced tuner has a double tee network to give the most range of
adjustment.

Note even the vaunted Johnson Matchbox did not cover all of today's bands
and impedances.

-Stuart
K5KVH



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Anyone tried fibermasts.


Tom:

Check out

http://www.wonderpole.com/

QST had a product review on their fiberglass poles in April 2004.

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 01:09 AM 5/14/2005 +0200, you wrote:

Hi all!
I wonder if any of you has tried the 33foot fibermast from either Spieth 
or the MFJ-1910?

How is the quality?
Will it stand up against much water or possible arctic winter clima?
Do they bend a lot?
I plan to put up a battle creek and use a fibemast to support the vertical 
portion of the antenna.
There will be som stress on the top of the mast due to the horizontally 
part of the battle creek.

Any reply off list would be much appreciated.
I will post a summary to list to keep BW down.

73 de Tom LA1PHA
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Anyone tried fibermasts.


I do not know. My suggestion would send an e-mail to the vendor and ask.

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 08:29 PM 5/13/2005 -0400, you wrote:

Would this pole be suitable for putting say a MP1 antenna it?
Paul Gates
Elecraft K1 #231
XG1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


- Original Message -
From: Stephen W. Kercel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Anyone tried fibermasts.


 Tom:

 Check out

 http://www.wonderpole.com/

 QST had a product review on their fiberglass poles in April 2004.

 73,

 Steve Kercel
 AA4AK


 At 01:09 AM 5/14/2005 +0200, you wrote:
 Hi all!
 I wonder if any of you has tried the 33foot fibermast from either Spieth
 or the MFJ-1910?
 How is the quality?
 Will it stand up against much water or possible arctic winter clima?
 Do they bend a lot?
 I plan to put up a battle creek and use a fibemast to support the
 vertical
 portion of the antenna.
 There will be som stress on the top of the mast due to the horizontally
 part of the battle creek.
 Any reply off list would be much appreciated.
 I will post a summary to list to keep BW down.
 
 73 de Tom LA1PHA
 ___
 Elecraft mailing list
 Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
 Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
   http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
 
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
 Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com


 ___
 Elecraft mailing list
 Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
 Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
 Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Pomona 3296 Parts Source?

2005-06-18 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Paul:

Supposing that you are not in a desperate hurry for the item, and you are 
willing to trade a bit of lead time for money, I suggest that it would be 
worthwhile for you to consider Mouser.


Of they carry an item as listed but unstocked, they are typically very good 
about seeing that it gets delivered within a few days/weeks, even on 
small-lot orders. My advice is to give them a call (you'll talk to a human 
and not a computer) and see what they can do for you.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 12:06 PM 6/18/2005 -0700, you wrote:

Can't seem to find a source for the subject
BNC-binding post adapter for use with my KX1.  I
checked the Mouser website, but though they show
the item, they don't seem to stock it.  The only
other website I could find that sells this part
has a $60 minimum order for Pomona parts.  Any
recommended source(s)?

- Paul, n6lq
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] SMT - Was Re: Wayne on KNBx

2005-07-19 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Jim:

I used to design electronic instrumentation at Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, usually built under my direct supervision by the very competent 
technicians in my research group. However, when we came to installing SMT, 
we always farmed it out to an expert SMT constructor (a young woman with 
extremely steady hands and sharp eyes who did the SMT work for the whole 
Division). Admittedly, we did that for cost effectiveness of construction, 
and arguably, the cost of the time of an amateur constructor need not be 
taken into account. Perhaps it is possible for the typical amateur 
constructor to learn how to build SMT gear.


However, as Wayne pointed out in a post some months back, there is another 
issue with SMT. It is extremely costly for the kit manufacturer to support 
amateur constructors of SMT when the constructed kit fails to work 
correctly. If SMT kits are to become popular among amateur builders and 
profitable to the vendors, then some cost effective means of technical 
support needs to be devised.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 03:19 PM 7/19/2005 -0400, you wrote:
Like it or not, we are seeing another transition in kit building.  Just as 
some of us witnessed
the transition from tubes to transistors, we are now seeing the beginning 
of the transition from
parts with leads to SMT.  I would guess that in ten years or so it will be 
increasingly difficult
to find parts with leads.  Perhaps those of us that are uncomfortable with 
SMT should start

stocking up on discrete parts and parts with leads.

I successfully made the transition from tubes to transistors and am 
beginning to embrace the
transition to SMT.  I just received one of Steve Weber's ATSIII kits. It 
is the most dense

SMT kit I have attempted so far, but I am convinced that I can do it.
Steve did  teach me
something new about SMT.  He said to hold down the small parts with a 
toothpick with some

beeswax on it.  I could have used that info when assembling the AA-908.
I was holding a
really small part with tweezers when twang it went off to somewhere.
I never did find it
and had to wait for the arrival of its replacement.

Jim, W4BQP
Happy owner of K2 #2268 and a bunch of other Elecraft do-dads.
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Sad day for amateur radio

2005-07-20 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

Back in the day, when I had the blue paper (FCC First Phone) and the white 
paper (FCC Second CW) and the blue and white paper (Amateur Extra acquired 
before the days of incentive licensing) I considered that any compromise on 
the code requirement would lead directly to the demise of Western 
Civilization. (Side note: In those days, passing the 20 WPM code test was 
no big deal. You had to be a General for two years before you could even 
apply for an Extra. Any active CW operator who starts at 13 WPM will be 
well over 20 WPM after two years. The big bugaboo on the Extra was the 
written exam. I had the First Phone and Second CW for several years before 
I took a crack at Extra.)   By the early 80s when the no-code topic first 
came up in a serious way (and CBers were getting ham licenses in droves), I 
was very energetic in the effort to nip the no-code thing in the bud.


However, I now see that, after quite a few years of no-code licensing on 
VHF, we're not really closer to perdition than we were back then. As an 
exclusively CW operator, I find that CW is still thriving. Also, I do find 
no-code VHF licensees who want to learn the code, and 5 WPM Extras who want 
to get good at CW. Dropping the code requirement does not prevent the 
members of either group from doing so.


I do sympathize with Thom LaCosta's point.  Isn't the gradual relaxation of 
the Morse requirement part of an overall relaxation in standards that seems 
to be bedeviling all levels of contemporary society? Certainly, I used to 
think so. However, I once ran across a translation of a 4000 year old 
Egyptian hieroglyphic text that essentially said, I don't know how we're 
going to make it. The youth of the land don't have to achieve what we did, 
and they have no sense of responsibility. This seems to be literally an 
ages-old concern.


I expect that the real situation is that each generation needs to be good 
at different things. When we see the rising generation not placing value on 
skills we value, we forget that they are also mastering other skills which 
are indispensable to them, but on which we do not place high value.


There is one other thing that should not be forgotten. Passing a code test 
is not an assurance of either moral or intellectual virtue. It is not even 
an assurance that the passee will be a good CW operator. There seems to be 
a little enclave between 7035 and 7050 kHz where the quality of the sending 
is absolutely abysmal. Nevertheless, every one of those operators passed a 
code test, and probably well above 5 WPM.


Should the new generation of hams, especially the new Extras, by expected 
to pay the dues to get the privilege? Absolutely! Must they pay them in the 
same coin that we did?  This seems unnecessarily arbitrary.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] RE: Sad day

2005-07-21 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Stuart raises an interesting point.

Who controls the scope and format of the licensing exams?

Does the FCC require that it be a list of multiple choice questions?

If you want a fair but thorough way of assuring that new licensees pay the 
dues, why not do it on the basis of an oral exam? Each candidate spends 30 
minutes before a panel of three very experienced VEs (maybe 25 years each). 
The VEs ask questions reflecting the scope of the standard question pool. 
This need not be done in either a hostile or high pressure atmosphere. The 
objective is for candidates to demonstrate that they know what they're 
talking about. The decision to pass or fail is based on a majority vote of 
the three VEs.


This is the time honored format that is traditionally used as the Final 
Exam for PhDs.


Steve Kercel
AA4AK




At 05:00 PM 7/21/2005 -0500, you wrote:

I invite those seeking answers to why the code testing requirement was
dropped to read the FCC's definition of the ham radio service given in the
NPRM, as well as the detailed FCC comments to each of the petitions they
considered.

They clearly made a case of why test by mode, as CW is a mode; when there
are so many other modes.

They also made it clear the VEC was free to establish the test topics based
on input from the tested community and existing ham operators.

So, when the time to revise question pools is announced; be sure to notify
the VEC of what you would believe hams should be tested upon.

Stuart
K5KVH



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


Elecrafters:

I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is more 
a call to action than simply venting a complaint.


FCC Notice 05-235 has come out in the Federal Register and comments are due 
by October 31.


There are a great many of us who would at least like to see a CW 
requirement maintained for the Extra Class  exam. There is a very small 
(but real) chance that the FCC would do that if they are provided with 
novel and compelling reasons. (Note: The traditional arguments, such as 
Without the code test, ham radio will become another Citizen's Band, are 
known to the FCC, and they are unconvinced by them. We need to get the FCC 
to say, Gee, we never thought of that.) If you'd like to see some 
semblance of a code test preserved, this is the time to think outside the box.


Will such comments assure that the FCC will change their minds? Maybe not. 
However, the way for us to guarantee that the code requirement is dropped 
for all classes is for us to do nothing.


In the spirit of participatory democracy, I urge all US list members to 
file their comments, irrespective of their positions on the issue. (I 
expect that the list members should get used to filing FCC comments. There 
is worse on the way. The British government has already floated a trial 
balloon to drop ham licensing altogether in the UK. It is only a matter of 
time before the FCC tries to follow their bad example.)


If you are unfamiliar with how to file, you can check out the Web site of 
my local club:


www.ks1r.net


There I have posted an explanation of how to file and a copy of my filing 
to serve as a template.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK  



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


   Elecrafters:
   I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is
   more a call to action than simply venting a complaint.
   FCC  Notice  05-235  has come out in the Federal Register and comments
   are due by October 31.
   There  are  a  great  many  of  us who would at least like to see a CW
   requirement  maintained  for  the  Extra  Class  exam. There is a very
   small  (but  real)  chance  that  the  FCC  would  do that if they are
   provided  with  novel  and  compelling reasons. (Note: The traditional
   arguments,  such  as  Without  the  code  test, ham radio will become
   another   Citizen's  Band,  are  known  to  the  FCC,  and  they  are
   unconvinced  by  them.  We  need to get the FCC to say, Gee, we never
   thought  of that.) If you'd like to see some semblance of a code test
   preserved, this is the time to think outside the box.
   Will  such comments assure that the FCC will change their minds? Maybe
   not. However, the way for us to guarantee that the code requirement is
   dropped for all classes is for us to do nothing.
   In  the  spirit of participatory democracy, I urge all US list members
   to  file their comments, irrespective of their positions on the issue.
   (I  expect  that  the  list  members  should  get  used  to filing FCC
   comments.  There  is  worse  on  the  way.  The British government has
   already  floated  a  trial balloon to drop ham licensing altogether in
   the  UK.  It  is  only a matter of time before the FCC tries to follow
   their bad example.)
   If you are unfamiliar with how to file, you can check out the Web site
   of my local club:
   www[dot]ks1r[dot]net
   There  I  have  posted  an explanation of how to file and a copy of my
   filing to serve as a template.
   73,
   Steve Kercel
   AA4AK
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] MY SECOND K2


Eric/Nick:

Both of you are right about not trusting the cone of protection. It is 
widely used in the power industry for the design of shield wires on HV/EHV 
transmission lines and in substations. Where that concept came from was a 
set of tabletop experiments conducted by Westinghouse several generations 
ago.  However, it is well known within the power industry that the 
shielding angles are only valid for geometries very close to those in the 
Westinghouse test setup.


Then it gets worse. The shielding angle only gives you a prediction of 
probability of a hit. It is more probable outside the cone of protection 
than inside. However, one actual hit no matter how improbable will ruin 
your whole day. BTW, you cannot really design to survive a direct hit. If 
your antenna is actually struck by lightning, the antenna itself will most 
likely be destroyed, along with the coax and the rig. Also the building 
will suffer structural damage.


Inductance comes in two flavors and both of them will bite you. The pulse 
of current in a lightning stroke is a broadband signal with a peak in the 
neighborhood of 500 kHz. The problem is that the reactance to a 500 KHz 
signal arising from the self-inductance in a long ground lead may be high 
enough that the surge might seek a lower impedance path to ground, like 
maybe through your rig.  That is why you need to have a short direct 
connection from your transmission line to the ground rod located well away 
from the rig.


The other problem is the one that Nick refers to, mutual inductive 
coupling. A wavelength at 500 kHz is 600 meters (and a sixth of a 
wavelength is obviously 100 meters) This is important because, for 
electromagnetic effects, the induction field is significant out to 1/6 of a 
wavelength, and trails off rapidly further out. In other words, if 
lightning strikes anywhere within 100 meters of your station, a replica of 
the wave will be coupled into every conductor in your station. In the worst 
case scenario (a super stroke) the peak current can be several hundred kA. 
The coupling is inefficient; thus, maybe only a few to a few hundred amps 
gets coupled into your station.  This is what happens when your rig gets 
burned up, but the foundation of your house did not crack. Near misses can 
be protected against (somewhat) by short direct ground connections.


73

Steve Kercel
AA4AK



At 09:24 PM 9/1/2005 +0100, Nick Waterman wrote:

Eric J wrote:
There is a cone of protection, they say, around a high point with an 
angle of 45 degrees. I wouldn't tempt it myself. However, I'm near the 
base of a 1900' peak and I've watched lightning hit the peak, but have 
never seen lightning anywhere near the area surrounding the peak. I 
believe in the theory, but still...


There's still this thing called INDUCTANCE, and I've not done the 
maths,   but 25 kiloAmps (there's a unit you don't often use!) in one 
wire, maybe 100m away from the wire connected to your rig...


The web has figures around 500 GW. Would you let someone transmit that 
kinda power into a 3 mile antenna within a mile of your expensive kit? No 
thanks!


--
Nosey Nick Waterman, Senior Sysadmin.
#include stddisclaimer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
False hope is better than no hope at all.
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


Paul:

By far, the simplest way to file is via the FCC Web site. You just need to 
spin up a Word or Word Perfect file and attach it to your posting per the 
instructions at the Web site.


There is a procedure for handling paper copies, but I do not recommend it. 
It is too easy for it to be mishandled.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 08:25 PM 9/1/2005 -0400, you wrote:

Dr. Steve, How many copies of our letter do we need to send to the FCC?
Paul Gates
K1  #0231
KX1 #1186
XG1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


- Original Message -
From: Stephen W. Kercel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 4:28 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


 Elecrafters:

 I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is
 more
 a call to action than simply venting a complaint.

 FCC Notice 05-235 has come out in the Federal Register and comments are
 due
 by October 31.

 There are a great many of us who would at least like to see a CW
 requirement maintained for the Extra Class  exam. There is a very small
 (but real) chance that the FCC would do that if they are provided with
 novel and compelling reasons. (Note: The traditional arguments, such as
 Without the code test, ham radio will become another Citizen's Band, are
 known to the FCC, and they are unconvinced by them. We need to get the FCC
 to say, Gee, we never thought of that.) If you'd like to see some
 semblance of a code test preserved, this is the time to think outside the
 box.

 Will such comments assure that the FCC will change their minds? Maybe not.
 However, the way for us to guarantee that the code requirement is dropped
 for all classes is for us to do nothing.

 In the spirit of participatory democracy, I urge all US list members to
 file their comments, irrespective of their positions on the issue. (I
 expect that the list members should get used to filing FCC comments. There
 is worse on the way. The British government has already floated a trial
 balloon to drop ham licensing altogether in the UK. It is only a matter of
 time before the FCC tries to follow their bad example.)

 If you are unfamiliar with how to file, you can check out the Web site of
 my local club:

 www.ks1r.net


 There I have posted an explanation of how to file and a copy of my filing
 to serve as a template.

 73,

 Steve Kercel
 AA4AK


 ___
 Elecraft mailing list
 Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
 Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
 Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Code Testing: vote with your key


Wayne:

Certainly there is a principle of use it or lose it. If there is a movement 
down the road to eliminate the CW (or narrow bandwidth, if ARRL gets its 
way) segments, the key argument will be (whether valid or not) that they 
are relatively unused.


Thus, irrespective of how the code test thing turns out, we need to occupy 
the space.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 08:23 PM 9/1/2005 -0700, wayne burdick wrote:
I really enjoy CW but life/work/family interferes with pursuing it. I bet 
this is the case for many of us.


But I'm trying to make more time for operating (QSO a day keeps the FCC at 
bay?), on the theory that increased utilization of the CW segments can't 
hurt the cause. I sometimes wonder if an Elecraft Worked All HF CW 
Segments Recently certificate would be a step in the right direction ;)


See you on the air?

73,
Wayne
N6KR


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


   At 09:09 AM 9/2/2005 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 In  a  message  dated  9/1/05  4:30:13  PM  Eastern  Daylight Time,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 There  are  a  great  many  of  us who would at least like to see a
 CW
 requirement  maintained  for  the  Extra  Class  exam. There is
 a very
 small   (but   real)  chance  that  the  FCC  would  do that if
 they are
 provided   with   novel   and   compelling  reasons. (Note: The
 traditional
 arguments,  such  as  Without  the  code  test, ham radio will
 become
 anotherCitizen's   Band,   are   known  to  the  FCC,  and
 they  are
unconvinced  by  them.  We  need to get the FCC to say, Gee, we
 never
 thought   of  that.)  If you'd like to see some semblance of a
 code test
preserved, this is the time to think outside the box.

 Some ideas:
 1)  Don't  compromise on what you really want. FCC has a history of
 going  a step farther, so a comment for Extra only code tests looks
 to  them  like  a  comment  for none at all. If you think Element 1
 should stay, say so!
 2)  Point  out  the  wide  use  of  Morse  Code  on HF by hams, and
 particularly   its  use  by  hams  who  are  technically  inclined,
 homebrewers, etc.
 3)  Despite  the  popularity of the mode, hams using Morse Code are
 rarely the subject of FCC enforcement actions.
 4)  Take  the  time  to  read  the  NPRM  a  couple  of  times, and
 specifically  comment on FCC statements that you disagree with. For
 example,  FCC  called  the  FISTS  recommendations  of written-test
 changes  vague,  yet they specifically spelled out exact steps to
 be taken to improve the written tests.
 5) The reductions and eliminations in Morse Code testing since 1990
 have  not  resulted in longterm changes in the growth of US amateur
 radio.   Nor  have  they  resulted  in  an  increase  in  technical
 development, etc.
 6)  Suggest  that  FCC  could  do something similar to Canada (they
 still  have  code  testing, but the grade is considered part of the
 overall testing, not a go/nogo standalone element).
 7)  Suggest  that if the code test is eliminated, the bottom 15% of
 each HF band should be set aside for Morse Code only.
 8)  Write  your  comments  in  the  standards  form  used  by  many
 commenters.  (search  ECFS  for my comments to previous proposals -
 last name Miccolis)
 9)  Include  a  brief  description of your amateur and professional
 experience, education, etc. Whil it may feel like bragging, the FCC
 does look at who is commenting as well as what they say.
 10) Take your time, spellcheck, proofread, etc. It really matters.
 Just IMHO
 73 de Jim, N2EY

   Jim:
   Your HO includes quite a bit of wisdom.
   A few specific reactions:
   1)  Although  many on the list will not agree with me, the reason that
   my  filing is an argument keeping an Extra only code test is because
   I  actually  believe it. Speaking only for myself, I have no objection
   opening  the HF bands to people only interested in digital; so long as
   they keep out of the CW-only segments.
   2)  I  personally  agree  with  the  wide  use of CW by home brewers
   argument;  it  does  illustrate the fundamental principle of advancing
   the  radio  art.  However,  I  offer  as  how the argument needs to be
   included  in  a  context of other arguments; the FCC is unpersuaded by
   this argument alone.
   3)  This  one  is wonderful! I do not recall its having been mentioned
   before.   Do   you   have  statistics?  Are  they  readily  available?
   Bureaucrats  like  numbers.  If one could show that 99.9% (or whatever
   large  fraction) of enforcement actions are against non-CW operations,
   it would be a telling point.
   4) This is a must. It is clear to me from many of the comments already
   filed  that  the commentor has not read the Notice. Such comments will
   be  dismissed  out  of  hand.  As your FISTS example demonstrates, one
   needs  to  find  the  factual errors in the Notice (easy to do because
   there are so many) and refute them in a polite but compelling manner.
   5) Another true point.
   6) Intriguing.
   7)  Keeping  CW  only  segments  is  critical.  Unfortunately,  mode
   allocation   is  outside  the  scope  of  05-235.  I  would  encourage
   commentors on 05-235 to focus on the code test. However, there will be
   future threats to the CW segments, and whenever the FCC floats a trial
   balloon on that idea we need to strangle it in the cradle.
   8)  This  is  very  important.  Preparing the comments in the standard
   format adds enormous credibility.
   9)  Yes,  including the commentor's relevant credentials is a critical
   element  of  the  filing;  it  is  not bragging. These invitations for
   public  comment  are  not  a  popularity

Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


Jessie:

Your point is well taken. If you have not already done so, I would 
encourage you to repeat it in a filing to the FCC.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 02:12 PM 9/2/2005 -0700, Jessie Oberreuter wrote:

 I'm a little behind on QRP-L, and I'm trying to avoid contributing 
noise on the topic, but this one slipped through and caught my attention.


 I'm not sure how compelling this might be to the FCC, but it means a 
lot to me:  I think of Extra Class licensees as elmers and mentors.  As 
such, I expect an Extra Class holder to be at least knowledgeable about, 
if not proficient in, a much wider range of radio activities than the 
other classes.  Indeed, I expect an Extra to have explored activities and 
modes that he or she may not even be personally interested in simply 
because without doing that leg work, one can't be an effective mentor for 
other hams with different interests.  For example, I have virtually no 
interest in operating PSK31, but I took the time to build a warbler and 
play with the mode simply so I could offer the option to a friend who 
likes radio, but has a hard time hearing in the presents of typical band 
noise. Similarly, I have no interest in ATV, but spent time pursuing it 
just so I could help a friend who /was/ interested get a start.  Thus, 
when I run into an Extra Class op on the air who can't exchange a name 
and RST at 5wpm, I feel let down: how can you claim to be a contributor 
to the art and community without making even the most basic investment in 
the second most popular operating mode?
 The incentive to become an Extra should not be the bandwidth -- it 
should be the recognition that you are a person who cares enough about 
the hobby to become a well versed contributor.


 Thanks for the bandwidth, de kb7psg.



 Some ideas:
 1)  Don't  compromise on what you really want. FCC has a history of
 going  a step farther, so a comment for Extra only code tests looks
 to  them  like  a  comment  for none at all. If you think Element 1
 should stay, say so!
 2)  Point  out  the  wide  use  of  Morse  Code  on HF by hams, and
 particularly   its  use  by  hams  who  are  technically  inclined,
 homebrewers, etc.
 3)  Despite  the  popularity of the mode, hams using Morse Code are
 rarely the subject of FCC enforcement actions.
 4)  Take  the  time  to  read  the  NPRM  a  couple  of  times, and
 specifically  comment on FCC statements that you disagree with. For
 example,  FCC  called  the  FISTS  recommendations  of written-test
 changes  vague,  yet they specifically spelled out exact steps to
 be taken to improve the written tests.
 5) The reductions and eliminations in Morse Code testing since 1990
 have  not  resulted in longterm changes in the growth of US amateur
 radio.   Nor  have  they  resulted  in  an  increase  in  technical
 development, etc.
 6)  Suggest  that  FCC  could  do something similar to Canada (they
 still  have  code  testing, but the grade is considered part of the
 overall testing, not a go/nogo standalone element).
 7)  Suggest  that if the code test is eliminated, the bottom 15% of
 each HF band should be set aside for Morse Code only.
 8)  Write  your  comments  in  the  standards  form  used  by  many
 commenters.  (search  ECFS  for my comments to previous proposals -
 last name Miccolis)
 9)  Include  a  brief  description of your amateur and 
professional  experience, education, etc. Whil it may feel like 
bragging, the FCC

 does look at who is commenting as well as what they say.
 10) Take your time, spellcheck, proofread, etc. It really matters.
 Just IMHO
 73 de Jim, N2EY



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test


Dan:

See interposed comments.

73,

Steve
AA4AK



Instead of wasting time complaining about the FCC dropping the testing 
requirement, CW enthusiasts should be promoting its use.


***
I am not asking the list members to waste their time with recreational 
complaining.


I am asking that the list members answer the FCC's call for comments in the 
expectation that the FCC will be influenced by well reasoned input. Failing 
to do so is like failing to vote in an election. If someone does not like 
the outcome, but did nothing personally to try to stop it, they have nobody 
to blame but themselves.




One thing you can do is get on the air and make a CW contact or two every 
day. Another is to encourage all your amateur friends to work more CW. 
Invite them over to your shack and show them how much fun working CW can 
be. Make CDs with the K7QO and G4FON courses and pass them out at club 
meetings, hamfests, etc.


**
As I've already noted, I certainly agree with a use it or lose it 
principle to CW operating. It is a very unusual day that I do not have a CW 
contact. I work no other modes.

***



73!

Dan KB6NU



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Code Testing: vote with your key




I sometimes wonder if an Elecraft Worked All HF CW Segments Recently 
certificate would be a step in the right direction ;)


See you on the air?

73,
Wayne
N6KR



Wayne:

In keeping with a number of comments on the list there is something useful 
that Elecraft could do. You might consider a CW QSO Every day Award; to 
win the prize, the applicant must make a signed statement that he/she has 
made a CW contact on 365 consecutive days. Instead of checking 365 QSL 
cards, use the Honor System like ARRL does on QRP DXCC. There is not much 
motivation to lie; the reason for bucking for the award would be to do 
one's bit to keep the CW segments occupied. In fact, you might offer a 
sweetened incentive by giving a plaque (perhaps at the applicants expense) 
for anyone who does 30-plus minute daily CW ragchews for 365 consecutive 
days. Maybe post the pictures of the winners on the Elecraft Web site or 
some such thing.


73,

Steve
AA4AK




___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Popularizing CW


Dan:

I agree that in all likelihood the FCC will drop the CW requirement for all 
classes, and Western Civilization will not collapse as a consequence. 
However, I think it is useful to file comments, in the unlikely case that 
the FCC just might listen.


Nevertheless, as several people including you have mentioned, the real 
issue for us CW jocks is peopling the bands and encouraging non-CW hams to 
take up the mode.


I see several specific steps that could help:

1) The idea that Wayne brought up half in jest, of having an award for lots 
of CW contacts might be useful. I wonder if maybe some respected 
institution like QCWA might sponsor such an activity. In fact, I may bounce 
it off some of my friends in QCWA.


2) KX-1 owners (I'm not one now, but expect to be soon) could show off 
(i.e., actually demonstrate) their rigs in club meeting programs, hamfest 
forums, field days, SETs and so on. Nothing is quite as impressive as 
showing people that you can do effective communications with a rig you can 
fit into a shirt pocket.


3) I think it would be especially useful to have KX-1 owners participate in 
organized emergency drills.  Here in Maine, emergency communications is 
extremely popular. It occurs to me that having several KX-1s in a drill is 
a dramatic demonstration of here's how we do it when the repeater goes down.


4) I've been discussing with some colleagues of mine in the UNE Psych 
department a radical new strategy for teaching the code by harnessing the 
brain's natural synesthetic abilities. If I get the kinks worked out, I may 
try it on some of the local club members who have expressed an interest in 
learning the code. If I get it right, it will make learning the code far 
easier than conventional strategies.


73,
Steve
AA4AK

At 08:12 PM 9/2/2005 -0400, you wrote:

Steve--

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but even though I'm about as big a CW 
man as you can get, I've yet to hear a unique and compelling reason to 
keep the Morse Code requirement. Without those compelling reasons, filing 
a comment with the FCC is really a waste of time. This is not an election, 
and filing a comment is not like casting a ballot.


The biggest waste of resources I've seen to date is the FISTS special 
issue on the FCC's NPRM. They printed and mailed to every member the text 
of the NPRM and urged FISTS members to file comments critical of this 
move. I think the money would have been better spent sending out more K7QO 
CDs and sponsoring CW classes and contests.


CW is not going to go away should the rules be changed. There are plenty 
of CW ops, like you and me who love the mode, and the many advantages will 
keep pulling in new CW ops.


Let's spend our time wisely. And in my humble opinion, the way to do that 
is to talk up CW when we can, demonstrate it to people whenever and 
wherever, and teach newcomers how much fun it can be. That will make much 
more of an impact than filing a comment with the FCC.


73, Dan KB6NU
p.s. If you really want to file a comment with the FCC on this NPRM, might 
I suggest that you file one noting that they decided against creating a 
new entry-level class with some HF priviledges. I think this does more 
harm to CW operation than dropping the code requirement. Too many 
licensees get stuck in Tech hell where just about all they're prepared 
to do is talk on a repeater. How boring and useless is that?





___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] CW in Emergencies?

2005-09-07 Thread Stephen W. Kercel




Ralph says:



There is CW out there but sometimes the activity does
seem sparse.



I'd wondered about that. I was completely inactive from July 1983 to 
November 2004, and I've noticed that the CW bands seem a lot less populated 
now than they did 20+ years ago. For example, last night as I tuned across 
the CW end of 40 m I heard maybe 6 QSOs. Admittedly, the geomagnetic 
activity has been high and propagation over the past week has been actively 
stinking.


On the other hand, I wonder if the sparsity of transmissions is really from 
fewer hams operating, or simply from fewer hams transmitting. I expect that 
quite a few operators do what I do, listen without transmitting until 
something genuinely interesting pops up. My reason for suspecting this is 
that I repeatedly notice a remarkable phenomenon. The band will seem very 
quiet, maybe 2-3 QSOs in a 20 kHz segment, but then a rare (sometimes even 
not so rare) DX station appears, and a pileup develops literally within 
seconds, and becomes massive no later than the DX's second QSO. This 
happens too fast to be the effect of a spotting net or computerized 
spotting, I can only conclude that many operators are listening, ready to 
pounce when the moment is right.


73,

Steve
AA4AK





___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] News covering Ham operations on Katrina damage...

2005-09-08 Thread Stephen W. Kercel


Jason:

Re: The media is a joke. Amen.

Having worked for several highly visible Government agencies, I was always 
amazed at media accounts of our activities. They were nothing like the real 
story.


Thomas Jefferson once said that while he believed in freedom of the press, 
he thought that the media should be in four clearly marked sections, Truth, 
Probabilities, Possibilities, and Lies.


73,

Steve
AA4AK


At 08:44 AM 9/8/2005 -0400, Jason Hissong wrote:
I normally don't chime in on these things... My initial reaction after 
reading Mr. Screeden's comments was what a pompous jerk!  But after 
re-reading the article, I think Mr.Screeden is referring to Ham radio is 
all you got left when he is stating pretty close to nothing and not 
being demeaning. I think the reporter put his comments out of context 
which they do to stir up the pot and keep their ratings up so that people 
come back for more.  Motorola should not be apologizing (because I don't 
think his intentions were what the article leads us to believe).  I think 
the media needs to apologize.  The media is a joke.


I know that this whole disaster has motivated me to take the ARES courses 
from the ARRL and get involved in our local ARES organization.
My wife is even thinking of participating (She would make an awesome net 
controller!!!)


Going back to lurking...

Jason N8XE



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Simple DXCC Questions?

2008-03-17 Thread Stephen W. Kercel

For Deleted Countries you get credit for them if you worked them 
when they were valid countries. The DXCC list includes the valid 
dates for each deleted country. The credit applies to your basic 
count for the DXCC award and endorsements. Thus for example if you 
have 98 current countries and two deleted countries worked when they 
were valid that would qualify you for  a DXCC award.


Where Deleted Countries do not count is for the DXCC Honor 
Roll.  To make the Honor Roll, at present you need at least 329 
countries, and Deleted Countries are not counted.


73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


At 11:34 AM 3/17/2008, WILLIS COOKE wrote:

The countries that no longer exist do not count for
DXCC.  They will credit you, but count only current
countries toward the official count, I think.  I am
not totally sure about for the initial 100, but I am
certain about when you start working for the Honor
Roll.

I have been DXing for 52 years and I only have 7
deleted countries out of 316, so it is not too big of
a deal.

Cookie, K5EWJ

--- Robert Tellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi Norm
 Living in multiple locations does not seem to be
 a problem, as long as they were all within the same
 DXCC entity, in our case, the continental US.

 I think you have a choice of what call you apply
 for your DXCC under.  I worked mine as W0KMF
 when I lived in Iowa, but have N6WG now.
 When I finally get around to applying, I'll probably
 ask for the W0KMF call on the certificate.  If they
 only want to grant to your current call, that's fine
 too.

 Reaching way back will probably cause you to have
 to send your cards to ARRL for checking.  By now,
 some of the countries I have cards for no longer
 exist :-)

 Good luck and 73
 Bob N6WG

 - Original Message -
 From: Norm Klieman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Elecraft elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 6:50 AM
 Subject: [Elecraft] Simple DXCC Questions?


  I have a few basic DXCC questions and hope someone
 on
  the list could help me?
 
  If you have lived in multiple locations does that
  matter?
 
  If you have had multiple calls how does that work?
 
  How far back can you go for old QSL cards?
  Can I go back to the early 1970's as a Novice?
 
  Thanks for the help!
 
  73's -- Norm  K9NK
 
  ___
  Elecraft mailing list
  Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
  You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
  Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
   http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

 
  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
  Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
 ___
 Elecraft mailing list
 Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
 You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
 Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
  http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
 Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Key line


Elecrafters:

I was wondering how one gets a keyed line out of the K2 for keying an 
external QSK amplifier.


On the back of the K2 there is no Key Out or Amp jack or whatever.

Thanks and 73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Key line


Ken:

This is just the sort of thing I was looking for.

73,

Steve


At 04:25 PM 3/29/2008, Ken Wagner wrote:

http://www.elecraft.com/Apps/Amp_keying_ckt.htm

73, Ken K3IU

Stephen W. Kercel wrote:

Elecrafters:

I was wondering how one gets a keyed line out of the K2 for keying 
an external QSK amplifier.


On the back of the K2 there is no Key Out or Amp jack or whatever.

Thanks and 73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com



___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Re: [Elecraft] Key line


Tom:

This looks very well suited to my intended application.

73,

Steve



At 04:29 PM 3/29/2008, Tom Hammond wrote:

Steve:

See:  http://www.n0ss.net/k2_t-r_rly_drvr.pdf

73,

Tom   N0SS


At 15:06 03/29/2008, you wrote:

Elecrafters:

I was wondering how one gets a keyed line out of the K2 for keying 
an external QSK amplifier.


On the back of the K2 there is no Key Out or Amp jack or whatever.

Thanks and 73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK


___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com





___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft


Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[Elecraft] Key Line - My Mistake