Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Once upon a time a long time ago in a town far far away (San Diego) I was the branch head in charge of SSIXS (Satellite Submarine Information Systems) for FCDSSA (Fleet Combat Direction Systems Support Activity) SSIXS is a message store and forward system that provides broadcast content to be transmitted via Navy VHF/UHF SATCOM to be received by submarines at sea (Two way capability.) SSIXS also provides one way broadcast message traffic to the VLF keying site to send low data rate messages to submerged subs trailing long wire antennas as deep as 60 ft. It is not at all unusual to have these VLF transmissions received from nearly any location depending on conditions and your receiving situation. Expect the transmissions to be encrypted. Oh, by the way... The British Royal Navy has a version of our software that we sold to them and maintain and they operate their own transmission sites. For more info I suggest Jane's. Patrick AF5CK -Original Message- From: Jim Barber Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 7:14 PM Cc: Flex Radio Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Interesting. Probably lots of silence and nav beepings out here on the west coast, tho. 73, Jim N7CXI On 3/10/2013 2:13 PM, Ken Alexander wrote: Hi Terry, There are sixteen longwave broadcast frequencies between 153 kHz and 279 kHz, spaced 9 kHz apart (except for 177 and 183, which have remained on some older layout). Several of the stations are reasonably strong here in Ontario (I'm in Newmarket) but less so than most shortwave broadcasters. All stations broadcast in their local languages, so you'll only find English on 198 kHz (BBC) and 252 kHz (Ireland). When conditions are good and quiet (low K-Index) then the band wil open up a little and you can hear multiple stations on each frequency and weaker stations from eastern Europe and Russia fading in. In addition to broadcasters there are Navtex weather broadcasts to shipping on 518 kHz, and DGPS (differential GPS) stations that support shipping navigation. There are time stations on 60 kHz and 77 kHz and naval communications in encrypted digital modes down even lower. I have had good luck with my Flex-1500 and a 500 kHz lowpass filter I built to keep the mediumwave broadcasters out. I use a 6 ft diameter active loop antenna, which provides good reception. 73, Ken Alexander VE3HLS From: Terry Maurice ve3...@execulink.com To: Lee Mushel herbe...@centurytel.net Cc: vtnn...@comcast.net; Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 4:20:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Interesting, comments on the K1EL converter and its use with the Flex radios. A question for those who have listened on the VLF bands. Is there much in the way of activity there, other than beacons? I know that these frequencies are used in Europe for commercial broadcasting, but are these signals receivable in North America other than in coastal areas? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks Terry On 09/03/2013 14:46, Lee Mushel wrote: Zack, I certainly wish I had known about the K1EL a few years ago when I first applied for membership in the MF Experimental Group. I had one of the first Flex5000As and I thought that with a resource like that plus virtually unlimited space for an antenna that I would be able to make a contribution to this effort. And I hurriedly put up a 1,500 ft. beverage and assembled a 12 ft. dia. loop as well. As is indicated in the review you mention, I slowly and painfully learned about things like lack of sensitivity at low frequencies of the 5000A and what broadcast band images were along with the nature of filters and a lot of other stuff as well! I had put together K1ELs keyer but somehow had managed to miss the existence of his converter! I do hope that your posting will save a lot of fellows the pain I went through since 500 kHz surely isn't anything like 80 meters! 73 Lee K9WRUWD2XSH-32 - Original Message - From: vtnn...@comcast.net To: Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ -- *VE3XTM* EN93un May the propagation be with you. ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex
[Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Now if only someone comes out with a transverter (Elecraft would be nice) once we get the VLF allocation things would get very interesting. Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with Flex Radios
K0od has used both the Palomar and the Heros VLF converter. I would like to see a side by side comparision of the two converters. Also a YouTube video of the two in a side by side comparison on a Flex. -- On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 10:45 AM PST vtnn...@comcast.net wrote: Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Interesting, comments on the K1EL converter and its use with the Flex radios. A question for those who have listened on the VLF bands. Is there much in the way of activity there, other than beacons? I know that these frequencies are used in Europe for commercial broadcasting, but are these signals receivable in North America other than in coastal areas? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks Terry On 09/03/2013 14:46, Lee Mushel wrote: Zack, I certainly wish I had known about the K1EL a few years ago when I first applied for membership in the MF Experimental Group. I had one of the first Flex5000As and I thought that with a resource like that plus virtually unlimited space for an antenna that I would be able to make a contribution to this effort. And I hurriedly put up a 1,500 ft. beverage and assembled a 12 ft. dia. loop as well. As is indicated in the review you mention, I slowly and painfully learned about things like lack of sensitivity at low frequencies of the 5000A and what broadcast band images were along with the nature of filters and a lot of other stuff as well! I had put together K1ELs keyer but somehow had managed to miss the existence of his converter! I do hope that your posting will save a lot of fellows the pain I went through since 500 kHz surely isn't anything like 80 meters! 73 Lee K9WRUWD2XSH-32 - Original Message - From: vtnn...@comcast.net To: Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ -- *VE3XTM* EN93un May the propagation be with you. ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Hi Terry, There are sixteen longwave broadcast frequencies between 153 kHz and 279 kHz, spaced 9 kHz apart (except for 177 and 183, which have remained on some older layout). Several of the stations are reasonably strong here in Ontario (I'm in Newmarket) but less so than most shortwave broadcasters. All stations broadcast in their local languages, so you'll only find English on 198 kHz (BBC) and 252 kHz (Ireland). When conditions are good and quiet (low K-Index) then the band wil open up a little and you can hear multiple stations on each frequency and weaker stations from eastern Europe and Russia fading in. In addition to broadcasters there are Navtex weather broadcasts to shipping on 518 kHz, and DGPS (differential GPS) stations that support shipping navigation. There are time stations on 60 kHz and 77 kHz and naval communications in encrypted digital modes down even lower. I have had good luck with my Flex-1500 and a 500 kHz lowpass filter I built to keep the mediumwave broadcasters out. I use a 6 ft diameter active loop antenna, which provides good reception. 73, Ken Alexander VE3HLS From: Terry Maurice ve3...@execulink.com To: Lee Mushel herbe...@centurytel.net Cc: vtnn...@comcast.net; Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 4:20:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Interesting, comments on the K1EL converter and its use with the Flex radios. A question for those who have listened on the VLF bands. Is there much in the way of activity there, other than beacons? I know that these frequencies are used in Europe for commercial broadcasting, but are these signals receivable in North America other than in coastal areas? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks Terry On 09/03/2013 14:46, Lee Mushel wrote: Zack, I certainly wish I had known about the K1EL a few years ago when I first applied for membership in the MF Experimental Group. I had one of the first Flex5000As and I thought that with a resource like that plus virtually unlimited space for an antenna that I would be able to make a contribution to this effort. And I hurriedly put up a 1,500 ft. beverage and assembled a 12 ft. dia. loop as well. As is indicated in the review you mention, I slowly and painfully learned about things like lack of sensitivity at low frequencies of the 5000A and what broadcast band images were along with the nature of filters and a lot of other stuff as well! I had put together K1ELs keyer but somehow had managed to miss the existence of his converter! I do hope that your posting will save a lot of fellows the pain I went through since 500 kHz surely isn't anything like 80 meters! 73 Lee K9WRU WD2XSH-32 - Original Message - From: vtnn...@comcast.net To: Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ -- *VE3XTM* EN93un May the propagation be with you. ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Interesting. Probably lots of silence and nav beepings out here on the west coast, tho. 73, Jim N7CXI On 3/10/2013 2:13 PM, Ken Alexander wrote: Hi Terry, There are sixteen longwave broadcast frequencies between 153 kHz and 279 kHz, spaced 9 kHz apart (except for 177 and 183, which have remained on some older layout). Several of the stations are reasonably strong here in Ontario (I'm in Newmarket) but less so than most shortwave broadcasters. All stations broadcast in their local languages, so you'll only find English on 198 kHz (BBC) and 252 kHz (Ireland). When conditions are good and quiet (low K-Index) then the band wil open up a little and you can hear multiple stations on each frequency and weaker stations from eastern Europe and Russia fading in. In addition to broadcasters there are Navtex weather broadcasts to shipping on 518 kHz, and DGPS (differential GPS) stations that support shipping navigation. There are time stations on 60 kHz and 77 kHz and naval communications in encrypted digital modes down even lower. I have had good luck with my Flex-1500 and a 500 kHz lowpass filter I built to keep the mediumwave broadcasters out. I use a 6 ft diameter active loop antenna, which provides good reception. 73, Ken Alexander VE3HLS From: Terry Maurice ve3...@execulink.com To: Lee Mushel herbe...@centurytel.net Cc: vtnn...@comcast.net; Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 4:20:40 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Interesting, comments on the K1EL converter and its use with the Flex radios. A question for those who have listened on the VLF bands. Is there much in the way of activity there, other than beacons? I know that these frequencies are used in Europe for commercial broadcasting, but are these signals receivable in North America other than in coastal areas? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks Terry On 09/03/2013 14:46, Lee Mushel wrote: Zack, I certainly wish I had known about the K1EL a few years ago when I first applied for membership in the MF Experimental Group. I had one of the first Flex5000As and I thought that with a resource like that plus virtually unlimited space for an antenna that I would be able to make a contribution to this effort. And I hurriedly put up a 1,500 ft. beverage and assembled a 12 ft. dia. loop as well. As is indicated in the review you mention, I slowly and painfully learned about things like lack of sensitivity at low frequencies of the 5000A and what broadcast band images were along with the nature of filters and a lot of other stuff as well! I had put together K1ELs keyer but somehow had managed to miss the existence of his converter! I do hope that your posting will save a lot of fellows the pain I went through since 500 kHz surely isn't anything like 80 meters! 73 Lee K9WRUWD2XSH-32 - Original Message - From: vtnn...@comcast.net To: Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ -- *VE3XTM* EN93un May the propagation be with you. ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/ ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
[Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with Flex Radios
Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios
Zack, I certainly wish I had known about the K1EL a few years ago when I first applied for membership in the MF Experimental Group. I had one of the first Flex5000As and I thought that with a resource like that plus virtually unlimited space for an antenna that I would be able to make a contribution to this effort. And I hurriedly put up a 1,500 ft. beverage and assembled a 12 ft. dia. loop as well. As is indicated in the review you mention, I slowly and painfully learned about things like lack of sensitivity at low frequencies of the 5000A and what broadcast band images were along with the nature of filters and a lot of other stuff as well! I had put together K1ELs keyer but somehow had managed to miss the existence of his converter! I do hope that your posting will save a lot of fellows the pain I went through since 500 kHz surely isn't anything like 80 meters! 73 Lee K9WRUWD2XSH-32 - Original Message - From: vtnn...@comcast.net To: Flex Radio flexradio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: [Flexradio] Eham review - K1EL VLF Converter and its Use with FlexRadios Found an interesting review by K0OD about using the K1EL systems VLF converter with a Flex-5000. http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5541 K1EL http://www.k1el.com/ 73 Zack N8FNR ___ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flexradio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flexradio.com/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Lee, Well, you have a point with the VOX problem as that shouldn't require a minimum delay system to run. I suspect the VOX will soon or has been solved. I don't use VOX as I can't think or talk fast enough to keep it pulled in without an inordinate hang time. PINs: Come to think of it I have an Ameritron PIN diode board that I actually had running for a few times. Got sidetracked by other interests at the time so its in the attic at the moment. Maybe the CW solution is to use a realtime operating system a la the programmable logic controllers that are used for machine control. I've installed many on all kinds of machines in the past and they were quick considering the little processor ran at a few MHz. Then run the windows programs on the side for the display stuff. Hmmm, I bet it can be done in the same computer with a bit of time slicing. If you are expecting a complete, bug free radio then the SDR stuff is not for you. It is a paradigm shift in the way radios are conceived, built and operated. There are problems now but most of them will be solved. There hasn't yet been a fundamental limitation to the present scheme. The main software is undergoing another internal reorganization to make it much more modular instead of the original spaghetti code. This should allow many more of the programmer types to contribute to the system. As far as the receiver goes, of the many I've used over the past 50 years this is the best for several reasons, its affordable, flexible and neat to play with. 73, Larry K2LT At 10:48 AM 10/7/2005 -0700, you wrote: What you say is true. However my point is that you miss the 800 pound gorilla in the room when touting your rig as having MAN'S BEST RECIEVER, and you can't get a friggin vox to work. I use pin diodes to do what you did with the 6SN7's by the way. My point in writing was that it is not clear to me that a little fiddleing with the software is going to make the system behave. You have proposed yet another hardware based fix of a seperate system of transmitter and reciever, with dedicated switching. Your solution I think is a good one, but note this is basically a 2 processor/memory/soundcard plus switching hardware solution and is exactly what I was driving at: How ya gonna solve the glaring deficiencies in the radio. If it is going to require a redesign then I'm waiting to throw my 1500 bux in the pot. 73 Lee W9OY -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267 - Release Date: 10/7/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Jim Lux wrote (of my dream): Why not have it spit out on Ethernet? I thought about this at length. I think it is better and more flexible for the hypothetical new SDR (even with the added USB/micro in between us and the current rig) to be a USB 2.0 appliance rather than a network appliance. The network appliance would be at the next level up (Windows orLinux, user choice) and would enable a lot of the customization people are probably interested in doing (command line versus GUI, true network port/portal versus TightVNC, etc.). Keeping the device simple and low level allows lots of options and is also easier to setup for many. For instance, there's cases like mobile computing where one may not want to deal with the added complexity of a network at all. Just toss it in the car, hook up the USB, and get on the air. By not requiring a network, that whole process is less complicated and is accessible to more people, even in the base station case. Larry WO0Z
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Ah. Thanks for clearing this up. Mine ALL had the linear regulator, and we did in fact have to remove those and replace them with the regulator on the other side of the board to mount to the heat sink. I was wondering which of us had lost their minds. WHile it wasn't that, I am clearly losing my memory! But the end analysis says, all of these changes retrofit on the originial boards. Bob Lyle Johnson wrote: While not exactly an ECO (more a design change), the 5V regulator was originally a switcher and is now a linear. (not documented on the website list of ECOs) Actually, it was *originally* a linear regulator. Some users were concerned about the heat from the regulator in the original three board stack with no case. The switcher was found and installed by many. SDR-1000s were briefly produced with the switcher from the factory, as I recall. Later, some objected to the switcher RFI/noise and production SDR-1000s went back to linear regulators. Around that time the case appeared and made heatsinking it less of a problem. Enjoy! Lyle KK7P -- Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged!
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
If a decision is made to abandon the serial port protocol I would go for ethernet so that the radio *can* be put on a network. Simon Brown, HB9DRV --- www.sysgem.com, www.hb9drv.ch, www.laax.ch --- - Original Message - From: Larry Loen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought about this at length. I think it is better and more flexible for the hypothetical new SDR (even with the added USB/micro in between us and the current rig) to be a USB 2.0 appliance rather than a network appliance. The network appliance would be at the next level up (Windows orLinux, user choice) and would enable a lot of the customization people are probably interested in doing (command line versus GUI, true network port/portal versus TightVNC, etc.). Keeping the device simple and low level allows lots of options and is also easier to setup for many. For instance, there's cases like mobile computing where one may not want to deal with the added complexity of a network at all. Just toss it in the car, hook up the USB, and get on the air. By not requiring a network, that whole process is less complicated and is accessible to more people, even in the base station case.
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
That can be done right now if someone wants to take up integrating the Socket Utilities Library and TCPListener Class that I wrote into the current PowerSDR source code. I added it to a test version of PowerSDR 1.3.12 (see blog entry for Tuesday, June 28, 2005 at http://pcovington.blogspot.com/) that supported up to 10 concurrent connections on a user defined port. Basically it interfaces in the exact same way that the SIOListener Class does for serial CAT comms, so it will seemlessly work with Bob Tracy's CAT code as-is. There is another app on my webpage that bridges the vCOM (or hardware) serial ports to TCP to allow programs like HRD to connect over a network. Or someone can just connect on the TCP port and send CAT commands to PowerSDR over the network. I still use my patched PowerSDR 1.3.12 version from time to time when I want to listen to the SDR-1000 from my laptop outside (over wireless LAN) running HRD on the laptop. All the code is available from my website and I can send anyone that requests it, the PowerSDR 1.3.12 source code with the TCPListener mod if they want to take up integrating it into the current 1.4.5 source code. 73 de Phil N8VB On 10/7/05, Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If a decision is made to abandon the serial port protocol I would go for ethernet so that the radio *can* be put on a network. Simon Brown, HB9DRV --- www.sysgem.com, www.hb9drv.ch, www.laax.ch
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Of course I should note that you will still have to have a PC connected to the SDR-1000 but that can be easily done with a mini-itx board. Better, yet it would be cool to strip most or all of the GUI stuff out of PowerSDR except for the setup forms (to make setting changes to the database - this could be done in a separate app too) and just command the radio via CAT over TCP or serial. 73 de Phil N8VB On 10/7/05, Philip Covington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That can be done right now if someone wants to take up integrating the Socket Utilities Library and TCPListener Class that I wrote into the current PowerSDR source code. I added it to a test version of PowerSDR 1.3.12 (see blog entry for Tuesday, June 28, 2005 at http://pcovington.blogspot.com/) that supported up to 10 concurrent connections on a user defined port. Basically it interfaces in the exact same way that the SIOListener Class does for serial CAT comms, so it will seemlessly work with Bob Tracy's CAT code as-is. There is another app on my webpage that bridges the vCOM (or hardware) serial ports to TCP to allow programs like HRD to connect over a network. Or someone can just connect on the TCP port and send CAT commands to PowerSDR over the network. I still use my patched PowerSDR 1.3.12 version from time to time when I want to listen to the SDR-1000 from my laptop outside (over wireless LAN) running HRD on the laptop. All the code is available from my website and I can send anyone that requests it, the PowerSDR 1.3.12 source code with the TCPListener mod if they want to take up integrating it into the current 1.4.5 source code. 73 de Phil N8VB On 10/7/05, Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If a decision is made to abandon the serial port protocol I would go for ethernet so that the radio *can* be put on a network. Simon Brown, HB9DRV --- www.sysgem.com, www.hb9drv.ch, www.laax.ch -- Philip A Covington http://www.philcovington.com
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Simon Brown wrote: If a decision is made to abandon the serial port protocol I would go for ethernet so that the radio *can* be put on a network. Simon Brown, HB9DRV --- www.sysgem.com, www.hb9drv.ch, www.laax.ch --- And, under my scheme, nothing whatever would stop you from doing so. It would happen in the most natural and obvious way -- you'd hook it up to your PC using USB, put your PC on the net (which would be smart enough to deal with firewalls, IPv4 versus IPv6 whenever that becomes important and a host of other things known and unknown). You'd be able to run the regular code with TightVNC or custom code that dealt with incoming requests more directly. Meanwhile, you would not be _required_ to put the radio on a network to use it in the ordinary fashion, a skill some people do not possess in abundance or which some would not wish to exercise in their automobile if they take their SDR mobile. There, USB is a much, much simpler interface. It's really a question of where the complexity belongs. Networks are nasty little things and it's ideal for a real computer. We could do it at the peripheral level, but for the reasons I give, I think we'd repent of it quickly. Besides, the USB line is assuredly dedicated and it would also simplify timing questions not to have even the possibility of an ethernet collision. Larry WO0Z
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Lee A Crocker wrote: When I read the QST review and I see this kind of report: Although I could not altogether eliminate the delay, I was able to train my brain to work with it. And then I look at the CW waveform and there are 2 key closures before the first dit is transmitted, it make me very nervous when I see the CW issue and other design flaws being devalued, or the true cost of ownership vs. performance as a real problems. THe Flex people have been very upfront about the issues, but on the reflector it tends to get whitewashed. The CW question is what keeps me from throwing in my money. Is there any chance we will see QSK, or even true semi-break-in CW with the FLEX? I fear some may say, why make new technology accomodate an obsolete mode? If that is the case, and CW will remain an orphan in the Flexradio, then I wiould be better off looking elsewhere. -- _ _ _ _ _ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( G ) ( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ CRUSTY OLD CURMUDGEON - AND PROUD OF IT!
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
John Sielke: The CW question is what keeps me from throwing in my money. Is there any chance we will see QSK, or even true semi-break-in CW with the FLEX? I fear some may say, why make new technology accomodate an obsolete mode? If that is the case, and CW will remain an orphan in the Flexradio, then I wiould be better off looking elsewhere. -- Many tears and blood have been shed over the CW part of this radio. I have worked, now, about 127 contries in less than six months with the most modest antenna I have ever put up (G5RV as a sloper, apex at about 33 feet). I've done a bunch of RTTY lately, so I can't readily break down which is which, country-wise and of course some are done with both, but well over half of that 127 count are done with CW without doubt. I've broken pileups like Oman with it, too. This winter, I plan to get DXCC on 80 and CW features prominently in these plans. If you're a CW purist, you're going to have some trouble, however. But, at least if your main interest is chasing DX, as opposed to high speed rag chewing, it gets the job done and, nowadays, quite nicely. The more recent levels of software (starting at 1.4.1) are a substantial improvement over the past, so some of this you may read about is old news, too. But, there are some inherent problems in trying to key CW via a parallel port. The software masks these problems admirably however. Some report really fine success using an old fashioned serial port to key the transmitter. I haven't tried that yet, and I may yet do so. That will get you closer by all accounts. I can report that the radio as it stands is very usable, albeit not ideal. But, I'm running CW every night and I'm getting results. Maybe you should make a sked with someone and have a listen to how it sounds. Is it possible to find someone nearby that has one and give it a try? In the end, that's the acid test. Larry WO0Z
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Lee, Gerald's response should be considered the official response from FlexRadio on the less than perfect eham review. (link below) http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexradio_flex-radio.biz/2005-Octob er/002698.html Consider the following my personal response: Note that we have never pitched this radio as QSK or a perfect CW rig. Having said that, it is a darn good setup for CW enthusiasts mainly due to the high quality receiver/filters. Add a keyer with a sidetone (to eliminate any DSP delay) and you can have your cake and eat it too. The complaints about the craftsmanship of the enclosure are unfounded regarding the microphone connector and wiring. The 1/8 connectors are probably the weakest point in the current hardware. It helps to understand how this radio came about. Gerald spent years dreaming up this radio and working on it as a hobby. He laid out the prototype and coded the original VB application in his spare time while getting excellent advice from experts around the globe via the internet. Gerald spent time to write the 4 QEX articles (see our Articles link on the webpage) and the interest was so great that he turned it into a business. Now, given the radio's infancy, it is not hard to understand why the current radio uses the parallel port and 1/8 connectors. This is what everyone already had on their desk! Is it a perfect hardware design from a reliability stance? No. Having an 1/8 cable get pulled out unexpectedly can be frustrating. But it is hardly a showstopper. The drawbacks pale in comparison to the operating fun this radio offers. Not to mention that the performance compares with radios costing 10x as much. ;) As someone else stated, probably the best situation would be to have you find someone near you with an SDR-1000 and go get a hands on demo. Seeing/hearing is believing. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of Lee A Crocker Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:34 AM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Eham Review At the risk of being antagonistic, I would like to hear an accurate analysis from users about the problems with this design. I see a lot of apologetics and denial regarding the this review: Eham is stupid The problem is the antenna The guy has old boards yada yada yada I am on the fence about purchasing one of these based on what I percieve as some design issues that eventually will need to be addressed, and it is very unclear how they will in fact be resolved. One issue is that people tend to address hardware as only the SDR-1K box. This clearly is not rational as the entire system is devised to be worked against a computer/soundcard combo, so that aspect of hardware is integral to the system and it is not secondary as far as performance is concerned. So where does the hardware go? 2 soundcards has been suggested? 2 computers with one processor dedicated to being the hertbeat of the radio and the other dedicated to being a console/control? Gigabit networking to connect these now three boxes? Maybe a multi-processor multi-soundcard workstation? Now the $1500 radio starts looking like a $4000 radio. I read a recent thread where a man was considering what computer to go with and wound up going with a dual core AMD machine, no small expense. Others have talked about 3+ gig pentium 4 machines especially if you want CW due to the better timing characteristics of the P-4 machine. That comment will probably start a spate of I got mine runnin on my trusty ol 386, but the point is I think these considerations need to be part of the discussion if one is going to be honest about the real cost/benefit/performance analysis of the system, and the future expandibilty of the hardware. I have noticed a tendancy on this reflector to sweep the problems with this design under the rug as if they are to be expected QSK no we don't do QSK CW well it really has a good CW reciever buttt... VOX any day now... any day now. I don't think these issues are going to be solved by spiffing up the code a little. You may see a marginal improvement by code diddling but it would appear to me a redesing in system philosphy is where it's at. That being said I find the concept of this radio and the response I have witnessed by the folks at flex are superb, and I don't mean to sound critical but not addressing these issues directly is what invites the kind of EHAM review that was issued, and padding EHAM with a bunch of why its the best radio since sliced bread propaganda does nothing to advance the state of the art. It only serves to muddy the water. When I read the QST review and I see this kind of report: Although I could not altogether eliminate the delay, I was able to train my brain to work with it. And then I look at the CW waveform and there are 2 key
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Let me address a few more concerns: RFI: Most of us are aware that a radiating feedline could cause RFI in the shack. I definitely have a problem here. Alan Davis, N2WS, helped explain why. Basically, I built a cheapo G5RV without the balun at the feedpoint (based on bad advise, many field days ago). I need to get around to putting in a Balun -- I even have one, but I don't think it's good for a KW, so I haven't done this yet. My biggest problem was solved when I put a ferrite bead (the usual one available everywhere for about a dollar) on my PC's keyboard cable. Still have some problems (e.g. get into my own TV), but it's workable until I get around to the KW capable balun. It has not inhibited progress any more than it would have with previous rigs where I made similar mistakes :-) . So where does the hardware go? 2 soundcards has been suggested? 2 computers with one processor dedicated to being the hertbeat of the radio and the other dedicated to being a console/control? Gigabit networking to connect these now three boxes? Maybe a multi-processor multi-soundcard workstation? Now the $1500 radio starts looking like a $4000 radio. Two sound cards is, strictly speaking, only necessary for RTTY. You can't have VOX without it, but at least in my case, I did without VOX years ago. Even on my nice TS 930S, I found it more trouble than it was worth. But, it's only an absolute necessity for RTTY unless you think VOX is absolutely necessary. The second sound card can be practically anything if you have a Delta 44 for the one running the SDR. I had a 35 dollar Turtle Beach card I was using before the D44 and using it for RTTY has worked superb. I could probably use it for other things (e.g. SSB input maybe), but it isn't a priority for me. As for horsepower, I think it could be true (especially for CW, perhaps) that a slower PC is marginal. Make sure you have [EMAIL PROTECTED] and things like that turned off, too. But, my 2.4 GHz box hardly breathes when running this. Typically around 30 per cent, peak. My 1.4 GHz Celeron laptop (not bought with this in mind) is going to Belize, having already shown it can do the job (more marginally, to be sure, but it works). But, it just isn't that hard or expensive to get a desktop PC above 1.5 GHz nowadays that's either a good Athlon or a true Pentium IV type. Compared to a 10K rig, even the extra 500 dollars (and, if you work at it, less) for a stronger PC is a bargain comparing this radio to its conventional competition. The desktop will, of course, permit the Delta 44, which by itself solves a host of problems and raises quality a bit. Larry WO0Z
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
John, The current hardware is not QSK as the time required to switch the TR relays at this point is 50ms minimum. This doesn't mean that someone (including FlexRadio) will not figure out a way to modify the hardware for QSK. It just means that the current hardware will not do better than Semi Break in. Which brings me to ask: Can you define true semi-break-in? Without a clear definition, I have a hard time qualifying whether our radio will meet your expectations. Suffice it to say that FlexRadio is VERY interested in continuing to improve the CW operation of the SDR-1000. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of W2AGN Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:52 AM To: Lee A Crocker Cc: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review The CW question is what keeps me from throwing in my money. Is there any chance we will see QSK, or even true semi-break-in CW with the FLEX? I fear some may say, why make new technology accomodate an obsolete mode? If that is the case, and CW will remain an orphan in the Flexradio, then I wiould be better off looking elsewhere. -- _ _ _ _ _ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( G ) ( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Bom dia. Oi. For me, this was an informative and interesting review. I am very seriously considering the purchase of an SDR-1000. In preparation, I have upgraded my computer, purchased the Delta44 and Eric's ground isolation kit. The only thing that has prevented me from purchasing one to date is that I had to leave the country for 2 months on business. I am going into my SDR-1000 adventure with my eyes wide open. I am aware that the software is a work in progress and that this is not an appliance operator type of radio. No problem. I've lived on the cutting edge before so I know what to expect. The support and contributions of this group also has lessened my fears that the ~$1500 will be a well spent future investment. What concerns me is that a core part of my reasoning for going ahead with the SDR-1000 purchase was based on the assumption that the hardware component of the radio was, for the most part solid. I am aware that there have been minor improvements in the past to correct issues. That is to be expected. But the e-ham review brought up some interesting issues. Mostly about the construction quality, PA oscillations and RF susceptibility. I realize that one review doesn't properly describe the true state of things, but along with the other threads on this forum about problems being attributed to cold solder joints, I started wondering about my future purchase. The rebuttal e-ham review by KD5RD clearly defined the well known accolades and potential issues of *software* defined radios but doesn't address any of the hardware construction issues raised by AA8VL. Therefore I am interested in the discussion that this review will generate in this forum and also on e-ham. Hopefully my fears will be abated by the responses. Até logo 73 de W4TME -Tim --- Integrated Technical Services You can't close the door when the walls cave in --Robert Hunter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of VA3MA - Dan Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 11:16 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Eham Review http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4108#42946 Not a nice review - yet is buying another! ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Here's the post that I plan to put on Eham I’ve had my SDR1000 since the beginning of the year. It is my 3,018 radio-yes I’ve owned over 3000 rigs during 45 plus years of hamming. The only rig I’ve not used is the Yaesu FT9000. In the beginning, pre-Delta 44 sound card, I had to deal with a few problems. I expected the problems because, at the time of purchase, the SDR was still in development. And, although, at times I got frustrated, I really enjoyed the challenge of working with a radio on the cutting edge of technology. Today, the radio is not a work in progress but a fully capable radio that exceeds all my expectations. In short, it ranks number 1 on my list of all time favorite radios. Here are just a few reasons why I like my SDR1000. The best receiver that I’ve ever owned-any filter combination I desire! The best sounding transmitter I’ve ever owned-any transmitter width I desire up to 20 KHz! The most versatile radio I’ve ever owned-I can save all operating parameters by just storing them in a data base file! The best and easiest to use display panel of any radio I’ve ever owned! Unique and/or superior features like a lab grade spectrum scope, noise gate, 31 band EQ on receive and transmit, sweep generator, absolute control of receiver sensitivity and power output and much, much more The simplest computer controlled radio I’ve ever used! The most fun radio I’ve ever used! And, because software updates are issued several times a month, I feel like I have a new radio every time new software is released. To put it simply, I have a radio that performs like a radio costing over $10 grand but costing well under $2K and it will only get better! As for RF, until recently, I ran a Henry 4K amp without a single bit of RF in my audio. To ensure the SDR1000 was RFI proof I ran tests by increasing the RF in my shack to the point where all five of my rigs had RFI. The solution to eliminating all RFI was the same on all rigs-I put snap-on beads on the microphone cables. [The ultimate solution is to have an RF shielded shack.] The SDR had no more or less RFI than the other radios. [Note: users of the early SDRs reported RFI, which was really audio distortion from improper bias settings. This has been corrected.] With regard to the SDR1000 not being for the faint of heart, this might have been true in the early days, but the Flex Radio’s turn key system is as finished a product as any other radio on the market. The biggest difference is the Flex Radio gets significantly better every time you download new software. If you want PERFORMANCE and EXCITEMENT and LOW COST get a FLEX RADIO SDR1000! In a message dated 10/6/2005 8:24:33 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bom dia. Oi.For me, this was an informative and interesting review. I am very seriously considering the purchase of an SDR-1000. In preparation, I have upgraded my computer, purchased the Delta44 and Eric's ground isolation kit. The only thing that has prevented me from purchasing one to date is that I had to leave the country for 2 months on business.I am going into my SDR-1000 adventure with my eyes wide open. I am aware that the software is a work in progress and that this is not an "appliance operator" type of radio. No problem. I've lived on the cutting edge before so I know what to expect. The support and contributions of this group also has lessened my fears that the ~$1500 will be a well spent future investment.What concerns me is that a core part of my reasoning for going ahead with the SDR-1000 purchase was based on the assumption that the hardware component of the radio was, for the most part solid. I am aware that there have been minor improvements in the past to correct issues. That is to be expected.But the e-ham review brought up some interesting issues. Mostly about the construction quality, PA oscillations and RF susceptibility. I realize that one review doesn't properly describe the true state of things, but along with the other threads on this forum about problems being attributed to cold solder joints, I started wondering about my future purchase.The rebuttal e-ham review by KD5RD clearly defined the well known accolades and potential issues of *software* defined radios but doesn't address any of the hardware construction issues raised by AA8VL.Therefore I am interested in the discussion that this review will generate in this forum and also on e-ham. Hopefully my fears will be abated by the responses.Até logo73 de W4TME-Tim---Integrated Technical Services "You can't close the door when the walls cave in" --Robert Hunter-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of VA3MA - DanSent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 11:16 PMTo: FlexRadio@flex-radio.bizSubject: [Flexradio] Eham Reviewhttp://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4108#42946Not a
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
and contributions of this group also has lessened my fears that the ~$1500 will be a well spent future investment. What concerns me is that a core part of my reasoning for going ahead with the SDR-1000 purchase was based on the assumption that the hardware component of the radio was, for the most part solid. I am aware that there have been minor improvements in the past to correct issues. That is to be expected. But the e-ham review brought up some interesting issues. Mostly about the construction quality, PA oscillations and RF susceptibility. I realize that one review doesn't properly describe the true state of things, but along with the other threads on this forum about problems being attributed to cold solder joints, I started wondering about my future purchase. The rebuttal e-ham review by KD5RD clearly defined the well known accolades and potential issues of *software* defined radios but doesn't address any of the hardware construction issues raised by AA8VL. Therefore I am interested in the discussion that this review will generate in this forum and also on e-ham. Hopefully my fears will be abated by the responses. Até logo 73 de W4TME -Tim --- Integrated Technical Services You can't close the door when the walls cave in --Robert Hunter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of VA3MA - Dan Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 11:16 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: [Flexradio] Eham Review http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4108#42946 Not a nice review - yet is buying another! ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Well, let’s look at the complaints. “RF suppression is inadequate. The SDR has little to NO RF shielding. This means if you run an external amplifier...GOOD LUCK! If you run the internal 100W PA... you will need some luck as well. This radio was originally designed as a QRP 1 watt transmitter... since then they added a 100W PA without adding suppression...youre just asking for problems.” It’s a metal enclosure. If you use shielded cables to connect to it, you may be okay. I remember decades ago when I used to get an RF burn on my lip when it touched the microphone. RF in the shack is often an antenna/feedline issue. I haven’t hooked up an external amplifier yet, but I am running the 100 Watt internal PA. I was disappointed with the output power until the software version 1.4.4 came out. Now there's lots of power. I don’t use a direct microphone input, but I use an old Shure microphone mixer ($20 on eBay) that gives me flexibility on transmit audio sources, and I can turn down the sound card gain and avoid RFI issues. “The SDR's PA board oscillates between 1 watt and 200 watts all by itself (most notably when running an external amplifier on the lower frequencies, but occasionally if you're not running an amp and on the higher bands). I have partially cured this instability by running additional grounding.” I have not observed this. My SDR-1000 was ordered at Dayton 2005. I have since done the PA bias adjustment ECO. One fellow was having problems until he re-soldered some suspicious-looking solder joints on the PA “-The radio locks up in receive, transmit, or both a little more often than periodically. I talked to flex and this is a known issue that should be taken care of in newer models.” I have not observed this. Note: by applying the Engineering Change Orders and updating the software, you have the latest version of the transceiver. “-The sound card recommended is a Delta 44 which has 1/2 inch Phono connectors...the SDR connectors are sloppy 1/8 inch connectors. When you plug the cables in you can feel the guts of the radio shift back and forth...and the 1/8 inch input cables are cheesy and prone to just fall out of the radio. The power terminals to the SDR are cheesy. The whole 4 pin mic connector just spins when you try to screw on a mic. Basically all the connectors on the SDR chassis are cheesy and weak. You can plug the parallel cable upside down into the radio and not even know it!!!” Yeah, the miniature phone jacks are not the most elegant choice, but it was originally designed for a PC sound card. There are a bunch of these connectors in use in the world. If you don’t have a plug with extra molding around it that keeps it from seating properly through the back panel holes, it works. The power terminals are traditional binding posts. I’d like to use a banana plug, but it won’t handle the high current. I crimped a lug on to 12 gauge stranded wire and it handles more than 20 Amps. I couldn’t measure any voltage drop across the posts. The red and black insulated “nuts” will unscrew all the way off the post, so you can use a lug with a hole; you don’t need one that is open. One guy modified it for the RACES connectors, if that’s what you like. Parallel cable: I look before I screw a cable on to see the orientation. I suppose that I could put it on upside down. The external control connector is a DB-15 high-density; very standard in the industry. The microphone connector is a traditional one; mine doesn’t spin. Perhaps he got one that wasn’t tightened properly. The antenna connector is a BNC. I am glad to see this instead of the SO-239 “UHF” connector. The Delta-44 sound card does have a remote dongle with phone jacks. I soldered phone plugs on some miniature phone cables, so it works fine. There is a kit that plugs right into the sound card and does away with the dongle and supports using a off-the-shelf miniature phone cord jumper. “-The inside of the SDR is wired by a lot of loosely connected stereo speaker like connectors. You know the ones that always dont seat properly, always get noise, and you just end up cutting them off and hard wiring them. Well that is how most of the jumpers connect to the PA boards are configured etc etc etc. Almost all of the connectors visible from the top don't even snap on they are just pushed in and hope for the best.” No problems here yet. “-No Vox, QSK or the like” I think VOX is coming. No QSK. I believe that this is a PC issue, not a SDR-1000 hardware one. Definitely not a “full-break-in” transceiver. “-No ON/OFF LED on the chassis.” No power indicator on the transceiver. I went to AutoZone and bought an illuminated power switch that fits in the same hole. Works fine. “-Don't plan on surfing the web or working on documents while RX / TX with the SDR...the audio will get choppy like a skipping CD and or PowerSDR will lock up.” I’m running on a 2 Ghz PC. I use other software (Ham Radio Deluxe and
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
At 08:34 AM 10/6/2005, Gerald Youngblood wrote: Hi Tim, I am afraid I must chime in on this topic because of some misperceptions that may arise from the exam review. One thing that has been different about this radio is that the purchaser of serial number uno over two years ago has had the opportunity to upgrade to the latest performance. It would be handy if the flex-radio website gave details on this process: which radios, which s/n, what upgrades needed, what's the cost, etc. Or is it individually negotiated? the PERCEPTION of instability. We have discussed creating a separate discussion board for beta only because of the confusion that may cause new visitors. We would be interested in hearing from you on the reflector as to whether that would be a good idea. This would be a good idea... Jim , W6RMK
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
t the risk of over beating a dead horse, I've got get this off my chest. I'm sorry Chris had some issues, hopefully they will be resolved through the proper channels. It certainly looks like Gerald is trying on his end. But you know..what amazes me about Eham Reviews, is the disparity of opinions. Take for example the GAP Titan DX antenna that I bought recently. It had any number of this is a pretty good antenna entries, and one or two this is the worst piece of @%$# I've ever seen report(s). Sometimes when things don't work the way we THINK they should we totally get out of even believing that there is something we are not seeing and write the thing off as an impossible piece of @%#. That's the nice thing about this reflector. If we're having issues, there is going to be someone out there who has knowledge of the issue that we can turn to. I stand in awe of the expertise of some of the guys on this reflector. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Bill AD5OL Gerald Youngblood [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/06/05 10:34AM Hi Tim, I am afraid I must chime in on this topic because of some misperceptions that may arise from the exam review.
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
At 12:08 PM 10/6/2005, Robert McGwier wrote: ALL of my three SDR-1000's are Mark I radios and they all have all of the ECO's. Bob N4HY I have not observed this. Note: by applying the Engineering Change Orders and updating the software, you have the latest version of the transceiver. Not all versions can be updated with the latest ECOs. If you have one of the Mark I versions, you might not be able to change some things. It's not *entirely* a software radio. ECO-002 will not fit on an original (sans RFE) radio. While not exactly an ECO (more a design change), the 5V regulator was originally a switcher and is now a linear. (not documented on the website list of ECOs) I suppose the point is that it still is a piece of hardware. -- Laziness is the number one inspiration for ingenuity. Guilty as charged! James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
Bill This was the last message on the topic that I read. Kill the horse, since you hit on the MOST important of all facts which make this radio different than others, in your last paragraph. The many comments about the 'review' hit on many aspects which make it a great radio but still not unique. The truly unique factor IS: it is the ONLY UDR, User Defined Radio. It IS the users who are 'building' this radio, and will keep it newer all the time. Newer is NOT always better, (vis a vis beta releases) but is always the key to constant evolution, TOWARDS better, which a fixed hardware system will do an order of magnitude slower than software. It IS the key, however, to making it better. You want better? Buy the next ricebox with new knobs for another 2 to 10 grand and a slight proprietary change in the control software! This version of the hardware is solid and reaching the practical limit of what this version of the hardware portion of the radio can be. Even the ECO's were initially user suggested or contributed by collective discussion or expertise from users. Hopefully Gerald is not too exhausted to be designing the next version of the hardware. After all it is contra entempreneur, and BIG Business oriented, in that the improvements are user contributed and use the SAME hardware! The SAME Radio (hardware) which keeps getting better is a death knell in conventional business. Just maybe there is a new Amateur paradigm at work? I hope so for Gerald's sake. I and others who bought the radio hardware early have MANY times mentioned, perhaps a revival of sorts of what Amateur Radio was meant to be, and if it is to survive MUST be! Innovation, Advancement of the state of the art of communications. In that current advancement, technology such as Internet, Teamspeak as well as HF communications actually play a synergistic role. All of these have contributed to the SDR-1000 to NOT DIE. It IS the users who are the momentum for this effort, NOT FlexRadio Systems, who just 'facillitated' our user effort to the platform we were offered. Almost EVERY new SDR-1000 owner becomes a contributor to the 'state of the art' serving as 'elmers' to the existing base as well as every new owner' THIS IS WHAT Amateur Radio was meant to be. If we are lulled to sleep by Yeasu, Icom, Kenwood with the profit, appliance motive in mind, AMATEUR radio will die. I still remember the long trip to the Lafayette Radio store RT 17, Paramas NJ. in 1964, as WN2WYK, and purchasing a NEW 7.187 crystal for my DX-60 being absolutely THRILLED by the thought of being able to work yet another fixed frequency as a novice. The SAME feeling is back when I bought the SDR-1000 and became a User Defining the Radio a UDR! Eric - AA4SW C'est La Vie Ham Radio! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Guyger Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 4:42 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review t the risk of over beating a dead horse, I've got get this off my chest. I'm sorry Chris had some issues, hopefully they will be resolved through the proper channels. It certainly looks like Gerald is trying on his end. But you know..what amazes me about Eham Reviews, is the disparity of opinions. Take for example the GAP Titan DX antenna that I bought recently. It had any number of this is a pretty good antenna entries, and one or two this is the worst piece of @%$# I've ever seen report(s). Sometimes when things don't work the way we THINK they should we totally get out of even believing that there is something we are not seeing and write the thing off as an impossible piece of @%#. That's the nice thing about this reflector. If we're having issues, there is going to be someone out there who has knowledge of the issue that we can turn to. I stand in awe of the expertise of some of the guys on this reflector. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Bill AD5OL Gerald Youngblood [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/06/05 10:34AM Hi Tim, I am afraid I must chime in on this topic because of some misperceptions that may arise from the exam review. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
At 01:31 PM 10/6/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 07:40 AM 10/6/2005, Dale Boresz wrote: I have often advocated that, someday, we minimize/get rid of this altogether with some sort of true USB interface to a small microprocessor, possibly sending in the I and Q stream as integers or IEEE floats, depending on what works best and then have either the D44 or an ordinary D/A A/D hidden inside either the current box or some sort of caboose for us old timers. Well, I can dream, can't I? Yep would be nice to have a digital output... but, practically speaking, designing high performance A/D,D/A stuff is a royal pain. But, it would get rid of _all_ the cable problems once and for all. I have the USB-to-parallel and it works fine on my underpowered laptop (1.4 GHz, Celeron) even without the latest recommended fix. Why not have it spit out on Ethernet? James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
Re: [Flexradio] Eham Review
At 06:26 PM 10/6/2005, ecellison wrote: Bill This was the last message on the topic that I read. Kill the horse, since you hit on the MOST important of all facts which make this radio different than others, in your last paragraph. The many comments about the 'review' hit on many aspects which make it a great radio but still not unique. The truly unique factor IS: it is the ONLY UDR, User Defined Radio. for the amateur market, Matt Ettus and the gnuradio folk might differ with the ONLY... http://www.ettus.com/ The SDR1000 is certainly the closest to a plug and play ham rig. There's also a huge number of user defined radios in the commercial world. Check out companies like Pentek. For that matter, the new Electra radio used on Mars Reconaissance Orbiter is a software radio, in that most of the radio's processing is done in software. (Initially modeled in Matlab, for that matter. http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/mro/mission/sc_instru_electra.html http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/fourlanders/2005-August/000778.html Yep.. Electra's right at 437.1 MHz in the middle of the 70cm ham band. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
[Flexradio] Eham Review
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4108#42946 Not a nice review - yet is buying another!
