RE:KX1 HI Roger,W1WEM I want to purchase your KX1 #693 Send details. Thanks. Tom, ni0i
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 3:01 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Elecraft Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 Send Elecraft mailing list submissions to elecraft@mailman.qth.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Elecraft digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: K2 inventory question (js) 2. Re: Antenna? (Mike Morrow) 3. K2 #4130 on the air in SSB !!! (JEAN-FRANCOIS MENARD) 4. Re: K2 inventory question (Hisashi T Fujinaka) 5. Re: Antenna? (Brian Mury) 6. Re: Antenna? (Leigh L. Klotz, Jr.) 7. A paint scratch, Help! ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 8. RE: Antenna? (Ron D'Eau Claire) 9. Re: Antenna? (Mike Morrow) 10. KX1 #693 FOR SALE with all options (Roger Marrotte) 11. RE: Antenna? (Steve) 12. KPA100 Tightening the finals... (Ward Willats) 13. Elecraft CW Net 20 meter report for July 4, 2004 (Kevin Rock) 14. RE: KPA100 Tightening the finals... (Ron D'Eau Claire) 15. K2 fixed audio output again. (Don Wilhelm) 16. Re: KPA100 Tightening the finals... (js) 17. Elecraft CW Net 40 meter Report for July 5th, 2004 (Kevin Rock) 18. Re: Antenna? (Brian Mury) 19. K2 Inventory 'problem' (Bill Scovell) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 16:46:21 +0800 From: "js" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 inventory question To: "Bill Scovell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The two resistors should also be on the bandolier. 73 Johnny VR2XMC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Scovell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 1:46 PM Subject: [Elecraft] K2 inventory question Just completing inventory check for my second K2 (#4313)all well except can't find R50 and R58 (both 1/2 watt so not on the bandolier) are these normally loose in the RFb bag? or do they lurk in some other spot and I've had a senior moment and missed them?. I wouldn't normally bother the reflector for two R's but R50 is 1.5 Ohms and low values not easy to come by here. TIA Bill / VK4SQ _______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 06:47:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Morrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: Jeff Imel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Jeff Imel wrote: > The HF Pack organization sponsors and annual antenna shootout... > http://tinyurl.com/2lzgm That is a pretty interesting site. Thanks for the URL. It confirms the very dismal performance of *all* those "popular" HF short loading-coil verticals in comparison to the most simple, basic, inexpensive quarter-wave vertical. TANSTAAFL! Likewise, the horizontal antenna comparisons confirm the overall superiority of a simple dipole over other horizontal types being tested. A comparison of all tested horizontal and vertical antennas against the half-wave horizontal dipole would have been interesting. I'm sure it would have shown a very significant advantage of a horizontal dipole over any vertical tested. At campsites I've made several side-by-side tests of various verticals versus a resonant dipole and have *always* found found verticals to be very poor performers, when directly compared to a cheap horizontal dipole. Plus, don't forget the counterpoise or ground required by the vertical. If one chooses to use a multi-band dipole for portable operation, I'd suggest staying away from *trap* dipoles. Aside from the traps being heavy and bulky, the traps really narrow the bandwidth of each band compared to that of a single band dipole. That's why, for the seven-band portable dipole that I put together, I use small, lightweight, home-made PVC insulators with manually connected jumpers around them to change the band of resonance. The second-best portable antenna I've ever used was a random-length dipole, center fed with 450 ohm ladder twin lead and a tuner. The main problem presented was the routing of the excess twin lead. Every camp site is different, and it *does* make a difference if you coil up the excess or allow it to lay on the ground. The resonant dipole allowed me to return to the joyful and trouble-free world of RG-8X coax! Also, most small tuners aren't real balanced line tuners, so there are losses in the ferrite balun that nearly all such tuners use to support balanced line feed. I think I'm going to build a light-weight four-band version of my portable dipole for the four bands on my K1. Right now, I just use the seven-band version that I originally built for my old TS-50S. 73, Mike / KK5F ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 09:56:11 -0400 From: JEAN-FRANCOIS MENARD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] K2 #4130 on the air in SSB !!! To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hi, First of all, I would like to thanks Elecraft and his fabulous team that give us memorable moments building their kits !!! It's the first time in my life I have so much fun and desire to do something.... even on a beautiful sunny day !!! ;-) And YES !!! Finally K2 #4130 is on the air in SSB !!! I made my first real QSO yesterday. I receive only excellent comments. I'm using my Kenwood hand microphone that I receive with my TS-2000. It's not a desk mike but everybody told me that my audio was excellent.... it's not only the mic, it's my K2 also. :-) I transmit at about 13W. I receive very good quality report. I also got a better report than someone transmitting with 100W with a so so antenna !!! I'm using a vertical V antenna on 80M, well calibrated with my MFJ-259B... so no antenna tuner is necessary between 3.750 to 3.790. I'm very surprised of the perfromance and people comments. When you hear people telling those comments about something you build and using.... you can't feel better !!! ... and even when it's your first time building project !!! 73 and hope to hear you soon Elecraft folks !!! =============================================== Jean-Frangois Minard / VA2VYZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Amateur Radio Club of Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada Web site: http://homepage.mac.com/jfmenard =============================================== ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 07:36:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Hisashi T Fujinaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 inventory question To: Don Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed SN4355 has the resistors on the strip. So far, so good, I'm past the initial checks on the RF board (i.e. my control board and front panel work). I got an incredible headache sorting the caps. My wish for future builders: sort parts in a more sensible order so the RF board parts are divided into the stages. I know that means more labor at Elecraft, but so far that's my main complaint. :) On Sun, 4 Jul 2004, Don Wilhelm wrote: > Bill, > > Elecraft continually improves things - we all know that. So now you will > find R50 and R58 on the strip of resistors - at least they were that way for > SN4192 when I assembled it. Yes, it has not always been that way - those > resistors were previously shipped loose in the RFb bag, so your memory is > working well. > > 73, > Don W3FPR > > Life is what happens when you are making other plans > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Just completing inventory check for my second K2 (#4313)all well except > can't find R50 and R58 (both 1/2 watt so not on the bandolier) are these > normally loose in the RFb bag? or do they lurk in some other spot and I've > had a senior moment and missed them?. I wouldn't normally bother the > reflector for two R's but R50 is 1.5 Ohms and low values not easy to come by > here. > TIA Bill / VK4SQ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - [EMAIL PROTECTED] BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 10:20:08 -0700 From: Brian Mury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain On Sun, 2004-07-04 at 06:47, Mike Morrow wrote: > It confirms the very dismal performance of *all* those "popular" HF > short loading-coil verticals in comparison to the most simple, basic, > inexpensive quarter-wave vertical. TANSTAAFL! It's no surprise that a full size quarter wave beats any loaded vertical, but I disagree that they all have dismal performance. The best 5 are less than a 1 dB difference (with the best being a mere 0.3 dB difference). The best 13 are under 6 dB, which is less than 1 S unit. Only 4 have a greater than 1 S unit difference. > Likewise, the horizontal antenna comparisons confirm the overall > superiority of a simple dipole over other horizontal types being > tested. Here, the worst is -3.78 db, which is only slightly over half an S unit, while a couple beat out the reference antenna. Yes, ok, one of those *is* a yagi; the other is the long buddipole. > A comparison of all tested horizontal and vertical antennas against > the half-wave horizontal dipole would have been interesting. I'm sure > it would have shown a very significant advantage of a horizontal > dipole over any vertical tested. I would also like to see a comparison between the horizontal and vertical antennas. I don't think the horizontal antenna would necessarily beat the vertical - it depends on a few variables, a couple big ones that come to mind being the height of the dipole and the vertical's counterpoise. Of course, what is best also depends on what takeoff angle you want. If you want a low takeoff angle for DX, I would argue that a vertical would be hard to beat, especially if you're not able to get a dipole up high enough. A low dipole is, of course, hard to beat for shorter distances. > compared to that of a single band dipole. That's why, for the > seven-band portable dipole that I put together, I use small, > lightweight, home-made PVC insulators with manually connected jumpers > around them to change the band of resonance. Neat idea! -- 73, Brian VE7NGR ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 10:21:29 -0700 From: "Leigh L. Klotz, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" Mike, The way I read the table, the MP1 and PAC-12 are both about 1/2 dB down from a quarter wave piece of wire and a single radial. Leigh WA5ZNU On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 6:49am, Mike Morrow wrote: > It confirms the very dismal performance of *all* those "popular" HF > short loading-coil verticals in comparison to the most simple, basic, > inexpensive quarter-wave vertical. 73, WA5ZNU Leigh ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 10:46:56 -0700 (PDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Elecraft] A paint scratch, Help! To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Good day all! I have acquired a paint scratch on my K2 although in a good cause, Field Day. Has anyone come up with a matching paint for touch up use. Best regards, Bob K7HBG ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 10:54:42 -0700 From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I haven't done "pedestrian mobile" like the "Packers" but I have used a vertical with single "counterpoise" with a total length of 1/2 wave like that "reference vertical" they show on the web page would be on 20 meters. First, we ARE talking verticals now, and a vertical has about a 6 dB disadvantage over a horizontal, provided the horizontal is about 1/2 wave high! That's not likely to happen below 10 meters on a portable or pedestrian mobile setup, so it's a moot point here. That aside, what is interesting about a vertical with one horizontal counterpoise wire is that the counterpoise radiates as much as the antenna. Typical "ground-plane" arrangements provide a lot of cancellation of radiation from the "radials" since then are generally opposite each other and fed "in phase" (all connect to the same electrical point, not to out-of-phase currents like a dipole fed at the center). With only one counterpoise, there is no cancellation. That produces a lobe straight up for NVIS propagation from the counterpoise that is virtually as strong as the lower angle lobe. Also the antenna becomes fairly directional (in the direction of the counterpoise) which helps provide some gain to overcome the near-ground losses when hanging from a pedestrian <G>. That combination can be dynamite for what a H-F Pack operator wants - a great mix of radiation angles supporting ground wave and sky wave contacts. The only consideration seems to be that it will probably help to have the counterpoise sort of generally pointing in the direction of the other station for ground wave communications, although the "directivity" is going to be very broad. Also, with the counterpoise literally "on the ground" that high angle radiation will be greatly affected by the condition of the earth under it. Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Mury Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2004 10:20 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? On Sun, 2004-07-04 at 06:47, Mike Morrow wrote: > It confirms the very dismal performance of *all* those "popular" HF > short loading-coil verticals in comparison to the most simple, basic, > inexpensive quarter-wave vertical. TANSTAAFL! It's no surprise that a full size quarter wave beats any loaded vertical, but I disagree that they all have dismal performance. The best 5 are less than a 1 dB difference (with the best being a mere 0.3 dB difference). The best 13 are under 6 dB, which is less than 1 S unit. Only 4 have a greater than 1 S unit difference. >... -- 73, Brian VE7NGR ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 13:24:18 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: Mike Morrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: Brian Mury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Brian Mury wrote: >I would also like to see a comparison between the horizontal and >vertical antennas. I don't think the horizontal antenna would >necessarily beat the vertical - it depends on a few variables, a couple >big ones that come to mind being the height of the dipole and the >vertical's counterpoise. Hi Brian, HF verticals perform poorly without, as you mention above, a very good counterpoise or ground plane. In temporary portable installations, that is generally very difficult to obtain. But for a dipole, it's a non-issue altogether. I've never been able to get any vertical antenna (even a very expensive Australian-made dummy load) to perform within several s-units of a half-wave dipole that was up only about ten feet in side-by-side tests at a *temporary* site. The generalizations I make are simply based on what I've observed in several decades of tinkering with campsite antennas. They apply only to practical portable installations, not to the more optimally configured fixed vertical situation where observed performance may more likely reflect the theory. 73, Mike / KK5F ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 15:05:45 -0400 From: "Roger Marrotte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] KX1 #693 FOR SALE with all options To: <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have for sale KX1 #693. It comes with the following: KX1 #693 KXB30 30 Meter Adapter KXPD1 Plug in Keyer Paddle KXAT1 Internal Auto Antenna Tuner All Manuals KOSS Stereo Earbud Headphones 6 Lithium AA Batteries (almost new) In asking just my original cost + $7.- for S/H = $495.00. The radio works great. It went together without a hitch and worked the first time. It puts out about 5 watts with an external power supply and about 2-2.5 watts with internal lithium batteries. I've worked plenty of DX with it. The best one for me was OK1BB from an armchair in front of the TV (I had a coax going to my shack connected to a 30M loop up 65 feet). The fun was in the building for me, so now I'm selling it. I've built a K1, 2 K2s, a KX1, 2 XV transverters and most options. Please reply to me directly. Thanks, Roger, W1EM ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 20:53:36 -0400 From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Mike (and others)... There's been some discussions on the HFPack list about a ground independent vertical design, published in the April 2004 issue of QST. The author, Brian Cake, KF2YN, describes a "C-Pole" loop antenna resembling an OCF (off-center fed) horizontal antenna, only wrapped in a loop. A tree branch about 18' off the ground is all that's needed to hoist the 20M version into the air. Feed is at ground level through a choke balun. EZNEC shows a low angle of radiation, and no radials/counterpoise, etc. are needed. Details for the 20M version may also be found: http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/netxqrpclub/ And the original article describing the background and 20 - 10M designs: http://www.arrl.org/members-only/tis/info/pdf/0404037.pdf 73, Steve aa8af -----Original Message----- HF verticals perform poorly without, as you mention above, a very good counterpoise or ground plane. In temporary portable installations, that is generally very difficult to obtain. But for a dipole, it's a non-issue altogether. ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 17:56:54 -0700 From: Ward Willats <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... To: <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Just finished the KNB2 for my K2 (a birthday present from the in-laws -- yea!) and while I was inside the K2 to install it I tightened up the screws on the KPA100 finals per Elecraft's recommendation, since I've been using the radio for about 6 months now and this was probably overdue. They all took a little snugging up, maybe a little less than 1/8 turn. My question is: will they stay tight now for all time? Or do I have to check them now and then? What's the theory on the thermal cycling here and how it effects these screws? Just wondering... -- Ward / KG6HAF ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 17:59:50 -0700 From: Kevin Rock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] Elecraft CW Net 20 meter report for July 4, 2004 To: Elecraft <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-15 Howdy folks, It was interesting propagation this afternoon. I received fair contacts for one go around and then folks would be gone. Three contacts from California, Nova Scotia, and then Minnesota. There were some very, very light stations below my ability to copy. Gary gave me a 229 which I appreciate. John in California was pretty light but copyable. Bruce and Gary were both much stronger but it depended upon what moment I was listening. Gary did try to relay a Bill but I lost him at that point. The list: N6JW - John - CA - K2 - 3290 VE1RGB - Gary - NS - K2 - 2519 W0QQS - Bruce - MN - K2 - 3646 Thank you for hanging in there. I worked until 34 minutes after the hour to allow propagation to change. I am glad I did. It took almost 7 minutes for the first check in and then about 5 to six minutes in between. If I missed you I am sorry. Hopefully the sun will improve conditions a bit for next week. I did hear 6 and 15 meters opened up but I was too busy to find out for myself. Hope you had a chance to work on them. In about an hour I hope to hear some of you on 40 meters for ECN/2. 73, Kevin. KD5ONS (Net Control Operator 5th Class) ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 18:29:40 -0700 From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... To: <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I haven't noticed any looseness in mine since tightening them a few months after the initial build, and I did some testing of the "drift" mods that had me cycling the K2 finals over and over again hard enough that the heat sink was too hot to leave my hand on for any length of time. So I'd guess that you're fine, now that you've done the initial re-tightening. Checking heat sink screws whenever I have a rig open is sort of "second nature" to me after servicing gear professionally for a few years. On the other hand, you don't want to crank 'em down so tight you damage the gaskets and washers on the hardware. Snug 'em but don't do what I like to call "Godzilla" them <G>. Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- Subject: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... Just finished the KNB2 for my K2 (a birthday present from the in-laws -- yea!) and while I was inside the K2 to install it I tightened up the screws on the KPA100 finals per Elecraft's recommendation, since I've been using the radio for about 6 months now and this was probably overdue. They all took a little snugging up, maybe a little less than 1/8 turn. My question is: will they stay tight now for all time? Or do I have to check them now and then? What's the theory on the thermal cycling here and how it effects these screws? Just wondering... -- Ward / KG6HAF _______________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 22:14:16 -0400 From: "Don Wilhelm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] K2 fixed audio output again. To: "Elecraft reflector" <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Folks, I have had many asking if I can take PayPal payments - and the answer is yes, IF and only if those payment come from your PayPal funds or a bank account. I have only a personal PayPal account and I don't want to upgrade to a business account just for this project and pay the resulting fees forevermore. If you are wondering what this is all about because you didn't see the posting first time, I have a kit available to add a fixed audio output to the K2. You can take a look at the article on my website www.qsl.net/w3fpr for full information and photos. Prices for the full kit is $17.50 with Priority mail shipping and $15 for 1st class mail. Outside the US I will ship AirMail and need to adjust the price for the additional shipping (I will know how much extra it costs for the UK after Tuesday's mailing). Partial kits (without the connectors, jack and cables) $3.50 less than the full kit ($14.00 Priority and $11.50 1st Class) For those wanting the board only, $5 shipped 1st Class mail in the US I have plenty of the boards, and I have about half the full kits left. Since few have asked about the partial kit, I can order more connectors and jacks and pass the savings of buying in quantity along to you. I will let you know when I am running low, but it will only take 3 to 4 days to restock the parts. 73, Don W3FPR Life is what happens when you are making other plans ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 10:38:06 +0800 From: "js" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... To: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" I share the same experience as Ron. 73 Johnny Siu VR2XMC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <Elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 9:29 AM Subject: RE: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... I haven't noticed any looseness in mine since tightening them a few months after the initial build, and I did some testing of the "drift" mods that had me cycling the K2 finals over and over again hard enough that the heat sink was too hot to leave my hand on for any length of time. So I'd guess that you're fine, now that you've done the initial re-tightening. Checking heat sink screws whenever I have a rig open is sort of "second nature" to me after servicing gear professionally for a few years. On the other hand, you don't want to crank 'em down so tight you damage the gaskets and washers on the hardware. Snug 'em but don't do what I like to call "Godzilla" them <G>. Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- Subject: [Elecraft] KPA100 Tightening the finals... Just finished the KNB2 for my K2 (a birthday present from the in-laws -- yea!) and while I was inside the K2 to install it I tightened up the screws on the KPA100 finals per Elecraft's recommendation, since I've been using the radio for about 6 months now and this was probably overdue. They all took a little snugging up, maybe a little less than 1/8 turn. My question is: will they stay tight now for all time? Or do I have to check them now and then? What's the theory on the thermal cycling here and how it effects these screws? Just wondering... -- Ward / KG6HAF _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 19:38:48 -0700 From: Kevin Rock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] Elecraft CW Net 40 meter Report for July 5th, 2004 To: Elecraft <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-15 Good Evening, The QRM was higher than on 20 meters but the signal strength was too. A 339 from Ric and a 599 from John. I don't feel so bad now :) I also checked in one of my NTS buddies from Vancouver, BC. John was the only one who wished me a Happy 4th however. I wonder why they don't celebrate this day in Canada ;) Soon Ms P and are off to the fireworks. Hopefully you all have had a safe day playing with explosives (where legal that is) and retained all your fingers and thumbs. Happy 4th of July to all of you folks who celebrate this holiday. On to the list: VE3XL - Ric - ON - K1 - 968 N6JW - John - CA - K2 - 3290 VE7DWG - Dave - BC - non-Elecraft rig Thanks to all who participated and I am sorry to have missed those who may have tried and I could not hear you. The noise was a bit high but I'll do better next time. 73, Kevin. KD5ONS (Net Control Operator 5th Class) ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 21:37:08 -0700 From: Brian Mury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Antenna? To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain On Sun, 2004-07-04 at 10:20, Brian Mury wrote: > It's no surprise that a full size quarter wave beats any loaded > vertical, but I disagree that they all have dismal performance. What I said and what I was thinking were not exactly the same. I meant to say that the antennas in the shootout don't all have dismal performance compared to the full size quarter wave reference antenna used. Compared to a full size quarter wave with a good counterpoise - well, that's a different question! -- 73, Brian VE7NGR ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 17:43:45 +1000 From: "Bill Scovell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Elecraft] K2 Inventory 'problem' To: "Hisashi T Fujinaka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Elecraft <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" They say that confession is good for the soul so perhaps I should detail my foolish mistake. I looked at the RFa bag bandolier, not too closely it turns out, and decided that it wasn't carrying any 1/2 watt resistors. Not being able to find any loose ones I counted up the number of resistors required for the RF board and compared this to the number of R's on the bandolier ---two short!!! but I had overlooked R115 and R116. After a 'heads up' (I hope I'm using that term correctly) from Don Wilhelm I looked again at the bandolier which, of course, was loaded with two 1/2 watts in their ordained position. I should not have been so quick to doubt Elecraft's reliability. My only worry now is that the 'Mojo Fairy' might punish me for this --- perhaps if I record my thanks to Christine, Walter, Judy and Somarian for a 100% perfect pack I shall be forgiven. Bill / VK4SQ p.s. I didn't suffer your headache --- I'm the proud possessor of an AADE L/C Meter --- outside of Elecraft the best $100 I ever spent. ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft You must be a subscriber to post. Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com End of Elecraft Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 ************************************** _______________________________________________ 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
