Olli, Fine on all of that. I did not think of using a CW buffer - in instances where a sequencer is appropriate, QSK operation is not usually a goal, so if the operator has to send 2 or 3 dits that will not be heard on the air, I would think that is a reasonable compromise. Of course, each to his own - if a CW buffer is added to the sequencer operation, how does the operator "keep up"? Is all the CW delayed by the sequencer time, and the sidetone sent to the operator in real time with his input? I would think that would really "boggle the mind" if the operator were to listen to his transmitted CW signal on another receiver.
Maybe I missed something in the exchange, but do remember that I usually defer to the KISS principle - where the operator may have to make some decisions based on the circumstances rather than trying to have automated equipment make decisions for the operator. Too many computer applications try to tell me how to do things, but often their preferred paths do not produce what I want - keeping to the KISS principle means less automation, but it also means getting the results that I want. 73, Don W3FPR On 2/3/2012 6:05 PM, Oliver Dröse wrote: > Hi Don, > > indeed one of the sequencer outputs could also be applied to the TX-INH pin. > When we first designed the FA station manager I did not have my K3 yet so > did not know much about TX-INH (and never thought about that on my old Yaesu > radios, hi). Besides the solution should be usable with *any* available > transceiver that's why we chose to go for PTT (or to be more precise: > MIC-PTT, Digimode-PTT and CW, depending on the trigger). > > Yes, TX-INH is quite comfortable as you can still use the K3's internal > voice/cw-keyer and do not need to use some external devices before the > sequencer. One of the reasons I designed (and use it myself) another > sequencer exclusively for K3 use (including the needed pull-up, etc.). But > that only works reasonably well as long as the switching times of LNA/PA are > not too high as you will loose/truncate the first cw signs when you need > higher switching delays (and thus need to prevent K3 output using TX-INH for > longer time then the first cw sign needs). Then it would be better again to > use the FA-SM with it's built-in CW buffer that will just send the dits and > dahs after everything has switched. > > But well, isn't it nice to have choices? ;-)) > > Vy 73, Olli - DH8BQA > http://www.dh8bqa.de/ > > PS: Also see my comment in my reply to Joe - thanks for your great knowledge > sharing, guys! :-)) > 02.02.2012 > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
