Dave,
I fully understand your concerns here. This is an issue we had planned
to address anyway.
The K3 has "software-defined" features in the sense that the DSP is
very easily upgradeable (one-click PC application), and powerful, and
can handle future operating modes or signal processing tasks. It also
has a huge amount of flash memory for filter parameter storage. Thus we
may be able to do very interesting things in the future such as
auto-tuning of SSB signals, syllabic squelch, DSP noise blanking with
signal restoration, etc.
We hope to incorporate ideas from K3 owners over time, given this
flexibility. But all features that are available at time of shipment
will be very stable, and we won't be depending on the programming
community to "fix" anything. We'll retain close control over the source
code for both the DSP and the main microcontroller to ensure high
quality.
Regarding the microcontroller:
The K3's MCU is the largest and fastest in Microchip's line, and I can
assure you it is not "way too slow". It runs at 4.5 times the speed of
the K2's MCU. If a radio with this MCU running at this speed were to
appear "slow" to the operator, it would be the programmer's fault, not
the MCU's. In the case of the K3, we can simultaneously handle 38.4 kB
RS232 I/O; internal CW keying at 50 WPM; rapid update of the LCD; full
decode and display of PSK31/CW/RTTY text; and a continuous, rich
interaction between the MCU and DSP. There is no horsepower limitation
here!
The MCU is supplemented by a very large flash memory on the front
panel, providing a huge amount of help text and table storage, and
leaving plenty of ROM for all foreseen upgrades.
I realize that our competition is using PC cores in their radios. These
have several major disadvantages compared to our Microchip MCU:
- embedded PCs have much higher current drain (our entire radio can
draw as little as 0.8 amps,
vs. 2 to 3 amps for other high-performance rigs)
- embedded PCs may have very slow boot-up times (the K3 turns on in
less than 1 second; I believe
at least one of our competitor's rigs takes 11 seconds because it
has to
boot a Microsoft operating system!)
- embedded PCs and their support ICs generate much more RFI (our
entire MCU subsystems draws
something like 20-30 mA, dramatically reducing both conducted and
radiated emissions, and thus
simplifying shielding requirements)
- embedded PCs have much greater cost and complexity (our choice of
MCU is one reason we can
offer an extremely competitive radio starting at well under $2000)
As you may know, writing firmware for a microcontroller is vastly
different from writing code for a PC. I prefer the former, and I've
been doing it since I was 18. Lyle's been writing DSP code since there
were such things ;)
Regarding the K2:
We've learned a lot from developing and supporting the K2. Everything
we've learned is reflected in the K3, where we've had the luxury of a
larger enclosure, I.F. DSP, larger MCU, more front panel space, more
I/O, higher pricetag, etc. And the K3 was designed from the ground up
to use surface-mount parts everywhere possible to minimize
manufacturing costs.
The K2 is an ongoing product that we'll be updating as time permits. As
you may know, we're not a large company, so our engineering resources
will be stretched at times.
Please send me directly any suggestions for K2 improvements. I maintain
this list, prioritizing task items based on the needs of current and
future K2 owners.
Thanks for sharing your views on these topics!
73,
Wayne
N6KR
Dave-Boat Guy wrote:
Although the K3 seems to take into
account a lot of the comments we've made over the
years, it looks like it is jumping on the SDR
bandwagon. If any of you have followed the Software
Defined Radio Bandwagon, as it applies to "amateur
radio" developments, it simply means that the radio
manufacturers are more willing to put out a
"half-baked" radio than to commit to thoroughly
testing a radio. Flex Radio and Ten Tec have tried to
take the approach telling us that we won't need to
replace hardware for a long time since the software
can be updated to take into account new features. All
I've seen is that the manufacturers who pursue this
route take advantage of reprogrammability to fix their
own problems at a later date. By the time the
problems are solved, technology has improved and a new
piece of hardware becomes available and support for
the older equipment dwindles. Both of those companies
have obsoleted their initial releases in 3 or 4 years.
Perhaps the modular approach taken by Elecraft in the
K3 is the way to go. I for one am curious if they are
still using MicroChip PIC's, which are way too slow,
or if they have chosen a real processor....
---
http://www.elecraft.com
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
