[Elecraft] K3 Macro toggle
I need some help from those experienced in K3 macros. What I want to do is:- First press of say PF1 Turn ON DIGOUT1 Wait n mS Turn ON TUNE Second press of PF1 Turn OFF TUNE Turn OFF DIGOUT1 i.e. How can you toggle a macro from a function key ? T.I.A. 73 Stewart G3RXQ __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Another way to access APF
Al Lorona wrote: > > >There was recent discussion about the need to HOLD a pushbutton to turn on the >APF. In January 2011, Wayne made a post entitled "Tips for using APF" in which >he wrote, > >"2. There are two filter "Presets" (I and II, accessed by HOLDing the >HI/WIDTH >knob). You can turn APF on for one preset and off for the >other. This control is closer to where the action is than DUAL PB, and >I find it more convenient to use." > >Although this still involves HOLDing a button it may provide a better >alternative to the whole business of enabling APF. > That suggestion will work, of course, and so too will the macro route - but both of them are work-arounds, to compensate for functionality that is missing from the button where it belongs. The same applies to SPLIT: the K3 is the only high-end radio with a non-configurable SPLIT button. All the others have an option to configure that button as "Split and QSY" - but in the K3, that function must be assigned to some button, while the SPLIT button where that functionality should be is no longer used. The macro facility is seriously overplayed as an answer to missing functionality. Remember that the K3 has only TWO dedicated macro buttons, PF1 and PF2. Anything beyond that requires hidden controls which are a nightmare for the guest operator. -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek __ 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] [K3] Another way to access APF
There was recent discussion about the need to HOLD a pushbutton to turn on the APF. In January 2011, Wayne made a post entitled "Tips for using APF" in which he wrote, "2. There are two filter "Presets" (I and II, accessed by HOLDing the HI/WIDTH knob). You can turn APF on for one preset and off for the other. This control is closer to where the action is than DUAL PB, and I find it more convenient to use." Although this still involves HOLDing a button it may provide a better alternative to the whole business of enabling APF. Regards, Al W6LX __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Previous Firmware
Bill (N2BC) I am not sure how far I need to go back, the issue for me is that I have 2m and 70cm tranverters that were working fine, but I added an internal 2m module internally last week and upgraded the firmware. Net result is the K3 hangs at startup if an external transverter (70cm) is plugged into the aux bus. I will hold off on your offer and contact you when I work out what I need to go back to, I have lot of other things on the aux interface at the back of the K3 and will try to make a simple cable up in order to eliminate external hardware influences. Again my thanks for your offer, just might be back to you real soon! Roger VK3ADE. On 30/06/2012, at 3:30 PM, N2BC wrote: > Hi Roger, I am not sure what the E site has archived, but I have 'almost' > all that have ever been issued. Gladly send you all of them (abt 60M > uncompressed), or any one or two or more of your choice. > > 73, Bill N2BC > Quick question, is there an archive of the previous versions of the K3 firmware kept anywhere? __ 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] [K3] Previous Firmware
Quick question, is there an archive of the previous versions of the K3 firmware kept anywhere? Regards. Roger VK3ADE __ 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] [KX3] Assembly completed and working; thanks for the help
Thanks to the Elecraft personnel, particularly Ron as editor, who took the time to check my concerns about a few minor errors in the Rev C assembly manual. I wanted to have all parts sorted and on hand before proceeding but was held up by inconsistent dimensions of M-F standoffs on the CP board. I had been supplied with Rev A assembly manual. Rev C was posted while I was held up and I followed this version on the computer screen during assembly in the past couple of days. All proceeded very smoothly after Ron's reply and it was a great feeling yesterday when the KX3 powered up for the first time. Currently I'm listening on 40m SSB. The corrections have since been posted as Errata Rev C1-2 dated 29 June. I've dusted off my old Kenwood DM-81 dip meter this morning and will try using it as a signal generator to calibrate the KXFL3. I won't connect it directly, just a loose coupling to the KX3. First job today is a tour of the menus, and perhaps a firmware update. Cheers, Bernie. VK2BLW. __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [KX3] Speaker Grille?
Hi all; What about spray-on rubber cement from places like office supply stores? You would need to do some masking to keep the cement just below the grill and maybe some on the grill itself to make sure it doesn't get in the area of the openings (assuming the KX3 is like the K3--mine hasn't come yet) but this would also let you take the screen off later for some reason if needed. 73s Scott XE1/AA0AA; AA0AA __ 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] Windows4P3 new version in the works: Data A mode and more..
Hi I am about to release a new version of Windows4P3 and here are the latest additions, some minor but one I find pretty useful. 1) "Data A" mode. Pressing this button will add an adjustable offset to the marker frequencies which will allow you to click on a PSK31 peak for example and it will be centered in the audio passband of your filter in use. Thus you can set up the span to show all of the PSK31 signals around, use a narrow filter, and then just click on the one you want and the radio is automatically tuned to put it in the center of your filter. This means, that programs such as DM780 which use a waterfall can have this feature turned off and then used remotely without hogging the bandwidth (when W4P3 remote is available). I have a question for the group: Any there any other similar features that would be useful? 2) Averaging settings are now kept on restart 3) General improvements... Any other suggestions? Thanks, Tom. Va2FSQ The software is at va2fsq.com - it;'s free for non commercial use -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Windows4P3-new-version-in-the-works-Data-A-mode-and-more-tp7558359.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] [KX3] Speaker Grille?
John, If you have the skills and where-with-all to glue your speaker grill cloth to the KX3 enclosure (not the speaker) without creating a mess, then you have "the cure". The original allowed the grill cloth to rattle against the speaker cone on some units and created distortion. The concern for releasing this to the general public has to do with individual skills in handling glue on the enclosure speaker web holes - too much makes a mess, while too little is ineffective. 73, Don W3FPR On 6/29/2012 7:25 PM, N6JW wrote: > What is the latest on the use of the supplied speaker grille cloth > for the KX3? > > Have any of you gone ahead and used the grille, despite the > recent instructions to do otherwise? Distortion? > > Given field use, I would like (if possible) to use the grille cloth > to keep bugs and metal bits out. But, having built a K1, K2, > and K-Line, I am loath to go against the instructions :) > > Thanks for any replies/advise, > > 73 > > John, N6JW > > -- > View this message in context: > http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/KX3-Speaker-Grille-tp7558357.html > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > __ > 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
[Elecraft] [KX3] Speaker Grille?
What is the latest on the use of the supplied speaker grille cloth for the KX3? Have any of you gone ahead and used the grille, despite the recent instructions to do otherwise? Distortion? Given field use, I would like (if possible) to use the grille cloth to keep bugs and metal bits out. But, having built a K1, K2, and K-Line, I am loath to go against the instructions :) Thanks for any replies/advise, 73 John, N6JW -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/KX3-Speaker-Grille-tp7558357.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ 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] KX3F # 620 alive and well
I just received my KX3F, serial number 620 and made my first contact, on 6 M, with it; all is well! 73 de Dave, W5SV __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 451 and AGC
Mark, Depends a lot on personal preferences but there are some suggestions in this thread: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Recommended-AGC-settings-for-4-51-td713.html And after the WPX contest there was a lot of debate about the various settings people had used in the contest, and their effects on the pileups, in this thread: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Rev-4-51-firmware-what-AGC-settings-worked-on-big-pile-ups-with-loud-AND-weak-signals-in-the-WPX-td7556676.html 73, Thomas M0TRN On 29 June 2012 20:07, mark roz wrote: > Can anybody let me know the "best" settings of AGC parameters with the new > 451 firmware? > Looking for best posible separation of multiple signals. > Thanks, > Mark > __ > 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
[Elecraft] Windows4P3 new version in the works: Data A mode and more..
Hi I am about to release a new version of Windows4P3 and here are the latest additions, some minor but one I find pretty useful. 1) "Data A" mode. Pressing this button will add an adjustable offset to the marker frequencies which will allow you to click on a PSK31 peak for example and it will be centered in the audio passband of your filter in use. Thus you can set up the span to show all of the PSK31 signals around, use a narrow filter, and then just click on the one you want and the radio is automatically tuned to put it in the center of your filter. This means, that programs such as DM780 which use a waterfall can have this feature turned off and then used remotely without hogging the bandwidth (when W4P3 remote is available). I have a question for the group: Any there any other similar features that would be useful? 2) Averaging settings are now kept on restart 3) General improvements... Any other suggestions? Thanks, Tom. Va2FSQ The software is at va2fsq.com - it;'s free for non commercial use -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Windows4P3-new-version-in-the-works-Data-A-mode-and-more-tp7558354.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
Slight additional correction... Energy is computed as the integral of power over time. The power itself from a battery that is itself not under recharge is constantly changing over time even with fixed load. Thus, the actual energy computed is slightly less then the value you get with power times hours since power is not constant. PEH's iPad On Jun 29, 2012, at 12:28 PM, dave wrote: > >> lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has >> totally discharged the 110AH battery > > This isn't right. The capacity of the battery in watts is 110x12 or > about 1320WHr. If the load is 122w/hr the battery should be totally > exhausted after about 11 hours. > > Of course you should never intentionally fully discharge a battery so > a reasonable time of operation on battery alone would be about 7 hours. > > The solar panel, if in full sun and at max efficiency would generate > ~120w. This is barely enough to keep up with both transmitters. > Nothing left over to recharge the batteries. > > > 73 de dave > ab9ca/4 > > > > > > On 6/29/12 3:05 AM, Edward R. Cole wrote: >> Look at energy instead of power. You have a 120AH solar panel to a >> 110AH battery. What is your load? Two 100w transmitters running 12v >> at 17a dc load (204w load to the battery for each radio). Your Tx/Rx >> duty cycle is probably = 30% during FD (are you calling CQ FD CQ FD a >> lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has >> totally discharged the 110AH battery if were not being charged by the >> solar panel. With solar charging at 120AH you still have a negative >> energy equation (so maybe it takes a couple hours operation to >> discharge the battery). >> >> It sounds as only one battery was used for two radios. A better >> solution would be separate batteries very close to the radios. Still >> the 120AH solar charging system is undersized to maintain the >> batteries very long. >> >> So lower RF power to 50w (as has been suggested) to lower dc >> load. Also increase dc wiring size to lower ohmic losses. Battery >> boosters will give a little more voltage at the end of battery life, >> but at the expense of battery current (no free lunch). >> >> I ran 20w psk-31 one FD using a single 60w solar panel and a 100AH >> diehard marine battery and was able to run about 6-hours. Of course >> psk-31 is keydown in transmit. The radio was a FT-847 so I do not >> know its efficiency running at 20w RF. The Rx and digital ckts >> probably consumed 3-4 amps continuously, and transmitter probably 50w >> at 50% efficiency for another 4 amps. So say it was 7 amps in >> transmit (7x12= 84w). I did not call CQ extensively but instead >> searched and pounced so most of the time was Rx so Tx/Rx duty cycle >> was probably 10%. Overall the load was probably 48w per hour so the >> 60w solar panel should hold the battery charge long-term. Things >> rarely run exactly according to theory. >> >> In my former job I maintained two remote repeater sites that were run >> on solar-charged batteries in summer and on alkaline batteries in >> winter (system auto-switched when solar battery voltage dropped to >> 10.5v). The solar system was two 60w solar panels feeding two 100AH >> deep-cycle batteries; winter was a 10,800 AH air-activated alkaline >> battery bank (90 1.5v cells in 10cell banks). Each 1.5v battery was >> rated at 1200AH. The site was operated in a stby status 99% of the >> time with only the UHF control radios activated full-time. We got >> three years life between battery replacements (helicopter only >> access). With new batteries the site had a 30-day operational >> status. Repeaters were 30w and there were more than one at each site. >> >> >> 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 >> == >> BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com >> EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-QRT, 1296-?, 3400-? >> DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@gmail.com >> "Kits made by KL7UW" http://www.kl7uw.com/kits.htm >> == >> __ >> 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 __ 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: ht
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
Some batteries have nowhere near their label AH capacity to start with. Others go bad with no use, effectively on the shelf. In come cases when opened, it is clear that the battery has been deliberately "short-sheeted" not to be confused with "shorted out". Use of filler below the cells, etc. Upon purchase, a cell should be fully charged and then checked for discharge curve. Defective cells can then be returned as defective, but "new" with sales slip and no arguments. Regretfully, I no longer buy batteries over the internet. I get them locally where they can be easily exchanged. I buy their "house brand". One local outlet has specifically ended business with a few well-known manufacturers and has no hesitation talking about it. Over a period of time, about one in four or five is actually defective if you count AH well below label. The local guys also always take my old battery for recycle without an argument. I never have to go to collection points on the "special days" when local waste management accepts certain hazardous waste. Keeps local merchants in business. With this procedure, if later the battery diminishes, I know it's old age or something I did. 73, Guy. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM, dave wrote: > > > lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has > > totally discharged the 110AH battery > > This isn't right. The capacity of the battery in watts is 110x12 or > about 1320WHr. If the load is 122w/hr the battery should be totally > exhausted after about 11 hours. > > Of course you should never intentionally fully discharge a battery so > a reasonable time of operation on battery alone would be about 7 hours. > > The solar panel, if in full sun and at max efficiency would generate > ~120w. This is barely enough to keep up with both transmitters. > Nothing left over to recharge the batteries. > > > 73 de dave > ab9ca/4 > > > > > > On 6/29/12 3:05 AM, Edward R. Cole wrote: > > Look at energy instead of power. You have a 120AH solar panel to a > > 110AH battery. What is your load? Two 100w transmitters running 12v > > at 17a dc load (204w load to the battery for each radio). Your Tx/Rx > > duty cycle is probably = 30% during FD (are you calling CQ FD CQ FD a > > lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has > > totally discharged the 110AH battery if were not being charged by the > > solar panel. With solar charging at 120AH you still have a negative > > energy equation (so maybe it takes a couple hours operation to > > discharge the battery). > > > > It sounds as only one battery was used for two radios. A better > > solution would be separate batteries very close to the radios. Still > > the 120AH solar charging system is undersized to maintain the > > batteries very long. > > > > So lower RF power to 50w (as has been suggested) to lower dc > > load. Also increase dc wiring size to lower ohmic losses. Battery > > boosters will give a little more voltage at the end of battery life, > > but at the expense of battery current (no free lunch). > > > > I ran 20w psk-31 one FD using a single 60w solar panel and a 100AH > > diehard marine battery and was able to run about 6-hours. Of course > > psk-31 is keydown in transmit. The radio was a FT-847 so I do not > > know its efficiency running at 20w RF. The Rx and digital ckts > > probably consumed 3-4 amps continuously, and transmitter probably 50w > > at 50% efficiency for another 4 amps. So say it was 7 amps in > > transmit (7x12= 84w). I did not call CQ extensively but instead > > searched and pounced so most of the time was Rx so Tx/Rx duty cycle > > was probably 10%. Overall the load was probably 48w per hour so the > > 60w solar panel should hold the battery charge long-term. Things > > rarely run exactly according to theory. > > > > In my former job I maintained two remote repeater sites that were run > > on solar-charged batteries in summer and on alkaline batteries in > > winter (system auto-switched when solar battery voltage dropped to > > 10.5v). The solar system was two 60w solar panels feeding two 100AH > > deep-cycle batteries; winter was a 10,800 AH air-activated alkaline > > battery bank (90 1.5v cells in 10cell banks). Each 1.5v battery was > > rated at 1200AH. The site was operated in a stby status 99% of the > > time with only the UHF control radios activated full-time. We got > > three years life between battery replacements (helicopter only > > access). With new batteries the site had a 30-day operational > > status. Repeaters were 30w and there were more than one at each site. > > > > > > 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 > > == > > BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com > > EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-QRT, 1296-?, 3400-? > > DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@gmail.com > > "Kits made by KL7UW" http://www.kl7uw.com/kits.htm > > == > > ___
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
> lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has > totally discharged the 110AH battery This isn't right. The capacity of the battery in watts is 110x12 or about 1320WHr. If the load is 122w/hr the battery should be totally exhausted after about 11 hours. Of course you should never intentionally fully discharge a battery so a reasonable time of operation on battery alone would be about 7 hours. The solar panel, if in full sun and at max efficiency would generate ~120w. This is barely enough to keep up with both transmitters. Nothing left over to recharge the batteries. 73 de dave ab9ca/4 On 6/29/12 3:05 AM, Edward R. Cole wrote: > Look at energy instead of power. You have a 120AH solar panel to a > 110AH battery. What is your load? Two 100w transmitters running 12v > at 17a dc load (204w load to the battery for each radio). Your Tx/Rx > duty cycle is probably = 30% during FD (are you calling CQ FD CQ FD a > lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has > totally discharged the 110AH battery if were not being charged by the > solar panel. With solar charging at 120AH you still have a negative > energy equation (so maybe it takes a couple hours operation to > discharge the battery). > > It sounds as only one battery was used for two radios. A better > solution would be separate batteries very close to the radios. Still > the 120AH solar charging system is undersized to maintain the > batteries very long. > > So lower RF power to 50w (as has been suggested) to lower dc > load. Also increase dc wiring size to lower ohmic losses. Battery > boosters will give a little more voltage at the end of battery life, > but at the expense of battery current (no free lunch). > > I ran 20w psk-31 one FD using a single 60w solar panel and a 100AH > diehard marine battery and was able to run about 6-hours. Of course > psk-31 is keydown in transmit. The radio was a FT-847 so I do not > know its efficiency running at 20w RF. The Rx and digital ckts > probably consumed 3-4 amps continuously, and transmitter probably 50w > at 50% efficiency for another 4 amps. So say it was 7 amps in > transmit (7x12= 84w). I did not call CQ extensively but instead > searched and pounced so most of the time was Rx so Tx/Rx duty cycle > was probably 10%. Overall the load was probably 48w per hour so the > 60w solar panel should hold the battery charge long-term. Things > rarely run exactly according to theory. > > In my former job I maintained two remote repeater sites that were run > on solar-charged batteries in summer and on alkaline batteries in > winter (system auto-switched when solar battery voltage dropped to > 10.5v). The solar system was two 60w solar panels feeding two 100AH > deep-cycle batteries; winter was a 10,800 AH air-activated alkaline > battery bank (90 1.5v cells in 10cell banks). Each 1.5v battery was > rated at 1200AH. The site was operated in a stby status 99% of the > time with only the UHF control radios activated full-time. We got > three years life between battery replacements (helicopter only > access). With new batteries the site had a 30-day operational > status. Repeaters were 30w and there were more than one at each site. > > > 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 > == > BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com > EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-QRT, 1296-?, 3400-? > DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@gmail.com > "Kits made by KL7UW" http://www.kl7uw.com/kits.htm > == > __ > 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
[Elecraft] 451 and AGC
Can anybody let me know the "best" settings of AGC parameters with the new 451 firmware? Looking for best posible separation of multiple signals. Thanks, Mark __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
>Does anyone have any other pointers? I never have been able to get the >decoder to do much for me, even during a contest. Just pay close attention to centering the signal using the CWT decode meter. I usually fine tune a little around the center of the range and find a sweet spot. I have had good results with the last few CW Contests. The last contest I showed my CW challenged brother how well the decoder works. He was truly impressed and is leaning toward a K3 for his next rig. Lately, I have set my AGC THR at 10-11 as a good point to work for all situations I encounter. Oh, also, my pitch is set either at 520 or 530 Hz usually. If you can find a station sending code practice on the air, that would be a good place to see what adjustments are needed for decoding computer generated CW and then you could go from there for not so perfect CW. - Roger W5RDW -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/4-48-vs-4-51-CW-Decode-tp7558336p7558349.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
Lyle and I have discussed this, and we're certain that we can have the best of both AGC and CW decoding with some further changes to firmware. We'll be looking into it when I get back from vacation. Wayne On Jun 29, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Guy Olinger K2AV wrote: > Perhaps if you are only talking about the CW decoder, but in general > my > experience with 4.51 is utterly dead opposite of yours. It *DOES* > change a > lot of sweet spots, but once adjusted for those, the improvement in > all > areas is rather extraordinary. Again, the sweet spots for a lot of > things > seemed to have moved, but given the changes in AGC, that's not really > surprising. Using the second receiver in diversity, 4.51 improves > signals > near or at the AGC intercept, allowing a truer separation of those. > We > tested this thoroughly at Field Day, and all who used the K3 with 4.51 > remarked on how good the diversity was. > > Weak signal performance with 4.51 was clearly much better by ear if > one was > using an AGC with lower numbers in the settings. > > 73, Guy. > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > >> I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. >> >> IMHO 4.51 is: >> 1) More difficult to use >> 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 >> 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 >> 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control >> >> This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still >> using >> 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others >> are having >> better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. >> >> I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but >> alas I am >> CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to >> 20 wpm >> block. >> >> >> Jim, W4ATK >> __ >> 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
Contests aren't the best setting for CW decode, imho. However, if you tune the CW slightly higher than the CWT indicates it seems to improve decoding when there is band noise present. If you minimize the passband to 50 or 100 Hz, this also helps reduce noise in the decode channel. With the passband minimized, the decoder gets good results with the CW and CWT matching. Matt Zilmer Consultant - Product Management Dept. Magellan Navigation / MiTAC Digital Corp. Tel: (909) 394-6052 Cell: (909) 730-6552 Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Hisashi T Fujinaka Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 10:47 AM To: W5RDW Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, W5RDW wrote: > When I first installed 4.51, I had to fiddle around with a few > adjustments for the decode function to work as before, primarily > adjusting THR lower. It seemed 4.48 liked a THR of 7, but now 4.51 > seems to like a THR of 3. I have the AGC THC at 10 or so. Also, I > always use the SPOT function to get the received signal in the proper place > to decode. Does anyone have any other pointers? I never have been able to get the decoder to do much for me, even during a contest. -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - ht...@twofifty.com BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
Perhaps if you are only talking about the CW decoder, but in general my experience with 4.51 is utterly dead opposite of yours. It *DOES* change a lot of sweet spots, but once adjusted for those, the improvement in all areas is rather extraordinary. Again, the sweet spots for a lot of things seemed to have moved, but given the changes in AGC, that's not really surprising. Using the second receiver in diversity, 4.51 improves signals near or at the AGC intercept, allowing a truer separation of those. We tested this thoroughly at Field Day, and all who used the K3 with 4.51 remarked on how good the diversity was. Weak signal performance with 4.51 was clearly much better by ear if one was using an AGC with lower numbers in the settings. 73, Guy. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. > > IMHO 4.51 is: >1) More difficult to use >2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 >3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 >4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control > > This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still using > 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others are having > better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. > > I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but alas I am > CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to 20 wpm > block. > > > Jim, W4ATK > __ > 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
[Elecraft] KX3 Order
Earlier today I posted notification from Elecraft that my KX3 Kit was ready to ship. Instead of giving you the order number I mistakenly gave you the invoice number. Here is the order number 2208-5523-4906 Sorry for the mistake. 73 Dave KD1NA __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
Thanks Wayne, that is good news. 73s, Jim On Jun 29, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Wayne Burdick wrote: > CW decode can and will be improved in the next release after 4.51. But we > have to get 4.51 into production status because of the AGC improvements. CW > decode requires its own AGC, in effect, so that the user can take advantage > of the wider dynamic range of the IF/AF AGC. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > >> I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. >> >> IMHO 4.51 is: >> 1) More difficult to use >> 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 >> 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 >> 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control >> >> This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still using >> 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others are having >> better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. >> >> I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but alas I am >> CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to 20 wpm >> block. >> >> >> Jim, W4ATK >> __ >> 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, W5RDW wrote: > When I first installed 4.51, I had to fiddle around with a few adjustments > for the decode function to work as before, primarily adjusting THR lower. It > seemed 4.48 liked a THR of 7, but now 4.51 seems to like a THR of 3. I have > the AGC THC at 10 or so. Also, I always use the SPOT function to get the > received signal in the proper place to decode. Does anyone have any other pointers? I never have been able to get the decoder to do much for me, even during a contest. -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - ht...@twofifty.com BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
When I first installed 4.51, I had to fiddle around with a few adjustments for the decode function to work as before, primarily adjusting THR lower. It seemed 4.48 liked a THR of 7, but now 4.51 seems to like a THR of 3. I have the AGC THC at 10 or so. Also, I always use the SPOT function to get the received signal in the proper place to decode. It will decode any speed that I have encountered if the sending CW is computer generated (it gobbles up the high speed W1AW code practice!) or the CW Op has a very good fist. As the sending CW Op gets more sloppy, the decode function starts to suffer, as I would imagine most decoders would do. Some Ops do not leave a space between characters, so no wonder a decoder has trouble. It loves the contests, where I imagine many are using a keyboard or memory functions to send calls, exchanges, etc. - Roger W5RDW -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/4-48-vs-4-51-CW-Decode-tp7558336p7558342.html Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
I listened hard to APF with 4.51 and can't tell any difference. OTOH I'm using fairly low threshold and slope settings (the defaults). Wayne On Jun 29, 2012, at 9:21 AM, Thomas Horsten wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > Since the effects of 4.51 have come up again, I'm wondering if you > got around to investigating the (to my ears negative) effect on APF > that it brought on? I seem to remember you were going to do some > measurements, but I can't remember having seen the results of those. > > 73, Thomas M0TRN > > On 29 June 2012 17:14, Wayne Burdick wrote: > CW decode can and will be improved in the next release after 4.51. But > we have to get 4.51 into production status because of the AGC > improvements. CW decode requires its own AGC, in effect, so that the > user can take advantage of the wider dynamic range of the IF/AF AGC. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > > > I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. > > > > IMHO 4.51 is: > > 1) More difficult to use > > 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 > > 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 > > 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control > > > > This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still > > using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps > > others are having better results and will share AGC settings, > > threshold setting etc. > > > > I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but > > alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over > > the 18 to 20 wpm block. > > > > > > Jim, W4ATK > > __ > > 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 > __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
I have sent in my FT radio so I cannot give you my settings. I find the latest update for CW decode to be the best yet. I do narrow my filter. I also use the decode to improve my copy speed and was easily in the 20WPM + speed. I send around 15+ with the KXPD3. 73, Bill K9YEQ -Original Message- From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of valvetb...@netzero.com Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 11:01 AM To: w4...@bellsouth.net Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode I agree. I just installed 4.51 yesterday, but it doesn't seem to work as well as 4.48, even using the same settings for slope and threshold. I will experiment more before I give up on 4.51, but I will probably revert back to the previous version. Art WB8ENE -- Original Message -- From: W4ATK To: Elecraft Reflector Subject: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:52:26 -0500 I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. IMHO 4.51 is: 1) More difficult to use 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others are having better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to 20 wpm block. Jim, W4ATK __ 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 Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
Hi Wayne, Since the effects of 4.51 have come up again, I'm wondering if you got around to investigating the (to my ears negative) effect on APF that it brought on? I seem to remember you were going to do some measurements, but I can't remember having seen the results of those. 73, Thomas M0TRN On 29 June 2012 17:14, Wayne Burdick wrote: > CW decode can and will be improved in the next release after 4.51. But > we have to get 4.51 into production status because of the AGC > improvements. CW decode requires its own AGC, in effect, so that the > user can take advantage of the wider dynamic range of the IF/AF AGC. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > > > I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. > > > > IMHO 4.51 is: > > 1) More difficult to use > > 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 > > 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 > > 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control > > > > This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still > > using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps > > others are having better results and will share AGC settings, > > threshold setting etc. > > > > I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but > > alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over > > the 18 to 20 wpm block. > > > > > > Jim, W4ATK > > __ > > 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 > __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
CW decode can and will be improved in the next release after 4.51. But we have to get 4.51 into production status because of the AGC improvements. CW decode requires its own AGC, in effect, so that the user can take advantage of the wider dynamic range of the IF/AF AGC. 73, Wayne N6KR On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:52 AM, W4ATK wrote: > I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. > > IMHO 4.51 is: > 1) More difficult to use > 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 > 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 > 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control > > This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still > using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps > others are having better results and will share AGC settings, > threshold setting etc. > > I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but > alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over > the 18 to 20 wpm block. > > > Jim, W4ATK > __ > 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
Re: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
I agree. I just installed 4.51 yesterday, but it doesn't seem to work as well as 4.48, even using the same settings for slope and threshold. I will experiment more before I give up on 4.51, but I will probably revert back to the previous version. Art WB8ENE -- Original Message -- From: W4ATK To: Elecraft Reflector Subject: [Elecraft] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:52:26 -0500 I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. IMHO 4.51 is: 1) More difficult to use 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others are having better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to 20 wpm block. Jim, W4ATK __ 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 Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2 __ 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] 4.48 vs 4.51 CW Decode
I am saving a copy of 4.48 so I can go back to it. IMHO 4.51 is: 1) More difficult to use 2) Does not perform as well as 4.48 3) Lacks the weak signal performance of 4.48 4) Requires constant adjustment of the RF Gain control This was the absolute best CW decoder I had ever used. I am still using 4.51 but have not yet hit the sweet spot with it. Perhaps others are having better results and will share AGC settings, threshold setting etc. I am can copy call signs, signal reports at elevated speeds, but alas I am CW challenged and am using CW decode to help me get over the 18 to 20 wpm block. Jim, W4ATK __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] The ins and outs of PSK on the K3?
[Just catching up with the list] My latest PSK method in my continuously evolving technique using the K3 is: Lock the K3 on the base frequency in DATA-A mode. (When I adjust the hi and low cut knobs I frequently bump the big tuning knob.) Set the low cut to 300 and high cut to 2400 so there won't be any falloff of signals at the ends of my 2KHz waterfall. Poke at signals on the waterfall for contacts. Use the manual notch filter to remove any single very strong signal if necessary. When I start a QSO, narrow the hi and low cut to about 150 Hz around the signal. Adjust the RF gain until the band noise is barely visible on the waterfall. Tune the signal with both "receivers" in my computer software (cocoaModem on a MacBook Pro), which will generally give a 1 Hz or so difference and improve decoding. When the QSO is over, open the bandwidth back up and continue searching. When I'm calling CQ, I narrow the bandwidth as above so I can detect weak responses. I have a macro to open the bandwidth, but because the audio frequency of the QSO is variable I haven't automated the narrowing of the bandwidth. I am thinking of making a mod to cocoaModem to send a command to the K3, but this project will have to wait until at least September. One other issue is that the noise reduction in cocoaModem is quite effective when the bandwidth is open, but it becomes much worse when the bandwidth is narrowed. The K3 does not provide noise reduction in Data-A mode. Cheers - Bill, AD6JV --- Bill Frantz| gets() remains as a monument | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | to C's continuing support of | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | buffer overruns. | Los Gatos, CA 95032 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
I agree. In this case (pulling lots of current with a respectable duty cycle), the booster only gives you more operating time in the margin when the K3's DC input sees less than 11V. I typically run this AGM battery as low as 10V. And it takes longer to recharge using the solar PV source. I'm discovering that this battery is about flat now. It's 12 years old and won't hold a charge so well any more. Time for one of those Optima deep cycle 140AH Yellow Tops! 73, matt On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 21:06:58 -0700, you wrote: > > >A battery booster doesn't do much good very long if you're drawing more >current from the battery than your solar cell is putting into it like >WO1S was. A dead battery just gets deader quicker. > >Dave AB7E > > >On 6/28/2012 2:54 PM, Matthew Zilmer wrote: >> You might want to get a battery booster. Here is one >> http://stores.tgelectronics.org/Detail.bok?no=10. >> >> I can recommend that one. Had one for a couple years and use it to boost to >> 14.5VDC from whatever voltage any time of day from a solar-charged battery. >> I think my K3 likes that 14.5V! >> >> Matt Zilmer >> Consultant - Product Management Dept. >> Magellan Navigation / MiTAC Digital Corp. >> Tel: (909) 394-6052 >> Cell: (909) 730-6552 >> Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere >> > >__ >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
[Elecraft] KX3 Order
I just received my order confirmation e-mail from Lisa at Elecraft. I ordered it December 28th and it is the kit. I am getting all the excessories except the battery charger (not in stock) and the key (not ordered). My order number is 85917 for those who are keeping track. The message stated delivery in early July. Better clear my workbench!! 73 KD1NA __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] kx3 options shipping status
Our intent is to ship any KX3 add on options upon order. In general this will happen within 1-5 days, depending on our current supply. 73, Eric www.elecraft.com _..._ On Jun 29, 2012, at 12:39 AM, "John Cooper" wrote: > Ive been trying to resist the urge to call them, every call is precious time > taken away from filling orders. > > John > > -Original Message- > From: Jim Lowman > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:29 PM > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] kx3 options shipping status > > I decided after the fact to order the paddle and mic. > Since I was ordering a K3, I asked if they could be included with that > order, > rather than waiting for the KX3 to ship. > > At that time, probably 60 or so days ago, I was told that the mic would > ship with the K3, but they were saving the paddles to ship with units > ready to go. That situation may have changed. > > Why not give the nice ladies at Elecraft Sales a call or send an e-mail? > > 72/73 de Jim - AD6CW > > > On 6/28/2012 9:29 AM, John Cooper wrote: >> If one just needs to purchase a kx3 option without the kx3 itself ie just >> the tuner or paddle or filters is there still a “wait” untill all orders >> are caught up? Or are the options shipping immediately? I know the >> chargers are on backorder. Theres no shipping status on the webpage for >> individual options so not sure how that works. Has anyone that already >> has there kx3 ordered something for it and received it or what? >> >> Thanks WT5Y >> > > __ > 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 __ 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
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
Hello Jack Thankfully, I have not been in a real emergency, but one of my prime directives would be to first establish a stable and exclusive channel, OK, it might have to change from time to time, but not like a contest situation. Having established a channel, one of the power-lean digital modes would be the choice for me: I keep hearing stories of working across the world on a dead band with half a noodlewatt. The incoming data is captured on a power-lean laptop, palmtop, Iphone unambiguously in plain language and forwarded or printed off if you must with a small printer. I declare I haven't done any of this, it's just my firtile imagination - but I'd like to. David GUNA On 28/06/2012 22:43, Jack Brindle wrote: > Guys, I think the point is this: There is a real emergency. You are > off someplace with a big battery and have been operating for quite > some time, enough for the battery to have gone down. You have another > message to get through. In this situation, perhaps you should be > running CW at a lower power, but still, the situation could be very > real. > > Having a battery booster could be very helpful, and perhaps one should > be added to the ham's arsenal. On the other hand, running 100 watts on > battery is probably not a good idea either. Having been in emergency > situations where you do not know when operations will end, you do > everything you can to conserver your resources. That means lowering > the TX power as much as possible. Even still, Murphy says that at some > point when the battery is running out, someone will hand you an > emergency message to get through. How do you handle it? As I noted, > I'd then lower the power and grab the CW key... > > Jack Brindle, W6FB > > > > On Jun 28, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Matthew Zilmer wrote: > >> You might want to get a battery booster. Here is one >> http://stores.tgelectronics.org/Detail.bok?no=10 >> . >> >> I can recommend that one. Had one for a couple years and use it to >> boost to 14.5VDC from whatever voltage any time of day from a solar- >> charged battery. I think my K3 likes that 14.5V! >> >> Matt Zilmer >> Consultant - Product Management Dept. >> Magellan Navigation / MiTAC Digital Corp. >> Tel: (909) 394-6052 >> Cell: (909) 730-6552 >> Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net >> [mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net >> ] On Behalf Of Peter Wollan >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:07 AM >> To: John Kountz >> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3 >> >> The problem here isn't the battery AH capacity, but the voltage >> supply. It could be dropping below 10 vdc because both radios are >> on the same supply, or because the power supply wires are too fine >> gauge, or because the battery is defective. >> >> The K3 is less robust to supply voltage than the other Elecraft >> radios. The K2 is rated for 10-15 volts; the K1, KX1, and KX3 go >> down a lot lower, I think 8 volts. I looked at the K3 documents to >> see what minimum voltage it requires, and I couldn't find it -- I >> think it's something like 11, but it may be 11.5 or even 12. >> >> You'd probably do fine just by using a separate battery for each >> radio, and not letting it run down too far. A voltage booster isn't >> needed, as lots of operators all over the world have demonstrated. >> >> Peter W0LLN >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:19 PM, John Kountz wrote: >>> ... In tandom >>> operation, the Eagle was not affected by momentary voltage dips >>> (below >>> 10 >>> VDC) whereas the K3 would shut down. >> __ >> 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 > __ > 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.
Re: [Elecraft] Field Day experience with K3
Look at energy instead of power. You have a 120AH solar panel to a 110AH battery. What is your load? Two 100w transmitters running 12v at 17a dc load (204w load to the battery for each radio). Your Tx/Rx duty cycle is probably = 30% during FD (are you calling CQ FD CQ FD a lot?). So the load is 204w x2 x 0.30 = 122w which after an hour has totally discharged the 110AH battery if were not being charged by the solar panel. With solar charging at 120AH you still have a negative energy equation (so maybe it takes a couple hours operation to discharge the battery). It sounds as only one battery was used for two radios. A better solution would be separate batteries very close to the radios. Still the 120AH solar charging system is undersized to maintain the batteries very long. So lower RF power to 50w (as has been suggested) to lower dc load. Also increase dc wiring size to lower ohmic losses. Battery boosters will give a little more voltage at the end of battery life, but at the expense of battery current (no free lunch). I ran 20w psk-31 one FD using a single 60w solar panel and a 100AH diehard marine battery and was able to run about 6-hours. Of course psk-31 is keydown in transmit. The radio was a FT-847 so I do not know its efficiency running at 20w RF. The Rx and digital ckts probably consumed 3-4 amps continuously, and transmitter probably 50w at 50% efficiency for another 4 amps. So say it was 7 amps in transmit (7x12= 84w). I did not call CQ extensively but instead searched and pounced so most of the time was Rx so Tx/Rx duty cycle was probably 10%. Overall the load was probably 48w per hour so the 60w solar panel should hold the battery charge long-term. Things rarely run exactly according to theory. In my former job I maintained two remote repeater sites that were run on solar-charged batteries in summer and on alkaline batteries in winter (system auto-switched when solar battery voltage dropped to 10.5v). The solar system was two 60w solar panels feeding two 100AH deep-cycle batteries; winter was a 10,800 AH air-activated alkaline battery bank (90 1.5v cells in 10cell banks). Each 1.5v battery was rated at 1200AH. The site was operated in a stby status 99% of the time with only the UHF control radios activated full-time. We got three years life between battery replacements (helicopter only access). With new batteries the site had a 30-day operational status. Repeaters were 30w and there were more than one at each site. 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 == BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-QRT, 1296-?, 3400-? DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@gmail.com "Kits made by KL7UW" http://www.kl7uw.com/kits.htm == __ 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
