[Elecraft] K3 macro to set power
Hi Elecrafters, I am triyng to write 2 macros to switch between 100W output power and power set by band. 100W ouput power is simple : PC100; Unfortunatly I found no way to make sure I am on nor or per band in PWR SET menu. It's easy to access to PWR SET menu : MN081; but the parameter seems to be changed only by : UP; or DN; then MN255; to exit the menu. Each time you play the macro, you toggle between nor or per band but, without going in the Config menu, you have no way to know if you are on nor or per band. My question : do you know a sure way to set this menu to per band ? Thank you and best regards Georges F6DFZ __ 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] KRC2
Hi to the group, I would like to know if the KRC2 can be used to interface a Kenwood rig to the KAT500. The KRC2 can read the Kenwood RS232 protocol and know its frequency. The KAT500 needs a BCD code to switch bands (with the K3 it gets it from the Aux connector). The KRC2 has a connector (J4) which can be set to Input or Output BCD code. My questions are : does the KRC2 outputs the correct BCD code needed by the KAT500 when the Kenwood rig is set to a frequency ? Can each band limits be set with the KRC2 utility software ? I would prefer personnal experience than theory, I have carrefully read the manual ! Thanks and best regards. Georges F6DFZ __ 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] TR : KRC2
Message original Objet : Re: [Elecraft] KRC2 De : Georges Ringotte F6DFZ f6...@sfr.fr À : e...@elecraft.com Cc : Hi Eric, Thanks for your answer and happy to be in direct contact with you. As I said in my post, I read the KAT500 manual. What I want is an ATU who switch bands in receive, without having to tune. That's why I posted this question. Best regards. Georges Georges Ringotte F6DFZ Colonel de Sapeurs - Pompiers (er) 180, rue du Château 07120 Saint Alban - Auriolles France 06.12.51.88.15 __ 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] (no subject)
Hi to Geoff and to the Group, Geoff said : Although the Hilberling PT-8000 series of transceivers are very expensive, this could be because they have been designed for Military and 'commercial' use and not only for amateurs. I believe that it should be possible to design and market a high performance transceiver using an up-conversion architecture, whose selling price is reasonable for most amateurs.Yes, it's built like a RS instrument and a lot of money went also with its 200W, 2 receivers, 144MHz coverage, high end power supply, all filters included... The results I have of tests performed by other people and myself, show that the level of odd order IMD generated by a crystal ladder filter using a given quality of quartz increases as the filter's bandwidth is decreased. This is surely one of the reason why the Hilberling uses a 50 kHz wide VHF roofing filter.This remind me of the 50 years old debate about SSB generation and the choice between filter or phasing generation.Filter generation was considered like a brute force method, and phasing a soft one.Down conversion with ultra narrow filters is somewhat brute force, up conversion with large bandwidth filters is a softer method.Just my opinion ! Regards Georges F6DFZ __ 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] Down or Up conversions designs
Hi to Geoff and to the Group, Geoff said : Although the Hilberling PT-8000 series of transceivers are very expensive, this could be because they have been designed for Military and 'commercial' use and not only for amateurs. I believe that it should be possible to design and market a high performance transceiver using an up-conversion architecture, whose selling price is reasonable for most amateurs.Yes, it's built like a RS instrument and a lot of money went also with its 200W, 2 receivers, 144MHz coverage, high end power supply, all filters included... The results I have of tests performed by other people and myself, show that the level of odd order IMD generated by a crystal ladder filter using a given quality of quartz increases as the filter's bandwidth is decreased. This is surely one of the reason why the Hilberling uses a 50 kHz wide VHF roofing filter.This remind me of the 50 years old debate about SSB generation and the choice between filter or phasing generation.Filter generation was considered like a brute force method, and phasing a soft one.Down conversion with ultra narrow filters is somewhat brute force, up conversion with large bandwidth filters is a softer method.Just my opinion ! Regards Georges F6DFZ __ 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] Down or Up conversions designs
Out of an extremely interesting private mail, I don't have got comments on this topic, which was much debated in the past. I post it once again because I think the Elecraft team and Elecraft aficionados are more apt to discuss this subject than on other reflectors dealing with down conversion receivers. I added some comments. Sorry if I am boring you! George Here it is : Hi to the group Even though I own and appreciate very much my K3, in fact I believe it's the best sounding receiver I ever had, I have always been an advocate of up conversion design, namely because it's the only way to get general coverage and also because some characteristics, for a given cost, are better with an up conversion design (IF and image rejections for example). The probability is low, but if in the future a WARC give a new band very near the IF of a down conversion design, it will not be able to cover it. Due to the Sherwood chart, and the way receivers are classed, there is a trend for manufacturers to propose down conversion design, even though some characteristics may be poor ; I think of the Yaesu FT5000 for example, very high in the Rob Sherwood chart, but with poor image rejection, and extremely poor IMD2 figure for the second receiver. Even Kenwood comes with a high end transceiver with a strictly down conversion first receiver, and a mixed design second receiver. Only Icom seems to resist. The IC7700, even if costly and not perfect, employs some very interesting features (preselector, relays switching of RF filters, large coils, good gain distribution, etc...) I always thought the key to success was an up conversion design with very good gain distribution, like RS XK2100 transceiver for example. Ten Tec tried this with the Omni 7, but with limited success, even for remote signals IMD3. Now the 1st transceiver on Rob's chart is an up conversion design, with a VHF roofing filter 50 kHz wide, proof of the validity of optimized gain distribution ; it has 105 dB dynamic range with signals separated by only 1 kHz. In the past, the Signal One CX7 and CX11 were up conversion design, with a first IF from 39 to 40 MHz (the real bandwidth was much wider than 1 MHz of course), and the CX11 managed to get very good IMD3 inside this bandwidth, proof of a very good gain distribution. Perhaps, after the current trend to develop down conversion receivers (Elecraft's rigs, Eagle, FT3K, TS-590, TS990) it will revert trend and we will see up conversion design with large dynamic range for closed spaced signals. Yes this German made transceiver, built like a measuring instrument, is very expensive, but surely it's concept can be used to market simpler rigs (100W, 13,8V, only one receiver, no VHF, not so luxurious, with true general coverage ...) for a more correct price. Any comments? Best regards. Georges F6DFZ __ 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] TR : Down or Up conversions designs
Message original Objet : Re: [Elecraft] Down or Up conversions designs De : Georges Ringotte F6DFZ f6...@sfr.fr À : n...@sonic.net Cc : Hi Alan, Happy to meet the Elecraft firmware guru! Many thanks for your fine comments. I perfectly understand the Elecraft policy, I don't critic it In fact, from the beginning with the K2, it's very coherent. What I don't agree with is using the down conversion hip to market transceivers very expensive like the new Yaesu FT3K, and seeing people on its reflector waiting for it like a miracle. Thanks again and best regards! Georges Georges Ringotte F6DFZ Colonel de Sapeurs - Pompiers (er) 180, rue du Château 07120 Saint Alban - Auriolles France 06.12.51.88.15 __ 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] Up conversion design
Hi to the group Even though I own and appreciate very much my K3, in fact I believe it's the best sounding receiver I ever had, I have always been an advocate of up conversion design, namely because it's the only way to get general coverage and also because some characteristics, for a given cost, are better with an up conversion design (IF and image rejections for example). The probability is low, but if in the future a WARC give a new band very near the IF of a down conversion design, it will not be able to cover it. Due to the Sherwood chart, and the way receivers are classed, there is a trend for manufacturers to propose down conversion design, even though some characteristics may be poor ; I think of the Yaesu FT5000 for example, very high in the Rob Sherwood chart, but with poor image rejection, and extremely poor IMD2 figure for the second receiver. I always thought the key to success was an up conversion design with very good gain distribution, like RS XK2100 transceiver for example. Ten Tec tried this with the Omni 7, but with limited success. Now the 1st transceiver on Rob's chart is an up conversion design, with a VHF roofing filter 50 kHz wide, proof of the validity of optimized gain distribution ; it has 105 dB dynamic range with signals separated by only 1 kHz. Perhaps, after the current trend to develop down conversion receivers (Elecraft's rigs, Eagle, FT3K, TS-590) it will revert trend and we will see up conversion design with large dynamic range for closed spaced signals. Yes this german made transceiver, built like a measuring instrument, is very expensive, but surely it's concept can be used to market simpler rigs (100W, 13,8V, only one receiver, no VHF, not so luxurious...) for a more correct price. Any comments? Best regards. Georges F6DFZ __ 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 RF feedback
Hi to the group Just to report a problem I had very recently. My K3 is used with a Turner +3 microphone and had been working very fine since the beginning. Yesterday, barefoot at 90 W or at 350 W with my PA, I had very bad modulation reports on 40 m. I switched on the monitor, and indeed modulation was extremely bad. But it was not permanent, only from time to time. Gary suggested RF feedback with eventually a problem from the power supply. I checked this reflector and found Pin 1 problem syndrome. On mine, shielded mike cable was connected to Pins 1/7, ant PTT to Pins 2/8. I modified the Turner +3 to have the PTT ground internally connected to the mike case and mike cable shield. Inside the K3 mike plug, I disconnected the PTT ground from Pin 8, which became free. This seems to solve the problem. Thank you for the Elecraft support team, and also for the fine advice on this reflector. Best regards Georges F6DFZ __ 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] KAT-500
Hi to the Elecraft team and the group, Will this ATU be used with the K3 as the internal tuner (automatic band change, automatic antenna selection with band, automatic ATU settings with frequency...) Is the diversity option still in the pipe? Best regards Georges Ringotte F6DFZ __ 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, ergonomy and performances
Hi to the group, I read with great interest the KX3 user manual. Two questions to the Elecraft team. The KX3 home use is clearly envisaged. In a vast majority of cases, you need to have a near vertical front panel to operate ergonomicaly a rig. Do you plan to sell a stand, like the one for the front panel of the TS-480, to operate the KX3 at home ? IMD2 is a major issue in Europe, where strong BC signals on lower SW bands recombine and appear as IMD in the upper ham bands. The KX3 is the first Elecraft rig with electronic switching of the receiver RF filters, others used relays. Can you tell if the IMD2 rejection of KX3 will be in the league as K2 and K3 ? Thank you and best regards Georges __ 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] Text Decode on P3 screen?
Hi to the group, On a similar subject, could the P3 screen be used to display some information from the K3 (for exemple the sub-receiver status) ? Best regards Georges __ 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] AF peak filter
Hi to the group, Is it possible to write a macro command switching on or off the AF peak filter ? I do not see anything in the programmer reference document. Best regards Georges __ 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] AF peak filter
Thank you for the answer ! Found how to get the AF peak filter Off on the sub receiver ! Regards Georges __ 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] P3 beta, A/B operation
Hi to the group, Same thing there, impossible to have the P3 showing the beginning of a band, it shows 99.5 kHz, or anything. That was not the case with previous version. Any help ? Georges __ 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] K2's Future
Hi to the group, Grab a K2 kit and/or its options as soon as you can. Through hole components become more and more scarce, and I believe will come a time when Elecraft will announce they can no more produce these kits. OHR, Wilderness Radio and others have such difficulties. Regards Georges __ 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/P3 S meter calibration
Hi to the group, I have a question about the S meter calibration. On HF bands, It's on spot, very impressive indeed from S1 to end of scale, tracking my HP generator nearly perfectly ; S9 at -73dBm However, it's not the same with the internal K144XV 2 m transverter. P3 is good, -93 dBm at S9. The K3 is very poor, S3/S4 for that same level. Do you have any explication ? Best regards Georges __ 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] K2 PA Failure
Yes you are missing something. The power supply was first switch on, then the K2. At switch on the capacitors into the K2 charges themself, and the power supply answered to this by emiting spikes. I never write that all power supply have the same behavior, but for mine, it explained the K2 PA transistors failure. A scope showed clearly the problem with this power supply. After changing the power supply, I had no more PA transistors failure. Georges F6DFZ Am I missing something here? Seems to me that the rational thing to do is turn on the power supply and let it stabilize (should only take a second or two), then turn on the K2/K3? Turning a K2 or K3 on and off using the power supply switch never gives the firmware/software a chance to initialize or shut down...just like pulling the plug on your computer might well cause at least mild consternation to the machine! There are no enormous filter caps in either Kn machine that need to be serviced at power on. Seems to me that using a non-matched pair of transistors is much more likely to be the cause of failure, as someone has already pointed out. John Ragle -- W1ZI = On 2/17/2011 2:31 AM, Georges Ringotte F6DFZ wrote: Hi to the group, When I had my K2/10, I had multiple failures of the PA transistors. Close investigation showed that the problem came from my switching power supply (a professional 5A one from Friwo). When switching on the K2, the power supply emited large spikes that destroyed the PA transistors. If the K2 was first switched on its internal battery, and then the power supply was switch on, no problem as the capacitors of the K2 were already charged. Before restauring your K2, check your power supply with a scope at switch on. Best regards. Georges F6DFZ __ 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] K2 PA Failure
Hi to the group, When I had my K2/10, I had multiple failures of the PA transistors. Close investigation showed that the problem came from my switching power supply (a professional 5A one from Friwo). When switching on the K2, the power supply emited large spikes that destroyed the PA transistors. If the K2 was first switched on its internal battery, and then the power supply was switch on, no problem as the capacitors of the K2 were already charged. Before restauring your K2, check your power supply with a scope at switch on. Best regards. Georges F6DFZ __ 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] P3 with Yaesu FT-2000 and K3
Hi to the group, You can use the FT-2000 with the P3 in fitting inside the IF-2000 board from RF Space, and configure the P3 on the IF out frequency of this board. Georges __ 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] Delivery in France
My K3/P3 are on their way to France with USPS Priority Mail International. Who will distribute them to my door : La Poste, GLS ??? Thank you. Georges F6DFZ __ 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] Down-conversion
Hi to the group, Here is a post I made on the TS-590 Yahoo Group about down or up conversion, close spaced signals dynamic range, and the way receivers are classed in a few charts (Sherwood or W8JI for exemple). I ordered very recently a K3, and it is on its way to France. I must add that Elecraft took some measures to limit the problems associated with down-conversion ; for exemple, transmit low pass filters are used to improve image rejection. There is also a complex netwoork in the receiver path with notches on image frequencies of the upper ham bands. For remote signals IMD2 and IMD3, relays are used to limit them. Down-conversion is not a fatality, only a technical choise aimed to get the maximun performance on the ham bands. If it's well implemented (as on the K3, I do hope !), all is fine. If not, you will have problems much more important than limited 2 kHz dynamic range. Professional receiver must cover the whole HF spectrum, and up-cpnversion is the only choise to do it. It's possible to have a wide (aka 15 kHz) VHF roofing filter, and still very good 2 kHz dynamic range, but it comes at a cost. All receiver are compromises, between technical choise, cost, and even marketting. You must understand this to make the better choise with the money you want to spend. I have a lot of respect for the work done by Rob Sherwood. But its chart, and the way receivers are classed, describes only a very small part of receivers performances, even if it has the merit to provoque the interest of prospective buyers and by way of consequence the interest of marketing departments of ham equipment manufacturers. 2kHz spacing IMD3 describes the behavior of a receiver in presence of close spaced signals, mainly CW and data. A good figure can be had by a tight selectivity near the frontend obtained by a narrow bandwidth roofing filter (as narrow as 200 Hz for the K3), and/or by a wideband roofing filter and judicious gain distribution (as the RS XK2100 does). As Rob pointed it, 2 kHz IMD3 has little to mean for SSB because IMD generated by nearby transmitters is more prevalent than IMD generated by the receiver itself ; there, selectivity obtained by the DSP is the main factor. The chart of Rob Sherwood is very incomplete ; for exemple, he could add image rejection, and IMD2 and IMD3 generated by remote signals. Image rejection is not a problem with a good up-conversion design, figures well over 100dB are mesured (FT-2000). But it's not the same case with downconversion designs (K2, K3, high in the Rob chart, Eagle, FT-5000, TS-590). With a 9MHz high IF, it's difficult and costly to reject images over 70dB on the higher ham bands, even more difficult with a lower IF (K2). One must understand that these low figures are a real threat when cycle 24 will peak. Can you imagine your chart topping $5k+ receiver with the upper ham bands full of BC and utilities image signals ? Remote signals IMD2 and IMD3 are even more prevalent. These measurements describe the behavior of a receiver in presence of signals for which the sum and/or difference (F1+F2 or F1-F2 for IMD2, 2xF1-F2 or 2xF2-F1 for IMD3) falls were you want to receive. Take real life exemples, described in CQDL magazine in the 80's by the late DL1BU. Imagine for IMD2 large BC signals from the 31m band combining with large BC signals from the 25m band. If your receiver has poor IMD2 (see ARRL review of some chart topping receivers), your 15m ham band will be full of strong combs of BC signals each 5kHz. The same problem exists for 31m and 19m BC bands falling inside the 12m ham band, and for 21m and 19m BC bands falling inside the 10m ham band, but there are a lot of over combinaisons doing the same. For IMD3, the 41, 31 and 21 m BC bands can generate tremendous spurious signals on the 40, 30 and 20 m ham bands. Speaking of real life, I bought in the mid 80's a brand new TS-830s, a very good reveiver, with down-conversion and a preselector. This receiver is quite high into Rob chart, and highly regarded (see eHam.net). When, for the first time I connected it to my Sommer XP507 antenna (a kind of log periodic wide band beam), the receiver was useless during certain parts of the day when the propagation was good on the BC bands. I could solve the problem from IMD2 with 2 switchable high-pass filters (18 MHz high-pass for 17 and 15 m ham bands, and 24 MHz for 12 and 10 m ham bands). For 40, 30 and 20 m ham bands, the only solution was to use the 20 dB attenuator to reduce IMD3. I could also have used an outboard preselector. I can attest that with the peak of cycle 24, if you have a large and/or broadband antenna, these same problems will occur if your receiver has poor IMD2 and remote signals IMD3. I can also certify that 2kHz IMD3 will have very little interest because statisticaly you will have a few ham signals inside your roofing filter, and thousands large BC and utilities signals outside your roofing filters. RF selectivity (VRF or
