Re: [Elecraft] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
Possibly true. However, as a de-facto self-policing Radio Service, and in the spirit of Elmering, it can sometimes to be helpful to discuss long-propagated misconceptions, misunderstandings and misapplications of the rules we operate under. This is true of both operational and engineering practices. For instance, many experienced radio amateurs still believe that there is a lower FCC standard for spurious emissions on HF QRP transmitters than for those above 5W. That changed back in 2003, and now all HF transmitters must be at -43 dBc or better. That's 20 times (13 dB) tighter than the old spec. There are exemptions for transmitters produced earlier, but those "placed in service" after 1/1/2003 must meet the new, tighter spec. (see Part 97.307) This means for example, that an amateur home-brewing from an older schematic must make sure the finished transmitter incorporates sufficient harmonic filtering and suppression of other spurious signals to meet the new spec. It's not so much being a self-appointed lawyer, as helping our fellow amateurs with opinions and advice that hopefully lead to good operating and engineering practices. I know that I have learned a lot from those who have Elmered me. I am constantly learning from those amateurs around me who are more versed in areas than I am, including many on this list. Perhaps, in some small way we can each learn from and help each other to promote a culture of high performance in the Amateur Radio Service, a hobby we all love. 73, Bruce, N1RX > Gentlemen, I'm convinced that Amateur Radio may have nearly as many such > self-appointed lawyers as we did in the Army __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
On 6/25/2011 8:16 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > Gentlemen, I'm convinced that Amateur Radio may have nearly as > many such self-appointed lawyers as we did in the Army - [snip] > nearly as many as Everyone tries to be a lawyer. Even some law school graduates. :-) -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane (A real lawyer) __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
Way back when I was in the US Army (our radio gear then used vacuum tubes), we always had a wise guy in the barracks who went on for hours about whether this or that was legal under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. They were sometimes entertaining, possibly right, and seldom pertinent to the conversation. We called them "Barracks Lawyers". Gentlemen, I'm convinced that Amateur Radio may have nearly as many such self-appointed lawyers as we did in the Army - perhaps nearly as many as Contesters and DX-hounds combined, Hi! 73, Ron AC7AC -Original Message- On 6/25/2011 7:56 PM, Bruce Beford wrote: > Whew. now that I have that off my chest, does anyone want to discuss the > illegality of using "/B" as a beacon identifier? > And /R for repeaters. All the R's belong to Russia. Fred K6DGW TDY Topaz Lake NV __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
On 6/25/2011 8:31 PM, FredJensen wrote: > > And /R for repeaters. All the R's belong to Russia. The ambiguity is resolved by position of the appendage. The /R for repeater is valid. For example, I could run a repeater with the call KB0YH/R. If I were to operate in Russia, my call could have the form R*/KB0YH, where the * represents zero or more characters. The call sign RA3/KB0YH would apply in Central Russia. 73, Gus Hansen __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
On 6/25/2011 7:56 PM, Bruce Beford wrote: > Whew. now that I have that off my chest, does anyone want to discuss the > illegality of using "/B" as a beacon identifier? > And /R for repeaters. All the R's belong to Russia. Fred K6DGW TDY Topaz Lake NV __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
Ever since the XG3 firmware was updated to include CW sending capability I have raised concerns that it's use as a beacon or hidden transmitter in a "fox hunt" would not be legal (in the US) on VHF and up. It simple lacks sufficient harmonic filtering. The phase noise is another issue, that cannot be resolved by filtering. Amplifying this device would just make it worse. The XG3 is a great piece of test equipment- no doubt. But- it is not clean enough to use as a transmitter. Whew. now that I have that off my chest, does anyone want to discuss the illegality of using "/B" as a beacon identifier? Bruce, N1RX > My motivation in all this has been the commentary we've been seeing > on the reflector about running an XG3 wide open into a directional > antenna with no filtering (quite illegally, IMO), and I hadn't > considered the noise generation question at all. When I've used my XG3 > on my K3, it has always been set at -107 dBm, and no change in the noise > floor is observed. > John Ragle -- W1ZI __ 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] Boots for the XG3...off reflector...
Hi, Joe... You're quite right. I did the ff experiment: connect the XG3 to the K3 input, set the XG3 to 50.100 MHz, set the K3 to 50.250 MHz, turn on the XG3 and measure the increase in background noise on the P3. In my case, the noise floor for my K3 looking into a dummy load is -148 dB. Looking into the XG3 OFF it is the same, -148 dB. Looking at the XG3 ON and set at -33 dBm, the K3 set at 50.250 MHz, the noise level is -112 dB...that's 36 dB. It's a noisy sucker, alright... I had not appreciated just how noisy. Of course, these conditions are not very representative of on-the-air actualities, but you're quite correct. My motivation in all this has been the commentary we've been seeing on the reflector about running an XG3 wide open into a directional antenna with no filtering (quite illegally, IMO), and I hadn't considered the noise generation question at all. When I've used my XG3 on my K3, it has always been set at -107 dBm, and no change in the noise floor is observed. John Ragle -- W1ZI = On 6/25/2011 1:55 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > I'm even concerned at 1W. The XG3 is spec'd for -105 dBc/Hz. I can > see a noticeable increase in the noise floor of my K3 on 50 MHz when > the XG3 is set to -33 dBm. __ 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
