Hi All,
Having just bought my F3K and being an avid CW Op and having been
promised by the UK Importer
that the F3K will do full QSK like my previous US made rig (which I
am now regretting selling!) I am
deeply concerned about what is being said here on the list and also
in all the emails I have received about FlexRadios
and the poor CW capabilities.
I am amazed a company that makes HAM radios can overlook the CW mode
in such a way and am now
in two minds as to what to do.
I really like the Panadapter/waterfall interface to the radio, I love
the filtering and no ringing capability when using
very narrow filters, but I have been using QSK for years and as John
has said it adds a new dimension to the mode.
So my question has to be will the F3K run at 25-30WPM without QSK or
is it going to drop characters?
In the UK Importer shop they had a Pentium PC driving the F3K demo
and said the reason it was useless
(and I really do mean useless!!) at sending CW was because the PC
wasn't fast enough,
even with no breakin set it dropped 80-90% of the characters I sent
from my twin paddle.
Is this going to be the case with a fast PC ?
If so, then I won;t bother spending £900 ($1500) on a new PC to drive
it and will instead take the radio back
and try to get my money back.
(Anyone from FlexRadio on this list that can give me an official
answer please? Or is this too hot a subject to coax you out of the
woodwork? )
Thanks!
Mike.
================================
>Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:01:21 -0500
>From: John Ragle <tpcj1...@crocker.com>
>Subject: [Flexradio] QSK -- True Grist
>To: "flexradio@flex-radio.biz" <flexradio@flex-radio.biz>
>Message-ID: <4b603921.1000...@crocker.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> This "interesting thread" has been active off the list-server as
>well as on. I strongly agree with Jay Sewell's comment ("I have
>never...") about QSK. Clearly the dominant design/engineering
thread at
>Flex has not thought very carefully about CW operation, and my view is
>that the Flex boxes are "Gentlemen's Voice Communication Devices."
> QSK is the ability to hear, for example, a breaking station as one
>is calling CQ. A simple "dit" or two sent by a listener during the CQ
>should be enough to alert the CQ'ing station that someone is
listening.
>Often, when I was using a rig capable of QSK operation, I would
mention
>QSK during the CQ sequence, immediately to receive a key-press from a
>listening station.
> Normally I operated CW at a comfortable rate, e.g. somewhere
around
>20-25 wpm, and there was plenty of time for a listener to have
gotten my
>attention. The transition from TX to RX in a QSK rig (I am told not to
>mention brand names on the reflector) occurs with no click, thump, or
>other distracting noise...the RX function is simply completely "there"
>when there is no TX output. In full QSK operation, there is no need to
>send -...-.- to alert a station that there will be a change-over
from TX
>to RX; a simple key-press by the listener or a pause by the sender is
>enough.
> There are at least 2 American firms that make full lines of
>transceivers capable of full QSK. I have never encountered a "rice-
box"
>with this capability, but there may be some. "Semi-break-in" is a joke
>in poor taste. Even though I approve of the philosophy behind the Flex
>designs, Mr. Sewell's last paragraph sums up my feelings in the
matter,
>except that I think the issue is a hardware one, not something in the
>programming. The Flex transceivers are definitely not for
inveterate CW
>operators, at least until this aspect is corrected.
>John Ragle -- W1ZI
_______________________________________________
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kc.flex-radio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
