It sounds like Wayne understands perfectly. Increasing the CTS count
from the K-Pod adds more data load on the RJ45 port, and there may be a
question as to whether the port can handle that increase.
73, Dennis NJ6G
On 10/8/2018 09:05, Art Suberbielle wrote:
Wayne,
In reading your reply I
A.
Hopefully this won't require a lot of code to accomplish.
Thanks.
Art KZ5D
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K-Pod CTS to match VFO-What say you Wayne?
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi Joe (et al),
I just reviewed this with our K-Pod firmware engineer. Going from 200 to
400 counts
Hi Joe (et al),
I just reviewed this with our K-Pod firmware engineer. Going from 200 to 400
counts is more complex than it sounds because of system bandwidth limitations
at the front panel RJ45 port. We still think it's possible, and we'll both be
looking at it when we get a chance.
73,
Hi Art,
Did Wayne respond?
Joe
KF5WBO
--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post:
lecraft] K-Pod CTS to match VFO
To the contrary, I was a K-POD Field Tester, and requested (on June 1st,
2016) that the K-POD Counts Per turn (CTS) match the K3 tuning rate
(CONFIG:VFO CTS). I was promised that it would happen some day when there
was a K-POD Utiolity. But the K-POD is still fi
To the contrary, I was a K-POD Field Tester, and requested (on June 1st,
2016) that the K-POD Counts Per turn (CTS) match the K3 tuning rate
(CONFIG:VFO CTS). I was promised that it would happen some day when there
was a K-POD Utiolity. But the K-POD is still fixed at 200 "tics" per turn.
At
: [Elecraft] K-Pod CTS to match VFO
Count me in if it's an option.
73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County
On 10/3/2018 1:08 PM, Mike Cox wrote:
> I'd use this for sure!
>
> Mike, AB9V
>
>
> On 10/3/2018 12:27 PM, NW0M wrote:
>> Art,
>>
>>
Count me in if it's an option.
73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County
On 10/3/2018 1:08 PM, Mike Cox wrote:
I'd use this for sure!
Mike, AB9V
On 10/3/2018 12:27 PM, NW0M wrote:
Art,
I've been for this too. Wayne said a couple years back that they
were going
to add this
Wayne,
Is this feature request something we can anticipate seeing before the end of
the year? I've had several other replies off reflector asking for it as well.
As it stands now, IF I set the tuning rate for the VFO A to be what I want, the
K-pod lags behind at half the rate so I can only
I'd use this for sure!
Mike, AB9V
On 10/3/2018 12:27 PM, NW0M wrote:
Art,
I've been for this too. Wayne said a couple years back that they were going
to add this to the firmware. I guess we're the only two K-Pod owners that
want this. I'm not calling this a major enhancement request but
I’d like the option.
Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill
> On Oct 3, 2018, at 12:27 PM, NW0M wrote:
>
> Art,
>
> I've been for this too. Wayne said a couple years back that they were going
> to add this to the firmware. I guess we're the only two K-Pod owners that
> want this. I'm not
Art,
I've been for this too. Wayne said a couple years back that they were going
to add this to the firmware. I guess we're the only two K-Pod owners that
want this. I'm not calling this a major enhancement request but it would be
a nice one.
73,
Mitch NWØM
--
Sent from:
As I recall, most of the K-pod field testers thought the reduced CTS was
beneficial given the placement of the knob.
Of course, they were most all CW contesters who wanted a slower tuning rate.
73,
Don W3FPR
On 9/27/2018 10:07 AM, Art via Elecraft wrote:
When the K-Pod first came out, it
Hi all,
When the K-Pod first came out, it was mentioned that the CTS of the K-Pod was
1/2 of the VFO. That is still the case. Case in point: Set VFO CTS to 200.
K-Pod CTS is only 100.
Could the developers PLEASE write the code to allow the K-Pod to operate at the
same CTS as the VFO?
It
14 matches
Mail list logo
