On Nov 5, 10:08?pm, "Iitoi" wrote:

Motorola just announced the intent to purchase Yaesu Musen.

Actually, they are buying Vertex, which owns Yaesu - and a lot more.

Which raises the question - will they keep Yaesu as a major amateur
radio manufacturer, sell off the amateur division, or shut it down?

Interesting times!

73 de Jim, N2EY

AF6AY wrote:

'S Meter' levels aren't really standardized as to
receiver input signal levels except as a 'common use'
standard and a recommendation by the IARU. Yet
most are under the impression that all S Meters are
calibrated/scaled alike (they aren't) and routinely
report their S Meter readings in QSOs. :-)

Ain't that the truth! There is so much ambiguity in S-meters that they
are more for self comparison than anything else. I calibrated my S-meter
during an antenna comparison a year or so ago, and they wen't in
agreement, and they weren't linear - which is to say that while S-7
might be a bit high, and S-5 mogt be a bit low, and S-2 something else
altogether.

Coupled with what I understand was a change in how many db were
considered an S-unit to boot makes the S meter more of an entertainment
device, or more likely one of the less important functions of the meter
we use ot adjust power, alc, SWR and the like.



Amateur radio equipment, especially transceivers,
are designed and made for stand-alone use.
Peripherals are relegated to outside-the-antenna-
connector devices or different speaker boxes and
other audio processing things. The external
connections are standardized as to power input
(AC standards from the power distribution infrastructure
or DC power from the auto industry), computer
interface connections (USB, serial, parallel) if those
are included for read-out or computer control, and
'open-source' connections such as automatic antenna
tuners made by the originating manufacturer or by
independent suppliers. Microphone, headset/speaker,
morse key connections still aren't standardized
fully, not even as de facto standards; that allows
more sales of adapters for that small niche market. :-)

I'm puzzled about all this palaver over some bandplan
automatic lock-out on frequency control and transmitting.

Certainly those who have the most need for the lock outs wouldn't
program them in anyhow. But I find it just an interesting thought exercise.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

wrote:
On Nov 5, 4:03?pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:44:34 EDT, wrote:
(The Elecraft K3 can send and receive RTTY and PSK31
without a computer, monitor, or
keyboard).
Couple of other modes, too. See the website - the manual is online
now:
www.elecraft.com

You send Morse Code to the rig and it translates/encodes the
Morse
into the PSK31, RTTY, etc. Paddles are the usual input device.
That is pretty darn clever.

Yup.

Of course it means you have to know how to send Morse Code in order to
do PSK31 or RTTY without a keyboard, but still.....

Indeed! My Morse code shortcomings are all on the receiving side. I can
send fairly well, but I have to have a pretty clean signal to hear it
easily.


Does it have any special characters for
backing up/corrections?

Check the manual. It's interesting reading.

I don't know if you've ever done it or not, but
I suspect that it would be really easy to drop into "cw speak",
which
might be a little strnge for us native psk'ers.

O RLY?

I've always said that Hams are probably the origin of leet.

In any event, props go
out to Elecraft for an innovative solution.

They've got a lot of them. Their manuals are worth a read
just for the ingenuity that went into the rig designs.

I got a chance to use a KX1 on Field Day this year. Amazing
little rig. Complete with accessory paddles, it's about the size of a
stack of QSL cards.

Well so is my IC-761, as long as you can stack up a few thousand in
maybe 30 piles.....

Seriously, the KX-1 is a nice little Xceiver.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Nov 5, 7:23 pm, AF6AY wrote:
Posted by on Sun, 4 Nov 2007 21:23:33 EST

On Nov 2, 4:49?pm, Paul W. Schleck " wrote:

1) The relatively-small amateur market won't support the cost of
standardization. IOW, it would add too much to the cost of a rig.

STANDARDIZATION, nearly all of it industry standards,
make up nearly everything in the component parts of any
manufactured and nearly every home-built radio equipment
for at least the last half century. Everything from fasteners
(nuts and bolts) made to English and metric industry
standards, vacuum tubes, resistors, capacitors, inductors,
transistors and diodes (of the 'registered' 2N and 1N prefixes).

The standardization being discussed was about things like power
connectors and the possible feature of the rig not transmitting
outside
the licensee's privileges (such as no 'phone in the CW/data subbands).

btw, many of the parts in consumer and amateur electronics today
are "house numbered", particularly ICs, and replacements can be a
real problem.

2) The rigmakers don't want any more interoperability, because it
means less sales

Aeronautical Radio, Inc (ARINC) was once solely a
commercial company engaged in providing air-ground
communications with aircraft before our government
got its act together and created the air traffic control
system. They still do that but ARINC is better
known to commercial avionics equipment makers as
an industry Standards Group that, by common
agreement of members, establishes standards on all
civilian avionics equipment.

Key factor there is "common agreement of members".

'S Meter' levels aren't really standardized as to
receiver input signal levels except as a 'common use'
standard and a recommendation by the IARU.

Even if S meter readings were standardized, differences
in antenna systems would make the readings meaningless
on an absolute scale.

Yet
most are under the impression that all S Meters are
calibrated/scaled alike (they aren't) and routinely
report their S Meter readings in QSOs. :-)

Who are "most", Len?

None of my homebrew receivers or transceivers has ever
had an S meter. Yet I give signal reports as part of most
QSOs.

Amateur radio equipment, especially transceivers,
are designed and made for stand-alone use.

Most are, but not all. For example, the Kachina 505DSP,
introduced about a decade ago, requires connection to a
computer. Same for the Ten Tec Pegasus, introduced
about a year after the 505DSP.

The inexpensive PSK31 transceivers commonly known as
the "Warbler" is another example.

More recently, some software-defined rigs have been produced
that require computer connection to operate.

Peripherals are relegated to outside-the-antenna-
connector devices or different speaker boxes and
other audio processing things.

Isn't being "outside" the definition of "peripheral"?

Many rigs nowadays have numerous *internal* options as
well, such as filters and firmware upgrades. These are almost
always manufacturer-specific if not model-specific.

At least one company (Elecraft) makes their transceivers
available with a wide variety of internal options that can be
added at initial construction, or later.

For example, their basic K2 transceiver is a 10 watt CW-only
80/40/30/20/17/15/12/10 rig. Options include an antenna
tuning unit, SLA battery, analog and DSP audio filters,
SSB, 160 meters/second receiver antenna input, noise blanker,
60 meters, 100 watt amplifier, and serial port. Their other
products offer similar options. But they are all specific to the
manufacturer.

www.elecraft.com

The external
connections are standardized as to power input
(AC standards from the power distribution infrastructure
or DC power from the auto industry),

Not on amateur gear. Some use Molex, some use PowerPoles,
some use other connectors for DC power.

computer
interface connections (USB, serial, parallel) if those
are included for read-out or computer control, and
'open-source' connections such as automatic antenna
tuners made by the originating manufacturer or by
independent suppliers. Microphone, headset/speaker,
morse key connections still aren't standardized
fully, not even as de facto standards; that allows
more sales of adapters for that small niche market. :-)

My point exactly.

I'm puzzled about all this palaver over some bandplan
automatic lock-out on frequency control and transmitting.

What's the puzzlement? It's just a proposed feature.

Allocations of amateur frequency and modes for same
aren't locked to any standard but the common-agreement
terms of the ITU-R. Sub-band allocations are always at
the discretion of the national radio regulating authorities
and may change at any time dependent on that nation's
politicking for sub-band use. :-)

The idea was that the rig could prevent an amateur from
accidentally transmitting where s/he wasn't supposed to.
Not just out-of-band but out of subband, even when the handy
frequency chart isn't available, or the operator doesn't look at it.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Nov 6, 8:17?pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:

Of course it means you have to know how to
send Morse Code in order to
do PSK31 or RTTY without a keyboard, but still.....

Indeed! My Morse code shortcomings are all on the receiving
side. I can
send fairly well, but I have to have a pretty clean signal to hear it
easily.

IMHO the circle game is complete.

I recall an article in QST (March 1964) where, by using
the right key sequences, a 60 wpm RTTY machine
could be made to send Morse Code. This was
particularly useful because in those days amateurs
using RTTY had to ID in Morse Code.

A few years later came the first CW keyboards,
which permitted someone with no Morse Code
sending skills to generate near-perfect Morse Code.

Now we have a rig that will permit a person with
no typing skills to send perfect RTTY or PSK31.

O RLY?

I've always said that Hams are probably the origin of leet.

Naw, the landline telegraphers started it.

- 73 de Mike N3LI

Congrats on the new call!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Now we have a rig that will permit a person with
no typing skills to send perfect RTTY

I thought that was the punch tape reader


Jeff

On Nov 9, 6:57 am, "Jeff" wrote:

I thought that was the punch tape reader

BWAAHAAHAAA - good one!

--

Another neat RTTY trick involved paper tape.

By using certain sequences of letters, the holes in
the paper tape could be made to form letters and numbers.
What was printed on the page looked like gibberish-with-a-pattern
but if you looked at the tape the message was clear.

Of course since it took several characters to make one letter, the
effective speed on a 60 wpm machine was about 15-20 wpm. And
there was no going back if you made a mistake. But the effect could
be impressive to the uninitiated.

73 de Jim, N2EY

....remembering the smell of hot machine oil in the W3ABT room...

On Nov 9, 11:12 am, wrote:
On Nov 9, 6:57 am, "Jeff" wrote:

I thought that was the punch tape reader

BWAAHAAHAAA - good one!

--

Another neat RTTY trick involved paper tape.

By using certain sequences of letters, the holes in
the paper tape could be made to form letters and numbers.
What was printed on the page looked like gibberish-with-a-pattern
but if you looked at the tape the message was clear.

Of course since it took several characters to make one letter, the
effective speed on a 60 wpm machine was about 15-20 wpm. And
there was no going back if you made a mistake. But the effect could
be impressive to the uninitiated.

73 de Jim, N2EY

...remembering the smell of hot machine oil in the W3ABT room...

I remember back-spacing and nulling out the mistake, then continuing.
But I wasn't 10 years old, either.

posted on Fri, 9 Nov 2007 10:12:59 EST:

On Nov 9, 6:57 am, "Jeff" wrote:

Another neat RTTY trick involved paper tape.

"Trick?" TTY p-tape was standard practice among the big guns
in communications of the 1940s. Back then it was 60 WPM on
a 24/7 basis...just keep them fed with paper, ink, and once in a
while, some lubricant. Teletype Corporation made a fine piece
of goods.



Of course since it took several characters to make one letter, the
effective speed on a 60 wpm machine was about 15-20 wpm. And
there was no going back if you made a mistake. But the effect could
be impressive to the uninitiated.

TTY p-tape makes it possible to do an immediate re-send of the
SAME message if a wire or radio circuit is blitzed by something.
During WWII and afterwards it was the standard way at big hubs
of networks that spread around the globe...be they military or
commercial, the 'torn tape relay' rooms were big and efficient.


...remembering the smell of hot machine oil in the W3ABT room...

I can easily remember an entire second floor at ADA's control
center tape relay room of the early 1950s. Over 200 teleprinter
machines busy working away 24/7. Impressive all by itself. And
that was only the third-largest hub (RUAP) in the Army network
then.

73, Len AF6AY

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:25:12 -0500, N2EY wrote:

On Nov 6, 8:17?pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
some snippage
Now we have a rig that will permit a person with no typing skills to
send perfect RTTY or PSK31.

Like they say, "It's all good". I don't know anyone nearby that has a K@,

but at Dayton next year I'm going to haunt the Elecraft booth.


I've always said that Hams are probably the origin of leet.

Naw, the landline telegraphers started it.

Point conceeded! ;^)


- 73 de Mike N3LI

Congrats on the new call!

Thanks. I was toying around, not too serious, looking for something a
little shorter, and found this one. I like it both for Morse and Voice.

And N5EE was taken already, hehe

-73 de Mike N3LI -