Elecraft › [K3]

Basic Info

Classic

List

Threaded

32 messages Options

Chester Alderman

Basic Info

I have not used my K3/P3 since early January. Now I want to give the system
another try to see how it really compares to my other radios.

Basic question: When I update to the latest firmware for both the K3 and P3,
are all of the previous updates included in the most current one? I should
know the answer to this, but I don't!

Thanks and 73,

Tom - W4BQF

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Gary Gregory

Re: Basic Info

Of course they are...go for it.

I gave up comparing over 3 years ago...:-)

Unless you have very good test equipment that is calibrated then the
difference will only be subjective at best if the equipment being tested is
technically very similar. But I could be wrong...:-)

Gary

On 16 July 2011 09:12, Tommy Alderman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have not used my K3/P3 since early January. Now I want to give the system
> another try to see how it really compares to my other radios.
>
> Basic question: When I update to the latest firmware for both the K3 and
> P3,
> are all of the previous updates included in the most current one? I should
> know the answer to this, but I don't!
>
> Thanks and 73,
>
> Tom - W4BQF
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

--

VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile
Elecraft Equipment
K3 #679, KPA-500 #018
Living the dream!!!
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Don Wilhelm-4

Re: Basic Info

In reply to this post by Chester Alderman

Tom,

You do not have to update incrementally, just load the latest. As in
the commercial "It's all in there".

73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/15/2011 7:12 PM, Tommy Alderman wrote:

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Chester Alderman

Re: Basic Info

In reply to this post by Chester Alderman

Thanks to NV1B, K9ZTV,VK4FD, W3FPR and to Dick for the quick response. I
just updated the K3 and P3. Now if I could just get DELAY set correct so I
would not hear any 'pops' in my audio when keying my 9500 amp, all would be
well. It will take me a while to get back into the K3.

Thanks again!

Tom - W4BQF

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tommy Alderman
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 7:13 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Elecraft] Basic Info

I have not used my K3/P3 since early January. Now I want to give the system
another try to see how it really compares to my other radios.

Basic question: When I update to the latest firmware for both the K3 and P3,
are all of the previous updates included in the most current one? I should
know the answer to this, but I don't!

Thanks and 73,

Tom - W4BQF

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Don Wilhelm-4

Re: Basic Info

Tom,

I know nothing about that particular amplifier, but I offer a few "in
general" facts.

Pops in the K3 audio while keying an amp could be a sign of "hot
switching" in the amplifier. Try increasing the keying delay in the K3
to see if that eliminates it. If not, check the relay "pull-in time"
for the amp (plus any contact bounce time), and if it is not within the
K3 Key-to-RF onset time, you will not be able to use QSK with that
amplifier unless you can speed up its T/R relay.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/15/2011 8:42 PM, Tommy Alderman wrote:

> Thanks to NV1B, K9ZTV,VK4FD, W3FPR and to Dick for the quick response. I
> just updated the K3 and P3. Now if I could just get DELAY set correct so I
> would not hear any 'pops' in my audio when keying my 9500 amp, all would be
> well. It will take me a while to get back into the K3.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Tom - W4BQF
>
>
>

W5UXH

Re: Basic Info

Don,

I suspect that Tom wants to run in CW+ (or QRQ) mode, and I believe in this mode the TX DLY delay parameter must remain at "8" and this effectively produces a delay from KEY IN to KEY OUT on the order of 4 to 5 msecs. I also believe it can not be increased by changing TX DLY?

My guess is the vacuum relays in the amp might not switch quite this fast.

73,
Chuck, W5UXH

Don Wilhelm-4 wrote

Tom,

I know nothing about that particular amplifier, but I offer a few "in
general" facts.

Pops in the K3 audio while keying an amp could be a sign of "hot
switching" in the amplifier. Try increasing the keying delay in the K3
to see if that eliminates it. If not, check the relay "pull-in time"
for the amp (plus any contact bounce time), and if it is not within the
K3 Key-to-RF onset time, you will not be able to use QSK with that
amplifier unless you can speed up its T/R relay.

73,
Don W3FPR

Chester Alderman

Re: Basic Info

I suspect my days of QRQ are about over as right now I'm doing pretty good
to copy at just 70 wpm!

My primary interest is getting 'smooth' full QSK at contesting speeds, i.e.,
26 to 36 wpm. If I can get that, then I'll be happy. I did drop TX DLY from
20 down to 8 and with the K3 barefoot, it sounds pretty darned good. In the
morning I will try this with the Alpha 9500 amp; every time I try it (on
20m), many Eu stations want a 'QSO'. Anyway I am getting close, both at 30
wpm and I just tested with TX DLY set for 8, and at 60 wpm it sounds good.

Tom - W4BQF

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of W5UXH
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:44 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Basic Info

Don,

I suspect that Tom wants to run in CW+ (or QRQ) mode, and I believe in this
mode the TX DLY delay parameter must remain at "8" and this effectively
produces a delay from KEY IN to KEY OUT on the order of 4 to 5 msecs. I
also believe it can not be increased by changing TX DLY?

My guess is the vacuum relays in the amp might not switch quite this fast.

73,
Chuck, W5UXH

Don Wilhelm-4 wrote:

>
> Tom,
>
> I know nothing about that particular amplifier, but I offer a few "in
> general" facts.
>
> Pops in the K3 audio while keying an amp could be a sign of "hot
> switching" in the amplifier. Try increasing the keying delay in the K3
> to see if that eliminates it. If not, check the relay "pull-in time"
> for the amp (plus any contact bounce time), and if it is not within the
> K3 Key-to-RF onset time, you will not be able to use QSK with that
> amplifier unless you can speed up its T/R relay.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
>
>

--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Basic-Info-tp6588331p6588551.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

W5UXH

Re: Basic Info

Tom,

In the original release notes for QRQ mode, Wayne stated:

"Note 2: If you use CONFIG:TX DLY to set external keying
delay, you may need to adjust its setting for QRQ CW use. Also,
any increase in the default (8 ms) may decrease the maximum
available CW speed."

It stil is not clear to me exactly what this meant. I used the scope to look at the timing between KEY IN and KEY OUT to determine that increasing the parameter above 8 msec had no effect on the timing. And as mentioned previously, the delay is not equal to the value of "8 msecs". It is on the order of 4 to 5 msecs, so the 9500 relays must be able to switch faster than that.

I believe what I found happening when the parameter was changed from 8 to even just 9 was that the KEY OUT line quit following the keying so that you effectively had semi qsk. A long interval of key open was needed in order for KEY OUT to go high again. I would need to check my log notes from my testing last August to verify this result, but it was something of this nature.

Even when set to "8", KEY OUT starts to hang low (not follow the keying) at about 65 wpm so the QSK begins to degrade at that point. I would prefer for it to continue "unblemished" up to 70 wpm, but I hardly ever run 65, usually 63 max, so I remain very pleased with the performance.

Chuck, W5UXH

Tommy Alderman wrote

I suspect my days of QRQ are about over as right now I'm doing pretty good
to copy at just 70 wpm!

My primary interest is getting 'smooth' full QSK at contesting speeds, i.e.,
26 to 36 wpm. If I can get that, then I'll be happy. I did drop TX DLY from
20 down to 8 and with the K3 barefoot, it sounds pretty darned good. In the
morning I will try this with the Alpha 9500 amp; every time I try it (on
20m), many Eu stations want a 'QSO'. Anyway I am getting close, both at 30
wpm and I just tested with TX DLY set for 8, and at 60 wpm it sounds good.

Tom - W4BQF

Chester Alderman

Re: Basic Info

In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm-4

Don,

I just ran full QSK test on 10m this morning, up to 70 wpm, and both the K3
and the Alpha 9500 sounded very good to me, after resetting TX DLY down to
08. However I'm not sure how it would sound on the other end. Hopefully
today, if I don't get flooded out of here (6 inches of rain yesterday and
more rain this morning!), I'm going to hook up my IC-7700 and listen for
myself. I am quite impressed with what I hear via the K3's sidetone.

73,
Tom - W4BQF

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Wilhelm [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:03 PM
To: Tommy Alderman
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Basic Info

Tom,

I know nothing about that particular amplifier, but I offer a few "in
general" facts.

Pops in the K3 audio while keying an amp could be a sign of "hot
switching" in the amplifier. Try increasing the keying delay in the K3
to see if that eliminates it. If not, check the relay "pull-in time"
for the amp (plus any contact bounce time), and if it is not within the
K3 Key-to-RF onset time, you will not be able to use QSK with that
amplifier unless you can speed up its T/R relay.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/15/2011 8:42 PM, Tommy Alderman wrote:
> Thanks to NV1B, K9ZTV,VK4FD, W3FPR and to Dick for the quick response. I
> just updated the K3 and P3. Now if I could just get DELAY set correct so I
> would not hear any 'pops' in my audio when keying my 9500 amp, all would
be
> well. It will take me a while to get back into the K3.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> Tom - W4BQF
>
>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Wm Bush

EC2?

Does anyone have an EC2 that needs a good home?

Bill
KD8JXJ

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Guy, K2AV

Re: Basic Info

In reply to this post by Chester Alderman

Last time I looked at Waddle K. Knowitall's Authoritative Real
Meanings Dictionary, 70 wpm, indeed 50 wpm was QRQ all the way.

If you want QSK, you should set the TX DLY to minimum 8 and leave it
there forever. I don't like the way it behaves at higher delays
anyway. If you want to keep RX from opening in certain contesting
situations, do it with the logging program and it's PTT setting and
pipe the logger supplied PTT signal around. You will find that your
9500 and the K3 are slick together.

You CAN use the CW+ fast QSK, but this is a fight in the K3 against
RX-TX-RX transition tasks. e.g. CPU time in the firmware, and in order
to be really fast some functions are disabled. You will need to
decide if the disabled functions are things you can do without.

73, Guy.

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tommy Alderman
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I suspect my days of QRQ are about over as right now I'm doing pretty good
> to copy at just 70 wpm!
>
> My primary interest is getting 'smooth' full QSK at contesting speeds, i.e.,
> 26 to 36 wpm. If I can get that, then I'll be happy. I did drop TX DLY from
> 20 down to 8 and with the K3 barefoot, it sounds pretty darned good. In the
> morning I will try this with the Alpha 9500 amp; every time I try it (on
> 20m), many Eu stations want a 'QSO'. Anyway I am getting close, both at 30
> wpm and I just tested with TX DLY set for 8, and at 60 wpm it sounds good.
>
> Tom - W4BQF
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of W5UXH
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:44 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Basic Info
>
> Don,
>
> I suspect that Tom wants to run in CW+ (or QRQ) mode, and I believe in this
> mode the TX DLY delay parameter must remain at "8" and this effectively
> produces a delay from KEY IN to KEY OUT on the order of 4 to 5 msecs. I
> also believe it can not be increased by changing TX DLY?
>
> My guess is the vacuum relays in the amp might not switch quite this fast.
>
> 73,
> Chuck, W5UXH
>
>
>
> Don Wilhelm-4 wrote:
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> I know nothing about that particular amplifier, but I offer a few "in
>> general" facts.
>>
>> Pops in the K3 audio while keying an amp could be a sign of "hot
>> switching" in the amplifier. Try increasing the keying delay in the K3
>> to see if that eliminates it. If not, check the relay "pull-in time"
>> for the amp (plus any contact bounce time), and if it is not within the
>> K3 Key-to-RF onset time, you will not be able to use QSK with that
>> amplifier unless you can speed up its T/R relay.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Basic-Info-tp6588331p6588551.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

AC7AC

Re: Basic Info

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

Guy, K2AV

Re: Basic Info

By common usage, the language has moved beyond the old CW procedural
meanings. QRQ clearly also means faster than common usage. Same
thing for QRO, which has more of an absolute sense these days.

Otherwise how would you interpret the sentence, "Do you consider 35 WPM QRQ?"

73, Guy.

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It's all relative. QRQ means, simply, "Shall I send faster?", nothing more,
> just as QRS means, simply, "Shall I send slower?"
>
> Obviously we've adapted those Q-codes in various ways, but they're meaning
> is still relative unless a specific number is added, e.g. "QRQ to 70 WPM" or
> "QRS to 30WPM"
>
> Ron AC7AC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Last time I looked at Waddle K. Knowitall's Authoritative Real
> Meanings Dictionary, 70 wpm, indeed 50 wpm was QRQ all the way.
>
> If you want QSK, you should set the TX DLY to minimum 8 and leave it
> there forever. I don't like the way it behaves at higher delays
> anyway. If you want to keep RX from opening in certain contesting
> situations, do it with the logging program and it's PTT setting and
> pipe the logger supplied PTT signal around. You will find that your
> 9500 and the K3 are slick together.
>
> You CAN use the CW+ fast QSK, but this is a fight in the K3 against
> RX-TX-RX transition tasks. e.g. CPU time in the firmware, and in order
> to be really fast some functions are disabled. You will need to
> decide if the disabled functions are things you can do without.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Tommy Alderman
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I suspect my days of QRQ are about over as right now I'm doing pretty good
>> to copy at just 70 wpm!
>>
>> My primary interest is getting 'smooth' full QSK at contesting speeds,
> i.e.,
>> 26 to 36 wpm. If I can get that, then I'll be happy. I did drop TX DLY
> from
>> 20 down to 8 and with the K3 barefoot, it sounds pretty darned good. In
> the
>> morning I will try this with the Alpha 9500 amp; every time I try it (on
>> 20m), many Eu stations want a 'QSO'. Anyway I am getting close, both at 30
>> wpm and I just tested with TX DLY set for 8, and at 60 wpm it sounds good.
>>
>> Tom - W4BQF
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

Ken G Kopp

"Q" signal trivia

"Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
between stations that don't share a common language.

In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.

Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)

Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good lucks".

73!
Ken - K0PP
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

k6dgw

Re: "Q" signal trivia

On 7/16/2011 6:46 PM, Ken - K0PP wrote:
>
> "Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
> between stations that don't share a common language.
>
> In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
> a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.

In commercial radiotelegraph in the past, they were generally presented
in the opposite order ... you ask the question "INT QRM" meaning, "Are
you bothered by interference?," or "INT QLB KPH 6" meaning "Have you
monitored KPH on 8 Mcs and if so can you report their signal strength?"
and the answer "QRM" meant "Yes, I am bothered by interference." If you
weren't bothered by interference you responded "N N K", or "NO K." "N"
and "NO" work for a great number of languages, as does "OK".

If you had monitored KPH on their 8 Mcs, you might report "QLB KPH 6 QSA
4" meaning "I have monitored KPH on their 8 Mcs frequency and I report
them as QSA 4."

In that service, "INT" [di di dah dit dah sent as one character] was the
interrogatory, and preceded the question you were about to ask. [INT
QRL] The Morse question mark is "di di dah dah di dit] which duplicates
the prosign "IMI" meaning either "please repeat last" or "I will repeat
last". Those with commercial radiotelegraph experience may remember this.

INT never made it into ham practice as [I think] we found that we could
easily distinguish a "?" from an "IMI" from context. Of course, we were
also not handling traffic for a price for a communications company who
had a rule book and a Chief Op standing behind you about to box you on
your ears if you screwed it up. :-)
>
> Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
> communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)

Very true in commercial marine and aeronautical radiotelephone service.
Hams, being inventive and prone to thinking out of the ITU box, have
nounified and verbified [and in some cases adjectivified and
adverbified] International Q Signals. QRM is too many stations on the
same frequency, generally a noun, as is QRG ["HIS QRG?"]. QRQ can be
either ... a noun denoting high speed CW, or a verb [QRQ] meaning "speed
up."
>
> Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good lucks".

I'm not the expert, but I have always thought 73 meant "Best Regards."
Thus, "VY 73 ES GUD DX" meant "Very Best Regards and Good DX." 73's
would then mean, "Best Regardeses."

But, if you tell me "Best 73's" on phone, I will take it as a gesture of
good will toward me, and thank you for that.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2011 Cal QSO Party 1-2 Oct 2011
- www.cqp.org
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

stan levandowski

Re: "Q" signal trivia

In reply to this post by Ken G Kopp

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Fred Jensen wrote:

> On 7/16/2011 6:46 PM, Ken - K0PP wrote:
>>
> In that service, "INT" [di di dah dit dah sent as one character] was
> the interrogatory, and preceded the question you were about to ask.
> [INT QRL] The Morse question mark is "di di dah dah di dit] which
> duplicates the prosign "IMI" meaning either "please repeat last" or "I
> will repeat last". Those with commercial radiotelegraph experience
> may remember this.
>
> INT never made it into ham practice

The interogatory was also standard practice in the US Navy. And in
MARS, of course (at least back then). I'm surprised that the ham
community did not embrace it. Personally, I always preferred it because
it 'sets off' the Q-signal that is to follow and tends to heighten one's
awareness.

Regarding use of Q signals outside of CW, we used to have a Chief
Radioman who used an interesting expression. Whenever someone messed up
a job, the Chief used an early variation of the commonly heard phrase,
"What part of that didn't you understand?"

The Chief simply got real close to your face and yelled, "INT QRK what
the ___?!"

Stan WB2LQF
RM2 USS BOXER 1966-1968

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Gary D Krause

Re: "Q" signal trivia

In reply to this post by Ken G Kopp

I think the reason 73's came about is that many of us, myself included, repeat
it twice at the end of a CW QSO.

Gary, N7HTS

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:46:41 -0600
"Ken - K0PP" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> "Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
> between stations that don't share a common language.
>
> In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
> a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.
>
> Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
> communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)
>
> Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good lucks".
>
> 73!
> Ken - K0PP
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

kevinr@coho.net

Re: "Q" signal trivia

I have always wondered why it is written in the possessive form. Why not
write it 73s instead if you want to make it a plural and not possessive?
Kevin. KD5ONS

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:57:43 -0700, Gary D Krause <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I think the reason 73's came about is that many of us, myself included,
> repeat
> it twice at the end of a CW QSO.
>
> Gary, N7HTS
>
>
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:46:41 -0600
> "Ken - K0PP" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> "Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
>> between stations that don't share a common language.
>>
>> In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
>> a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.
>>
>> Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
>> communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)
>>
>> Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good lucks".
>>
>> 73!
>> Ken - K0PP

Mark-2

Re: "Q" signal trivia

Hi Kevin:

Because an " 's " is the standard way to create a plural of a digit or
digits in English? (at least historically) :-) It doesn't indicate a
possessive in this usage.

See, for example,
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/apostrophe.htm:

"An apostrophe is also used to form some *plurals*, especially the
plural of letters and digits. Raoul got four _A's_ last term and his
sister got four 6's in the ice-skating competition. "

Of course, the Chicago Manual of Style disagrees... :-)

73,

Mark, KD4D

On 7/18/2011 12:19 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:

> I have always wondered why it is written in the possessive form. Why not
> write it 73s instead if you want to make it a plural and not possessive?
> Kevin. KD5ONS
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:57:43 -0700, Gary D Krause<[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I think the reason 73's came about is that many of us, myself included,
>> repeat
>> it twice at the end of a CW QSO.
>>
>> Gary, N7HTS
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:46:41 -0600
>> "Ken - K0PP"<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> "Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
>>> between stations that don't share a common language.
>>>
>>> In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
>>> a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.
>>>
>>> Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
>>> communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)
>>>
>>> Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good lucks".
>>>
>>> 73!
>>> Ken - K0PP
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

kevinr@coho.net

Re: "Q" signal trivia

However, we refer to the '60s without a second apostrophe.
Kevin. KD5ONS

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 09:29:26 -0700, Mark <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Kevin:
>
> Because an " 's " is the standard way to create a plural of a digit or
> digits in English? (at least historically) :-) It doesn't indicate a
> possessive in this usage.
>
> See, for example,
> http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/apostrophe.htm:
>
> "An apostrophe is also used to form some *plurals*, especially the
> plural of letters and digits. Raoul got four _A's_ last term and his
> sister got four 6's in the ice-skating competition. "
>
> Of course, the Chicago Manual of Style disagrees... :-)
>
> 73,
>
> Mark, KD4D
>
> On 7/18/2011 12:19 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>> I have always wondered why it is written in the possessive form. Why
>> not
>> write it 73s instead if you want to make it a plural and not possessive?
>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:57:43 -0700, Gary D Krause<[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the reason 73's came about is that many of us, myself included,
>>> repeat
>>> it twice at the end of a CW QSO.
>>>
>>> Gary, N7HTS
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:46:41 -0600
>>> "Ken - K0PP"<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> "Q" signals were established to facilitate communication
>>>> between stations that don't share a common language.
>>>>
>>>> In usual usage a "Q" signal without punctuation is considered
>>>> a statement. If it's followed by a "?", it's meant as a question.
>>>>
>>>> Needless to say, a purist would never use a "Q" signal in voice
>>>> communications, but we all do. "The home QTH here is ... (;-)
>>>>
>>>> Oh ... 73 is correct. 73's isn't. 73's is equivalent to "Good
>>>> lucks".
>>>>
>>>> 73!
>>>> Ken - K0PP
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html