Elecraft

Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

Classic

List

Threaded

14 messages Options

Joseph M. Durnal

Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

Elecraft Operators,

I have been off the HF airwaves for several years. Those darned antenna
restrictions really take the fun out of it. But after helping staff the
K2BSA operation at the Boy Scout National Jamboree this summer I've really
been itching to get back on the air from home.

I have to come to grips that I'll never have a nice balanced antenna and
that I'm pretty much limited to random runs of wire here and there that can
be well hidden. Right now I have a manual MFJ tuner, but I know that got
old when changing bands or moving from the CW area to phone on 40 meters.
I also have some common second story grounding issues. I'm wondering if
the KAT3A would be a good investment for my K3 given my situation.

73 de Joseph M. Durnal - NE3R
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Ross Primrose

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

If the cable run(s) between the K3 & the antenna(s) is fairly short,
it'd be a great choice. If you've got long runs, being able to tune at
the antenna might work better, but might also be harder to keep out of
sight...

73, Ross N4RP

On 8/30/2017 11:19 AM, Joseph M. Durnal wrote:

> Elecraft Operators,
>
> I have been off the HF airwaves for several years. Those darned antenna
> restrictions really take the fun out of it. But after helping staff the
> K2BSA operation at the Boy Scout National Jamboree this summer I've really
> been itching to get back on the air from home.
>
> I have to come to grips that I'll never have a nice balanced antenna and
> that I'm pretty much limited to random runs of wire here and there that can
> be well hidden. Right now I have a manual MFJ tuner, but I know that got
> old when changing bands or moving from the CW area to phone on 40 meters.
> I also have some common second story grounding issues. I'm wondering if
> the KAT3A would be a good investment for my K3 given my situation.
>
> 73 de Joseph M. Durnal - NE3R
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

--
FCC Section 97.313(a) “At all times, an amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications.”

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Don Wilhelm

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Joseph M. Durnal

Joseph,

The KAT3A has a wide tuning range, and will normally handle a 10:1 SWR.
If your SWR range is less than that, you will find operating with the
KAT3A much more pleasant than dealing with a manual tuner.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 8/30/2017 11:19 AM, Joseph M. Durnal wrote:

> I have to come to grips that I'll never have a nice balanced antenna and
> that I'm pretty much limited to random runs of wire here and there that can
> be well hidden. Right now I have a manual MFJ tuner, but I know that got
> old when changing bands or moving from the CW area to phone on 40 meters.
> I also have some common second story grounding issues. I'm wondering if
> the KAT3A would be a good investment for my K3 given my situation.
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Vic Rosenthal

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Joseph M. Durnal

The KAT3A will make it possible to load almost anything. Definitely
worthwhile. Even with antennas like the ones below.

You might think about an end-fed multiband antenna like this one:
<http://myantennas.com/wp/product/efhw-8010/>

It will still work if the wire is bent in numerous places. It might fit
your "random" places.

If that's too big, here's a 40-10m version that's smaller:
<http://myantennas.com/wp/product/efhw-4010/>

I'm a big partisan of balanced antennas, but if the option is not to
operate...

73,
Victor, 4X6GP
Rehovot, Israel
Formerly K2VCO
http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
On 30 Aug 2017 18:19, Joseph M. Durnal 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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bob McGraw - K4TAX

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm

In a recent QST article by Kai KE4PT he describes a nice antenna for portable operation.

As to 2nd floor stations and grounding, I've operated mine in that configuration for some 20 years. There is no "station ground". I do have 3rd pin ground in place and all equipment is bonded to the station power supply as the common point.

Bob, K4TAX

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 10:47 AM, Don Wilhelm <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Joseph,
>
> The KAT3A has a wide tuning range, and will normally handle a 10:1 SWR.
> If your SWR range is less than that, you will find operating with the KAT3A much more pleasant than dealing with a manual tuner.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
>> On 8/30/2017 11:19 AM, Joseph M. Durnal wrote:
>>
>> I have to come to grips that I'll never have a nice balanced antenna and
>> that I'm pretty much limited to random runs of wire here and there that can
>> be well hidden. Right now I have a manual MFJ tuner, but I know that got
>> old when changing bands or moving from the CW area to phone on 40 meters.
>> I also have some common second story grounding issues. I'm wondering if
>> the KAT3A would be a good investment for my K3 given my situation.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

Mike Furrey

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Joseph M. Durnal

When I moved from Houston and house with beams to a Florida apartment but with a big tree outside my door, I ordered the KAT3A. The KAT3 made easy work of my stealth antenna on 40-6 meters.
Yes, I have a manual tuner and yes I have an LDG 200Pro auto-tuner but the KAT3A was a huge convenience. Go for it.
73, Mike WA5POK

On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 10:21 AM, Joseph M. Durnal <[hidden email]> wrote:

Elecraft Operators,

I have been off the HF airwaves for several years. Those darned antenna
restrictions really take the fun out of it. But after helping staff the
K2BSA operation at the Boy Scout National Jamboree this summer I've really
been itching to get back on the air from home.

I have to come to grips that I'll never have a nice balanced antenna and
that I'm pretty much limited to random runs of wire here and there that can
be well hidden. Right now I have a manual MFJ tuner, but I know that got
old when changing bands or moving from the CW area to phone on 40 meters.
I also have some common second story grounding issues. I'm wondering if
the KAT3A would be a good investment for my K3 given my situation.

73 de Joseph M. Durnal - NE3R
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill Frantz

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Vic Rosenthal

My experience with the tuners in both the K3 and KX3 are that
they will reach an acceptable SWR with anything. I always check
the antenna when they take a long time to reach a match. (I.e.
lots of clicking.) Most of the time I find I am trying to match
an open antenna connection.

73 Bill AE6JV

On 8/30/17 at 9:15 AM, [hidden email] (Victor Rosenthal
4X6GP) wrote:

>The KAT3A will make it possible to load almost anything.
>Definitely worthwhile. Even with antennas like the ones below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | Concurrency is hard. 12 out | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506 | 10 programmers get it wrong. | 16345
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com | - Jeff Frantz | Los Gatos,
CA 95032

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Jim Brown-10

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

Please don't perpetuate that myth, Bill. Tuners do NOT reduce the SWR
unless they're at the antenna end of a transmission line. The SWR exists
on the transmission line, and it is determined ENTIRELY by the match
between the transmission line and the load.

What tuners at the rig do is get the rig to put power into the tuner
(and hopefully, onto the transmission line). If the SWR is high without
the tuner, it is equally high WITH the tuner. Depending on the cable,
the frequency, and the SWR, much of the power that the rig puts into the
tuner gets to the transmission line, but is turned into heat by the SWR
in the line and doesn't get to the antenna.

A better way to talk and think about this is to say that the tuner can
match a wide variety of loads to the transmitter sufficiently well that
the rig can pump the maximum power from its output terminals, whether
it's feeding a short wet string or a nice long wire we've launched into
a tree. And if there's no transmission line, SWR has no meaning! So SWR
is the wrong way to talk and think about it.

73, Jim K9YC

On 8/30/2017 10:15 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
> My experience with the tuners in both the K3 and KX3 are that they
> will reach an acceptable SWR with anything. I always check the antenna
> when they take a long time to reach a match. (I.e. lots of clicking.)
> Most of the time I find I am trying to match an open antenna connection.

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Dave Fugleberg

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

Jim, I think that last point is often overloaded and bears repeating. With
rigs like the KX2 or KX3, it's a common practice to connect the radiating
element directly to the rig and put the other end as high as possible. In
that case, 'SWR' is kinda meaningless, as the built in 'ATU' is actually
matching the output to the impedance at the antenna feed point.
The KX2 does this amazingly well, and I'm glad I sprung for that option.
In any other case, I tend to shy away from built in tuners or tuners in the
shack, and instead use a remote automatic coupler at the feed point (I use
the SGC 230 at home).
Good conversation.

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:25 AM Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Please don't perpetuate that myth, Bill. Tuners do NOT reduce the SWR
> unless they're at the antenna end of a transmission line. The SWR exists
> on the transmission line, and it is determined ENTIRELY by the match
> between the transmission line and the load.
>
> What tuners at the rig do is get the rig to put power into the tuner
> (and hopefully, onto the transmission line). If the SWR is high without
> the tuner, it is equally high WITH the tuner. Depending on the cable,
> the frequency, and the SWR, much of the power that the rig puts into the
> tuner gets to the transmission line, but is turned into heat by the SWR
> in the line and doesn't get to the antenna.
>
> A better way to talk and think about this is to say that the tuner can
> match a wide variety of loads to the transmitter sufficiently well that
> the rig can pump the maximum power from its output terminals, whether
> it's feeding a short wet string or a nice long wire we've launched into
> a tree. And if there's no transmission line, SWR has no meaning! So SWR
> is the wrong way to talk and think about it.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> On 8/30/2017 10:15 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
> > My experience with the tuners in both the K3 and KX3 are that they
> > will reach an acceptable SWR with anything. I always check the antenna
> > when they take a long time to reach a match. (I.e. lots of clicking.)
> > Most of the time I find I am trying to match an open antenna connection.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bill Frantz

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

Sorry Jim. You are indeed correct about the feedline SWR. While
there are other SWRs within the radio, they aren't of much interest.

However, these radios do report a SWR in the UI, and that is
what I was referring to. Since a naive user might look at that
figure and say, "The SWR is 2. The antenna must be good.", it is
important to know that the tuners can produce a low figure on
that meter with nothing connected to the antenna connector.

73 Bill AE6JV

On 8/30/17 at 11:25 PM, [hidden email] (Jim Brown) wrote:

>Please don't perpetuate that myth, Bill. Tuners do NOT reduce
>the SWR unless they're at the antenna end of a transmission
>line. The SWR exists on the transmission line, and it is
>determined ENTIRELY by the match between the transmission line
>and the load.
>
>What tuners at the rig do is get the rig to put power into the
>tuner (and hopefully, onto the transmission line). If the SWR
>is high without the tuner, it is equally high WITH the tuner.
>Depending on the cable, the frequency, and the SWR, much of the
>power that the rig puts into the tuner gets to the transmission
>line, but is turned into heat by the SWR in the line and
>doesn't get to the antenna.
>
>A better way to talk and think about this is to say that the
>tuner can match a wide variety of loads to the transmitter
>sufficiently well that the rig can pump the maximum power from
>its output terminals, whether it's feeding a short wet string
>or a nice long wire we've launched into a tree. And if there's
>no transmission line, SWR has no meaning! So SWR is the wrong
>way to talk and think about it.
>
>73, Jim K9YC
>
>On 8/30/2017 10:15 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>My experience with the tuners in both the K3 and KX3 are that
>>they will reach an acceptable SWR with anything. I always
>>check the antenna when they take a long time to reach a match.
>>(I.e. lots of clicking.) Most of the time I find I am trying
>>to match an open antenna connection.
>
>
>______________________________________________________________
>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
>Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | Since the IBM Selectric, keyboards have gotten
408-356-8506 | steadily worse. Now we have touchscreen keyboards.
www.pwpconsult.com | Can we make something even worse?

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

k6dgw

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

Of all the terms and jargon in ham radio, "Standing Wave Ratio" has to
be at least in the top 5 misunderstood ones, and maybe even top 3. It
didn't even really enter the ham vocabulary until the middle of the last
century.

Helping a ham trying to use an 11 m vertical-ish wire on 80 m, was
instructive. Rig was a KX3 with ATU. ATU indicated about 1.3:1 SWR,
but no contacts. EZNEC4 and TLW revealed the "gozinto" end of the coax
looked like about 0.4+j<big> ohms

The totally misnamed "Antenna Tuner" matched that to what the radio
thought was roughly 50 + j0 ohms [L-networks are good at that].
However, that network, plus I-squared R loss in the connectors, cable,
and wire were eating almost all the power. Ultimately, center loading
the wire raised the RR to about 20 ohms, lowered the reactance, and the
ATU still reported about 1.3:1 SWR. Only now, there were contacts now
being made.

My KAT2 will match a 1 foot RG-58 jumper on 15 meters to about 1.5:1
however I won't make many, if any, Q's.

73,

Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

/31/2017 3:09 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
> However, these radios do report a SWR in the UI, and that is what I
> was referring to. Since a naive user might look at that figure and
> say, "The SWR is 2. The antenna must be good.", it is important to
> know that the tuners can produce a low figure on that meter with
> nothing connected to the antenna connector.
>
> 73 Bill AE6JV

______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Bob McGraw - K4TAX

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Bill Frantz

One point to consider, anytime one inserts a tuner in line at the
transmitter, additional loss is also introduced. Additionally the SWR
and related loss on the feedline is not reduced. Some tuners,
depending on load and frequency, can introduce as much as 25% power
loss. In many cases, a 2:1 SWR at the radio is better than using a
tuner to show a 1:1 SWR at the radio due to added loss in the tuner and
the feed line loss remains the same.

73

Bob, K4TAX

On 8/31/2017 5:09 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:

> Sorry Jim. You are indeed correct about the feedline SWR. While there
> are other SWRs within the radio, they aren't of much interest.
>
> However, these radios do report a SWR in the UI, and that is what I
> was referring to. Since a naive user might look at that figure and
> say, "The SWR is 2. The antenna must be good.", it is important to
> know that the tuners can produce a low figure on that meter with
> nothing connected to the antenna connector.
>
> 73 Bill AE6JV
>
> On 8/30/17 at 11:25 PM, [hidden email] (Jim Brown) wrote:
>
>> Please don't perpetuate that myth, Bill. Tuners do NOT reduce the SWR
>> unless they're at the antenna end of a transmission line. The SWR
>> exists on the transmission line, and it is determined ENTIRELY by the
>> match between the transmission line and the load.
>>
>> What tuners at the rig do is get the rig to put power into the tuner
>> (and hopefully, onto the transmission line). If the SWR is high
>> without the tuner, it is equally high WITH the tuner. Depending on
>> the cable, the frequency, and the SWR, much of the power that the rig
>> puts into the tuner gets to the transmission line, but is turned into
>> heat by the SWR in the line and doesn't get to the antenna.
>>
>> A better way to talk and think about this is to say that the tuner
>> can match a wide variety of loads to the transmitter sufficiently
>> well that the rig can pump the maximum power from its output
>> terminals, whether it's feeding a short wet string or a nice long
>> wire we've launched into a tree. And if there's no transmission line,
>> SWR has no meaning! So SWR is the wrong way to talk and think about it.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>>
>> On 8/30/2017 10:15 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>> My experience with the tuners in both the K3 and KX3 are that they
>>> will reach an acceptable SWR with anything. I always check the
>>> antenna when they take a long time to reach a match. (I.e. lots of
>>> clicking.) Most of the time I find I am trying to match an open
>>> antenna connection.
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bill Frantz | Since the IBM Selectric, keyboards have gotten
> 408-356-8506 | steadily worse. Now we have touchscreen keyboards.
> www.pwpconsult.com | Can we make something even worse?
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

Richard Fjeld-2

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

I snipped as much as I could to shorten this up. See below.

I think the problem lies in part that early manuals taught antenna theory by starting out with a random wire and a simple L tuner as you say, at the antenna end of the transmission line. The purpose was to add inductance or capacitance as needed to attempt to resonate the wire. So, the term “tune the antenna” was used. And calling the matching devices ‘tuners’ doesn’t help correct the terminology either.

Rich, n0ce

From: Bob McGraw K4TAX<mailto:[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 6:36 PM
To: [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

>
> On 8/30/17 at 11:25 PM, [hidden email] (Jim Brown) wrote:
>
>> Please don't perpetuate that myth, Bill. Tuners do NOT reduce the SWR
>> unless they're at the antenna end of a transmission line.
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to [hidden email]

Drew AF2Z

Re: Dusting off the old K3 & Considering a KAT3A

In reply to this post by Bill Frantz

An antenna current meter is pretty handy. I have a box of parts on my
desk waiting to become one. At least when it shows zero current I'll be
able to figure out pretty quickly that I forgot to connect the antenna,
hehhe..

73,
Drew
AF2Z

On 08/31/17 18:09, Bill Frantz wrote: