K3 and CQWW
Locked
12
12
 
|
Sorry you feel that way Julian but I don't believe you actually read my message: > I always slow down to the speed of guys that call me but a very slow caller > answering a speedy op in a big pileup is simply a QRM generator who > shouldn't be there. I said a "very slow caller" in a "big pileup". I did not say a slow caller with nobody else calling. I stand by my statement. I also wouldn't disparage contesters too much. They're much more likely to hear your 100W to an attic antenna than someone using similar antennas to yours. QRPers sometimes forget who is doing the real work when they make a rare DX contact. 73, Bill W4ZV |
|
|
In reply to this post by GM0ELP
In both the CQWWCW and RTTY Contests I found the K3 to be "too good".
In the zoo of 20 and 40m I could easily find a hole in which to CQ by using the K3 filters and variable bandwidth controls, but in both contests i often got pounced upon with QRL QSY. I asked myself why. If I cant hear another station because I am using the filtration system of the K3 - is it MY problem? If they cannot reduce their rx bandwidth by the inclusion and usage of their filters - is that MY problem? Perhaps we should all use a K3 then we could squeeze more stations into the available bandwidth... If I am bothering YOU, but you are not bothering ME - than that is clearly YOUR problem......... or am I just being bolshy?? Tom GM4FDM GM0ELP wrote: > Hi All, > I was active as MM3T at the weekend with K3 #1293 and K2 #4688, Acom 1000, > Doublet 160/80, 1/4 GP 40 and Cobweb 20,15 and 10m. The last 3 CQWW CW I've > been using an FT1000MP MkV with inrad 4K roof filter (fully loaded) so was > keen to give the K3 the try for the first time. > > My K3 has 400/1k roofing filters installed. It needed the 400 engaged on all > but 15 and 10m which were quiet here in GM and so the 1k came in to good > use. I had intended to use Dual PB but forgot all about it. > > I had one problem with the K3 on top band when the rx went quiet and tx > power disappeared in a kind of intermittent way just after transmitting. It > took me a while to realise it wasn't the tuner/coax/LPF/Linear connections > and seemed to be located in the back panel audio connections area. Putting > my hand down the back of the transceiver and giving the connections a wiggle > seemed to bring the radio back to life. At one stage I power cycled the K3 > and got an ERR PLL message or something on the display. This only happened > when I was on top band. > > I used fast AGC with AGC threshold 5 and AGC slope 10 for high bands and 8/8 > for low bands respectively. I changed these settings a number of times > during the contest and ended up with several favourites dependant on > band/noise. I was raising the threshold in line with rising noise levels and > adjusting the slope downward when dealing with pile ups which helped my > brain separate the callers by adding sound level difference. Using the PF1 > and PF2 keys for threshold and slope worked a treat. > > I had been using a K1EL keyer with the MkV in the past and decided to > simplify things this year with the K3 by using DTR-RTS for key-ptt. This > coupled with WinTest contest software worked flawlessly (even with open wire > feeder in the shack). > > I allowed condx to determine my sending speed, if things got hectic whilst > running, my speed went up and when trying to bag a weak one on a noisy band > my speed went down. I did miss the winkey variable pot when working slow > stations, but just had to hope they had been listening to me enough to get > the call right before calling. I get more angry with inefficient exchange > (mindlessly repeating things like my call) rather than slow speed callers. > The worst combo when working a pile up is a slow caller who thinks data type > exchanges are the norm, as 9/10 times this one station will cause someone > else to steal your frequency whilst you are waiting for his exchange to > finish. > > The EU really is a zoo during CQWW CW and I've tried using lesser radios in > the past and given in. I did 24hrs with the K3 and still love it despite the > top band band failure. A fully loaded MkV is a hard act to follow, but I did > spend $6000 (ROB) on it and then had to install an inrad roof and do key > click mods to get it to work properly. > > Thanks to all who worked me! > > Doug GM0ELP (MM3T) > -- So I met the bloke who invented crosswords today. I can't remember his name, it's P something T something R. --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 081130-0, 30/11/2008 Tested on: 01/12/2008 22:15:53 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
>Perhaps we should all use a K3 then we could squeeze more stations into
>the available bandwidth... > I think you might be able to get the principals at Elecraft to sign up to this idea. >If I am bothering YOU, but you are not bothering ME - than that is >clearly YOUR problem......... > Well, it's a known issue. It goes two ways, too. I have a neighbor that runs all gain controls fully clockwise, to the point that he takes up half of 80m with splatter. This renders the K3 deaf, because there is serious on-frequency signal. If I could just get this guy to understand that he's supposed to keep his RF energy on frequency, and could explain that using reasonable gain settings is one way to accomplish this.... the problem would go away. >or am I just being bolshy?? > No - I've come across the same complaint from others. The K3 remakes how the world will use HF radio. "In between" takes on a whole new meaning. 73, matt W6NIA K3 #24 >Tom >GM4FDM > > > >GM0ELP wrote: >> Hi All, >> I was active as MM3T at the weekend with K3 #1293 and K2 #4688, Acom 1000, >> Doublet 160/80, 1/4 GP 40 and Cobweb 20,15 and 10m. The last 3 CQWW CW I've >> been using an FT1000MP MkV with inrad 4K roof filter (fully loaded) so was >> keen to give the K3 the try for the first time. >> >> My K3 has 400/1k roofing filters installed. It needed the 400 engaged on all >> but 15 and 10m which were quiet here in GM and so the 1k came in to good >> use. I had intended to use Dual PB but forgot all about it. >> >> I had one problem with the K3 on top band when the rx went quiet and tx >> power disappeared in a kind of intermittent way just after transmitting. It >> took me a while to realise it wasn't the tuner/coax/LPF/Linear connections >> and seemed to be located in the back panel audio connections area. Putting >> my hand down the back of the transceiver and giving the connections a wiggle >> seemed to bring the radio back to life. At one stage I power cycled the K3 >> and got an ERR PLL message or something on the display. This only happened >> when I was on top band. >> >> I used fast AGC with AGC threshold 5 and AGC slope 10 for high bands and 8/8 >> for low bands respectively. I changed these settings a number of times >> during the contest and ended up with several favourites dependant on >> band/noise. I was raising the threshold in line with rising noise levels and >> adjusting the slope downward when dealing with pile ups which helped my >> brain separate the callers by adding sound level difference. Using the PF1 >> and PF2 keys for threshold and slope worked a treat. >> >> I had been using a K1EL keyer with the MkV in the past and decided to >> simplify things this year with the K3 by using DTR-RTS for key-ptt. This >> coupled with WinTest contest software worked flawlessly (even with open wire >> feeder in the shack). >> >> I allowed condx to determine my sending speed, if things got hectic whilst >> running, my speed went up and when trying to bag a weak one on a noisy band >> my speed went down. I did miss the winkey variable pot when working slow >> stations, but just had to hope they had been listening to me enough to get >> the call right before calling. I get more angry with inefficient exchange >> (mindlessly repeating things like my call) rather than slow speed callers. >> The worst combo when working a pile up is a slow caller who thinks data type >> exchanges are the norm, as 9/10 times this one station will cause someone >> else to steal your frequency whilst you are waiting for his exchange to >> finish. >> >> The EU really is a zoo during CQWW CW and I've tried using lesser radios in >> the past and given in. I did 24hrs with the K3 and still love it despite the >> top band band failure. A fully loaded MkV is a hard act to follow, but I did >> spend $6000 (ROB) on it and then had to install an inrad roof and do key >> click mods to get it to work properly. >> >> Thanks to all who worked me! >> >> Doug GM0ELP (MM3T) >> Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:26:23 -0800, Matt Zilmer wrote:
>Well, it's a known issue. It goes two ways, too. I have a neighbor >that runs all gain controls fully clockwise, to the point that he >takes up half of 80m with splatter. This renders the K3 deaf, because >there is serious on-frequency signal. YES! It takes peer pressure and a reminder that sportsmanship and ethics prohibit us from running a race with elbows flying (which is what you do when an old/cheap radio and big power amp). Or generate clicks with an un-modified Yaesu MP. Running high power carries with it the responsibility for having a clean signal. During the contest yesterday, I observed that a certain JA5Fxx was getting blasted on the cluster for clicks. Sure enough, I listened here and he was clicking in CA on 160M, 4,000 miles away, with an S8 signal. I called him five times to tell him about his clicks, but he ignored me and went right on QRMing his neighbors. I heard him later on two other bands, but didn't call him. I have neighbors with K3s and KW amps only a quarter mile away, 2 miles away (N6RZ), and 5 miles away (K6XX). I find that we can coexist with each other quite well. Two of us (W6DRX and myself) bought K3s specifically so that we could do so. I had just bought a pair of used MPs, so I didn't need MORE radios, only BETTER radios. :) And it isn't enough to buy and use a K3 -- we've got a neighboring contester about 15 miles away with a K3 who often burns more of the band than W6DRX (only 0.25 miles from me). Dunno what he's doing, but it isn't good. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:06:35 -0800 (PST), Bill W4ZV wrote:
> said a "very slow caller" in a "big pileup". I did not say a slow caller >with nobody else calling. I stand by my statement. Agreed. One W7 kept calling continuously at 18 wpm when it was obvious he couldn't hear the DX station. I heard several instances of that, and it made things quite difficult for the guys that COULD hear the DX. >I also wouldn't disparage contesters too much. They're much more likely to >hear your 100W to an attic antenna than someone using similar antennas to >yours. QRPers sometimes forget who is doing the real work when they make a >rare DX contact. Agreed on all counts. I've been in chairs on both sides of that QSO. The antenna farms at stations like N6RO and W8JI include serious RX antennas and serious RXs. THAT'S why they can work flies peeing out the window in JA on 160. But I also agree with G4ILO when he correctly observed these egomaniacs CQing at 40 WPM for the last 8 hours of the contest and getting very few answers. QRQ WAS definitely part of why they were getting no calls -- they had already worked the several hundred guys who CAN read 40 WPM. My call has a lot of dashes in it, so I regularly work at 29 WPM or so, but when things get slow, I'll CQ at 25 or so. When it's not piled up, I'll certainly QRS when the other guy is QRS. But like you, when I'm running, the call I'll answer first is the one I think I can work the quickest, whether it's a better signal or a faster/better op. Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Milt -- N5IA
Milt,
I heard you OK (RST 549) it's just that I was in the 160m SOSB QRP section (the antennas I had all worked very well) and I only managed to work 4 USA stations, K1TTT being one of them nonetheless... no surprise there then. I managed 340 QSOs, 46 countries and 10 zones, 18hrs of operation. As my first serious attempt at CQWW I'm content with my efforts. My antennas pulled in signals from all around the world including China, Caribbean, India & a lot of USA stations but running QRP there was little chance of breaking any of the pile-ups going. I mainly sent at 26 wpm. When calling CQ an SN station came in with a rate of CW representing the sound of a machine gun and he was the only one I had to ask again 4 times !!!! As said before, and it is my belief too, this is too fast and there is no need for it. To me he wasted his time and mine as he could have moved onto another QSO quicker and I could have work the next one in the queue. He's got nothing to prove sending at the speed of RTTY. 73's Berni G0IDA Milt, N5IA wrote: > I also did my first contest with my new K3; the first since operating > with the team of K3s at VP6DX. I also used separate RX antennas and > the diversity feature. Lots of fun. > > I also worked 160 SB. BUT Berni, I don't see your callsign in my > log. I heard lots of stations and country/zone mults that I didn't > work. I need more elements on the TX antenna. Hi, hi!!!!!!!!!! > > Still, a somewhat casual outing from the Southwest corner of New > Mexico yielded 214 Qs, 57 DX and 21 Zones for a claimed score of > 38,064. > > I'll be looking for all of you in the ARRL 160 this next weekend. > > Milt, N5IA, XZ0A, and VP6DX > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Berni G0IDA" <[hidden email]> > To: <[hidden email]> > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 1:57 AM > Subject: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW > > >> Dear members of the K3, >> >> I just wanted to start a thread for those of you who used a K3 in CQWW, >> to ask of your experiences during the contest using the K3, the set-up >> you had and to see if we worked other K3 members. > -- _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10
On 1 dec 2008, at 19.12, Jim Brown wrote: > Interesting propagation from several locations on 20M caused very > strong > echoes that ran characters together to the point that I couldn't > copy them > at all. One example was about 1800Z Sunday for signals from anywhere > NE USA > and eastern Canada (that is, W1, W2, W3, VE1, VE2, VE3). Around > 2200Z I was > hearing it on a few JA stations. I'm about 70 miles S of San > Francisco and > use wire dipoles, so I don't have directivity to protect me from > secondary > arrivals. I also had this happening to me, with EU stations coming back several paths. The was one PA (I believe) that I just gave up on, his code just melted together to one steady carrier. On 80 meter I had a nice run Sunday night squeezed between two stations where the variable filtering came in handy. First I was a little annoyed when a station sneaked up very close on me starting a run, but after some filter tweaking I felt pretty good with my tight spot on the band. Overall it was a fun weekend with the K3! My claimed score is here; http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/3830/2008-December/164538.html 73 de Björn, SM0MDG SE0X _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
Bill and All,
I'm not an ardent contester, so this is a serious question--not a criticism. I did jump in this year on a very erratic basis, which only yielded about 110 Q's. But I'm curious--how does "ENN AU" convert to "599 21"? More specifically, the "E" and the "AU" part? I know it is getting to be pretty "standard" to use "N" for "9", and "T" for "0". That happens all the time in regular QSO's. I even started getting used to the use of "A" for "1" during the contest--lots of South America stations doing that. But the shorthand I question above is new to me. Probably it has been in use for a long time, but I sure didn't know it. I suspect a lot of others didn't either. That has to add to the confusion, and cause otherwise unnecessary requests for repeats. And the use of "A" for "1" by some ops, and for "2" by others, makes no sense. Seems to me if shorthand is to be used it should follow some generally accepted standard. Anyway, as one of the leading check-out stand tabloids says, "Inquiring minds want to know!" Dave W7AQK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill W4ZV" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:44 AM Subject: RE: [Elecraft] K3 and CQWW > If you were answered 4L0A at 15-18 WPM, he would have completed 2 QSOs by > the time you finished signing your call twice! And you would have been > QRMing everyone else in the process. He was sending at 32-34 WPM and his > canned exchange sped up to ~50 WPM (i.e. "ENN AU" for 599 21). And this > was > on 160 meters no less! > 73, Bill W4ZV > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
I did understand what you wrote, Bill. I simply felt that the way in which you expressed your opinion was offensive to those with lesser CW skills. Not all slow operators are guilty of doing what you object to. But even if a few do, they are still a fellow enthusiast whose interest in contesting should surely be encouraged, not made to feel that if their operating is not up to your level it would be better if they kept their rig switched off during the contest. I'm glad that you slow down if a slower guy calls you. But if I can't read your call in the first place I'm never going to call at all.
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392 K3 #222 KX3 #110
* G4ILO's Shack - http://www.g4ilo.com * KComm - http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html * KTune - http://www.g4ilo.com/ktune.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by Berni G0IDA
I spent a fair amount of time last weekend in the contest with my K3 and I came away VERY impressed with the performance of its main and sub receivers. I had been contesting quite happily for the past 4 years with a Ten-Tec Orion but my sense was that the K3 afforded a slight but significant advantage in copying every cw element sent by weak/fading stations and also when clicks/spurs were present by offending neighbors. Someone else mentioned a sense of less fatigue after hours of operating, and I can relate to that in retrospect. K3's excellent subreceiver afforded seamless diversity reception as well as the potential to work dx off both receivers/vfo's. With modest antennas, I managed almost 3M with about 30 hours on the radio. I posted some soundfiles of 40M runs on my Web site while using diversity reception. If you have broadband internet, have a listen to what the dx sounded like at http://n1eu.com/k3/cqwwcw08_40Mrun.mp3 (delta loop - left channel, Beverage - right channel; 300hz width with 500hz roofing filters) 73, Barry N1EU |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bjorn
I also noted on Sunday morning, 08:37 am local, while listening to LZ5K that on the 4/4 (110' top) stack he sounded
good, but on the dipole (@ 150') , there was quite an echo, making it difficult to
copy him. LZ5K wasn't the only station I noted this on.
73, Steve NN4X On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Björn Mohr <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Dave these are "cut" number abbreviations. N for 9, T for 0, E for 5, A for 1 and U for 2. There are others but they're very seldom used. I made a mistake before and should have said ENN UA instead of ENN AU. ENN UA is the correct abbreviation for 599 21. Why do guys send these cut numbers? To save time. Using the databases in most logging programs, the exchanges are presumed to be 599 (although they can be modified by exception). The logging programs also pre-fill most zone numbers based on prefix (i.e. they know 4L is in Zone 21). As soon as someone copies you as 4L0A, they already know your zone and RST is presumed 599, so 4L0A could send his ENNUA exchange at 100 WPM and most serious contesters wouldn't bat an eye. Could this really make a difference in time spent making an exchange? As an exercise, let's compare: 59921: ..... ----. ----. ..--- .---- (assuming a dash = 3 dits, you have 55 dits worth of timing. versus: ENNUA: . -. -. ..- .- (same rules = 18 dits worth). The latter exchange is roughly 3X faster. Now assume you repeat that for the 7247 QSOs 4L0A made, *and* also assume he sends the cut exchange at high speed (e.g. 60 WPM) and you begin to see why guys do it. Hope this helps and I personally never use anything but T or N for cut numbers. 73, Bill |
|
|
In reply to this post by Julian, G4ILO
Julian I also said in another post that I often slow down on the second day if I'm not getting any callers. Even during high rate times I'll sometimes down now and then if I'm not getting any callers. I imagine many beginners use Packet spots so they probably know my call. If a slow guy calls, I *ALWAYS* slow down to match his speed. This is really just common sense but I'll be quick to admit not everyone does this. By not doing this I do believe some guys lose QSOs. If I was a little terse it may have been that the memory of some guys answering rapid operators (like 4L0A) were simply making QRM for everyone else with their long slow calls. I learned a long time ago a DX station cannot hear you while he's transmitting but a surprising number of people don't seem to understand that. Here's an example of what I was hearing (in time sequence): TU 4L0A W1ABC ENNUA TU 4L0A W4XYZ ENNUA TU 4L0A (all at 35 WPM) W1ABC 5NNT5 W4XYZ 5NNT5 (all at 35 WPM) W A 9 L I D W A 9 L I D W A 9 L I D (all at 18 EPM) I'm not sure the above will come across graphically but hopefully you get the idea. Those were real exchanges with the calls changed to protect the innocent, hi! 73, Bill |
|
|
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Dave, here's something to ponder. 4L0A currently has the World high-claimed score for the Multioperator-Single Transmitter category. They made ~7300 QSOs in 48 hours with ONE transmitter. That means they made 7300/48 = 152 QSOs every hour on average. That's ~2.5 per minute or roughly one complete QSO every 24 seconds over the entire 48 hour period. Perhaps now you see their obsession with saving time by minimizing the exchange and sending it at high speeds! 73, Bill |
|
|
Hi Bill
Here's my two penn'orth: Operating in dxpeditions I usually use around 28 to 32wpm, down to 20wpm depending on conditions, eg 160m. In ideal conditions I would get up to around 190 contacts per hour and my friend SWH would get around 260 at similar speeds. The bottom line is that 3 or 4 per minute was considered necessary to justify all the expense of getting there. What limited me was my inability to mentally sort the hailstorm of incoming cw signals which forced my rate down to 160 or less on occasion. A K3 will help me next time. BTW on ssb my co-operator got up to 340 contacts in an hour I remember at 3am when we were on together. 73 David G3UNA > >> > > Dave, here's something to ponder. 4L0A currently has the World > high-claimed > score for the Multioperator-Single Transmitter category. They made ~7300 > QSOs in 48 hours with ONE transmitter. That means they made 7300/48 = 152 > QSOs every hour on average. That's ~2.5 per minute or roughly one > complete > QSO every 24 seconds over the entire 48 hour period. Perhaps now you see > their obsession with saving time by minimizing the exchange and sending it > at high speeds! > > 73, Bill > Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV
Yeah, and 4L0A's obsession with saving time also involves not caring if their next run frequency is already occupied. They don't set a very good example for "how it should be done" - i.e., big score no matter what it takes. 73, Barry N1EU |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |