K3- pace of development
Locked
12
12
 
|
Elecraft are brilliant in responding to customers'
wishes/needs so I wonder if I am alone in wanting a little time to let current
developments and firmware upgrades show their worth? I have just taken my
soldering to my two K3s to install upgrades (and then upgraded the
firmware). However I looked at the latest beta firmware and feel I am slightly
on a treadmill. I am very happy to wait say every six months and then pick
up any Elecraft firmware changes. I know I am free to do this but I have the
feeling that some requests for change are very individualistic and may well not
reflect the views of the majority of K3 users. Time for reflection isn't
always wasted. It might even allow me to have an up to date handbook for a
while.
73 Nick G3RWF
_______________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
If you are asking for a pause in the release of new firmware updates then I don't think that will find much favor with those who are still waiting for various features to be implemented. Nobody is required to install updates, and I personally don't unless the list of changes includes something I'm particularly interested in. It's in the nature of a forum like this that people will throw in their pet suggestions. I don't think anyone who does so expects their idea to get implemented straight away. Where I am inclined to agree with you is that the incorporation of features appears to occur in a haphzard fashion. Someone's idea may get acted on straight away whereas other things - even features documented in the manual since day 1 such as the ability to calibrate the 1ppm TCXO for extra stability - still remain on the to-do list. I think your concerns might be allayed if Elecraft were to do what a couple of developer types who I have had discussions with privately have suggested, namely publish a roadmap for firmware development. Then we could all see when the K3 is actually going to be "finished", when our long-awaited feature is likely to be implemented, and people would have to justify why their pet idea should come higher up the list than something else.
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 |
|
|
Some changes are easy to implement. Some are hard and carry a risk of side effects. Let's look into some:
1. Change LO step from 100 to 50 Hz -- very easy to implement 2. Band stacking, e.g., pressing V_M+nr for the same band toggles the stacks, a menu defines the number of stacks -- easy once one figures how to implement it 2. Make 2nd RX band independent - medium IMHO 3. Allow 2nd RX use ANT2 when TX uses ANT1 and 2nd RX connected to AUX -- easy but potentially dangerous if timing not right 4. Narrow manual notch (200=> 50 Hz) and faster automatic notch -- easy but a question whether to add menus 5. NTCH and NR under AGC loop - hard if not impossible with low power DSP; possibly with side effects in the first release There is a question to whom the changes are addressed. Ignacy
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Nick G3RWF
Having some experience with amateur repeater control
software and other systems, it usually happens that some new features are
particularly easy to implement while others are particularly hard. This is
unrelated to a user's perception of complexity or desirability, and relates
more to firmware design decisions that were made long ago. After "a
while", maintaining the existing software becomes more onerous than a
complete redevelopment.
This might explain some of the apparent hap-hazard
release of K3 features.
_______________________________________________ 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 addition to risk and complexity, there are other
factors that can have a bearing on what one would do "next"
This list is a tremendous source of new ideas.
Some of them are new & novel and you want to stay open to those.
Another factor is experience. The more we use our K3s the more we learn
about what really needs to be fixed and what isn't so important. Some
features that were envisioned (envisaged?) from the start may have seemed
important but time has shown that they aren't so critical after all, but
something unforeseen is.
Combine that with the complexity and risk issues and
you can have a seeming randomness to the changes.
Of course, it could be that SW development at Elecraft
is pretty much out of control. It could be that features are worked in
random order depending on the whim of the implementer. It could be that
things are done in an informal, undocumented, under-tested sort of way. It
could be that the process relies almost entirely on the heroics of the
individuals doing the work. In other words, they could be following the
industry standard model for SW development. If so, I predict the rate of
changes will slow as the code architecture becomes a limiting factor and as
changes upon changes begin to take their toll.
- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 - From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Monty Shultes Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 11:04 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3- pace of development Having some experience with amateur repeater control
software and other systems, it usually happens that some new features are
particularly easy to implement while others are particularly hard. This is
unrelated to a user's perception of complexity or desirability, and relates
more to firmware design decisions that were made long ago. After "a
while", maintaining the existing software becomes more onerous than a
complete redevelopment.
This might explain some of the apparent hap-hazard
release of K3 features.
_______________________________________________ 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 |
|
Administrator
|
Darwin, Keith wrote:
> Of course, it could be that SW development at Elecraft is pretty much > out of control. It could be that features are worked in random order > depending on the whim of the implementer. It could be that things are > done in an informal, undocumented, under-tested sort of way. It could > be that the process relies almost entirely on the heroics of the > individuals doing the work. In other words, they could be following > the industry standard model for SW development. If so, I predict the > rate of changes will slow as the code architecture becomes a limiting > factor and as changes upon changes begin to take their toll. Not :) There are five people responsible for software development at Elecraft. All of us are tasked with gradually improving not just the feature set but also the underlying structure, documentation, and regression test procedures. We all work very closely together, and have frequent discussions about which new features or improvements to work on. Many variables go into the equation, but the buck stops with Eric and myself. It's safe to say that our software and firmware get better with every release. Please keep sending suggestions, and don't pull any punches. We learn more from complaints than we do from praise, and we appreciate the great attitude of our customers. 73, Wayne N6KR --- http://www.elecraft.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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Nick G3RWF
Bravo Wayne,
Well said on the software development of the K3. It amazes me when folks on here start listing items they want to see implemented and then define just how difficult or easy they are to do. It's as if they think their assigned degree of difficulty will expedite the implementation. Patience folks. I'm betting that very few, if any, of the those posting on here could do the technical job that the Elecraft team is doing. Dave N8AG _______________________________________________ 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 Nick G3RWF
Nick, On Page 86 of the February QST Yaesu Has announced performance enhancements for their very expensive FTDX9000. I am sure that the DX9000 owners are thrilled to know they are about to receive major mods free of charge. I wonder if Elecraft's rapid response with upgrades and bug fixes had anything to do with this? I'll bet Yaesu owners would love to have the problem you describe. As has been stated or implied in other responses, there's no need to implement any of the firmware changes if they don't affect the way you operate. I've had my K3 for almost a year now (SN #386) and I, for one have been extremely satisified with the rate and quantity of upgrades. I had been a user of another well known manufacturer and was lucky to get any attention paid to my requests. I would also like to comment on the response from Julian, G4ILO where he stated.. This is a hobby for us, and a great one, but for Eric and Wayne and all the others, it is not only a hobby but a business. I've been the head of a large corporation and the last thing I would do is provide my competition with a road map of where I plan to go and when I plan to get there. 73, Don K2PMC |
|
|
They have also tried to improve the Ft-2000 via firmware upgrades. I would
say the 2000 plus K3's sold have made a difference. I have a friend that just sold his 746pro and is selling his Ft-950. He will order a K3. He wanted me to trade him mine for his 2 rigs and some cash from him... Right. Randy K8RDD ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don - K2PMC" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 9:07 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3- pace of development > > > Nick G3RWF wrote: >> >> Elecraft are brilliant in responding to customers' wishes/needs so I >> wonder if I am alone in wanting a little time to let current developments >> and firmware upgrades show their worth? >> > > Nick, > > On Page 86 of the February QST Yaesu Has announced performance > enhancements > for their very expensive FTDX9000. I am sure that the DX9000 owners are > thrilled to know they are about to receive major mods free of charge. I > wonder if Elecraft's rapid response with upgrades and bug fixes had > anything > to do with this? I'll bet Yaesu owners would love to have the problem you > describe. > > As has been stated or implied in other responses, there's no need to > implement any of the firmware changes if they don't affect the way you > operate. > > I've had my K3 for almost a year now (SN #386) and I, for one have been > extremely satisified with the rate and quantity of upgrades. I had been a > user of another well known manufacturer and was lucky to get any attention > paid to my requests. > > I would also like to comment on the response from Julian, G4ILO where he > stated.. > > >> I think your concerns might be allayed if Elecraft were to do what a >> couple of developer types who I have had discussions with privately have >> suggested, namely publish a roadmap for firmware development. >> > > This is a hobby for us, and a great one, but for Eric and Wayne and all > the > others, it is not only a hobby but a business. I've been the head of a > large corporation and the last thing I would do is provide my competition > with a road map of where I plan to go and when I plan to get there. > > 73, > Don > K2PMC > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/K3---pace-of-development-tp2244953p2253869.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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Don - K2PMC
Don - K2PMC wrote: > > On Page 86 of the February QST Yaesu Has announced performance enhancements > for their very expensive FTDX9000. I am sure that the DX9000 owners are > thrilled to know they are about to receive major mods free of charge. I > wonder if Elecraft's rapid response with upgrades and bug fixes had anything > to do with this? I'll bet Yaesu owners would love to have the problem you > describe. I suspect it has more to do with not wanting third parties coming up with "fixes" for design flaws in their flagship HF transceivers anymore, ala FT-1000D/MP/MP MkV roofing filters and key click mods. I'll bet Inrad has made a mint on the FT-1000 roofing filter kits. Could also be people who spent $12K on a rig get a little upset when it doesn't perform as well as one which cost 1/3 that amount. There's no doubt in my mind that Yaesu wouldn't be doing this if it weren't for the K3 and Flex5K. > This is a hobby for us, and a great one, but for Eric and Wayne and all the > others, it is not only a hobby but a business. I've been the head of a > large corporation and the last thing I would do is provide my competition > with a road map of where I plan to go and when I plan to get there. EXACTLY!! It might make a few on the reflector feel good but would be giving away a serious business advantage. When your competitors are bigger, with bigger R+D resources, it would be foolish to tell them where you're going, how you're going to get there, and when you expect to arrive. -- R. Kevin Stover, ACØH ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Don - K2PMC
I find this response baffling. Providing a road map of future development is exactly what major software companies like Microsoft, IBM etc. do, and I guess they have a lot more at stake than Elecraft. The idea is to give customers the confidence to invest in the product, especially where they may be interested in features that are in the pipeline but not yet available. Frankly I don't think anything that would be divulged in such a road map is any great secret. It's basically about letting people know when the K3 will work in every respect as one would expect. For example, AM does not currently have the option of speech compression due to an issue that Elecraft has not yet found the time to work on. Letting people know when this issue is going to be fixed is not going to be giving away any trade secrets.
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 |
|
|
Julian, G4ILO wrote: > I find this response baffling. Providing a road map of future development is > exactly what major software companies like Microsoft, IBM etc. do, and I > guess they have a lot more at stake than Elecraft. The idea is to give > customers the confidence to invest in the product, especially where they may > be interested in features that are in the pipeline but not yet available. > > Frankly I don't think anything that would be divulged in such a road map is > any great secret. It's basically about letting people know when the K3 will > work in every respect as one would expect. For example, AM does not > currently have the option of speech compression due to an issue that > Elecraft has not yet found the time to work on. Letting people know when > this issue is going to be fixed is not going to be giving away any trade > secrets. Very big difference between Microsoft and Elecraft. Microsoft for all intents and purposes has NO competition. They're attitude is "this is where we're going, whether you like it or not" and they're market share and installed base are big enough to let them get away with it. You don't think the R and D departments at Yaesu, Kenwood, and Icom wouldn't love to know what Elecraft plans are for development in the next year? The K3 caught all three of them with their pants around their ankles and they've been playing catch up (not very well) since. I hear that Kenwood is getting back into the high performance HF market again. We'll see if they've learned any lessons from the last ten years of being on the sidelines. -- R. Kevin Stover, ACØH ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
I'm not sure if there are crossed purposes here or a genuine difference of opinion. Personally I agree that publishing a roadmap for the development of new products could be commercial suicide. However, the K3 is an existing product and I am interested in what has or is going to change / get fixed / get incorporated in the future. There have been a number of discussions here where Lyle or Wayne has said they will go on the list to get fixed / incorporated. I don't think that it is an unreasonable request (to go on the existing list maybe :-) ) and it's not commercially sensitive information (it's in the public domain anyway) and I can't see what Elecraft's competitors would get that they haven't got already. 73's all Paul M1PAF |
|
|
The Microsoft's road map is mainly for the other folks that need to make changes to their software based upon the underlying structure of Microsoft's software.
That is not the case for Elecraft and the K3. I would like to know maybe the upcoming big moves like maybe an integrated vhf/uhf module or integrated panadapter. But I suppose Larry Philips might be more interested. PS: I am holding off on a panadapter to see where Larry and Wayne decide to go. I love my LP-100 and the my K3, I hope maybe a panadapter collaboration would give us the best of both worlds. But whatever happens the world of "the radio" will be better. AB3EN
Dan AB3EN |
|
|
I've only had my K3 for a little over a week. RX performance is great, but
I'm finding that some operational things don't work as I expect they should. Perhaps I just to be pointed in the right direction to understand what is happening? Frequency Memories: I have been trying to store some frequencies in memories, and it seems that sometimes it just does not work. I have the frequency selected and working, I hit V>M, select an empty memory, hit V>M again which should store it. Then I try to recall the memory with M>V, select that memory location and it's blank? A couple of times I have somehow gotten a random frequency stored in a memory location that does not correspond to anything I have tried to store. It seems that once this happens, I can then overwrite that random frequency with one that I want. That tells me that sometimes the memory that are blank will not accept a new frequency? VFO A/B: (I do not have the second rx) VFO A and VFO B seem to be tied to each other. When I change bands by tapping Band^, both VFOs change band. Shouldn't they work independently? When I recall a memory (those that have stored correctly) both VFO A and VFO B get set to that memory frequency, mode etc. Is this behavior correct? Bob W5OV ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Bob,
Independent bands is not yet available in the firmware. I know it is being addressed for the sub-receiver, but I am not certain about the possibility for cross-band operation with only the main receiver installed. When you try to store a memory, how long is your 'hit' on the V>M button? (it should be a TAP) Watch the VFO B area, and if you see "NO DVR" flash there, you are 'holding' the button instead of 'tapping' it. There should be no problem storing into an empty memory location. Yes, when a memory is recalled, both the VFO A and VFO B contents from that memory are recalled - that is normal behavior. 73, Don W3FPR Robert Naumann wrote: > I've only had my K3 for a little over a week. RX performance is great, but > I'm finding that some operational things don't work as I expect they should. > Perhaps I just to be pointed in the right direction to understand what is > happening? > > Frequency Memories: > I have been trying to store some frequencies in memories, and it seems that > sometimes it just does not work. I have the frequency selected and working, > I hit V>M, select an empty memory, hit V>M again which should store it. Then > I try to recall the memory with M>V, select that memory location and it's > blank? A couple of times I have somehow gotten a random frequency stored in > a memory location that does not correspond to anything I have tried to > store. It seems that once this happens, I can then overwrite that random > frequency with one that I want. That tells me that sometimes the memory that > are blank will not accept a new frequency? > > VFO A/B: (I do not have the second rx) > VFO A and VFO B seem to be tied to each other. When I change bands by > tapping Band^, both VFOs change band. Shouldn't they work independently? > When I recall a memory (those that have stored correctly) both VFO A and VFO > B get set to that memory frequency, mode etc. Is this behavior correct? > > Bob W5OV > > 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 |
Re: Newbie operational quirks?
|
|
Don,
Memories: I'm tapping and not holding as far as I can tell, but I'll play with it some more. Regarding the contents of the VFOs: I'm not trying to operate cross band but instead just have one VFO on one band, and the other on a different band and just switch back and forth between them as single operating frequencies using A/B. I now see that when I change frequency on VFOA, VFOB also changes to some frequency in the same band as VFO A. Band up and band down moves both VFOs also. This linked VFO behavior strikes me as "unusual". Bob W5OV -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 7:50 AM To: Robert Naumann Cc: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Newbie operational quirks? Bob, Independent bands is not yet available in the firmware. I know it is being addressed for the sub-receiver, but I am not certain about the possibility for cross-band operation with only the main receiver installed. When you try to store a memory, how long is your 'hit' on the V>M button? (it should be a TAP) Watch the VFO B area, and if you see "NO DVR" flash there, you are 'holding' the button instead of 'tapping' it. There should be no problem storing into an empty memory location. Yes, when a memory is recalled, both the VFO A and VFO B contents from that memory are recalled - that is normal behavior. 73, Don W3FPR Robert Naumann wrote: > I've only had my K3 for a little over a week. RX performance is great, but > I'm finding that some operational things don't work as I expect they should. > Perhaps I just to be pointed in the right direction to understand what is > happening? > > Frequency Memories: > I have been trying to store some frequencies in memories, and it seems that > sometimes it just does not work. I have the frequency selected and working, > I hit V>M, select an empty memory, hit V>M again which should store it. Then > I try to recall the memory with M>V, select that memory location and it's > blank? A couple of times I have somehow gotten a random frequency stored in > a memory location that does not correspond to anything I have tried to > store. It seems that once this happens, I can then overwrite that random > frequency with one that I want. That tells me that sometimes the memory that > are blank will not accept a new frequency? > > VFO A/B: (I do not have the second rx) > VFO A and VFO B seem to be tied to each other. When I change bands by > tapping Band^, both VFOs change band. Shouldn't they work independently? > When I recall a memory (those that have stored correctly) both VFO A and VFO > B get set to that memory frequency, mode etc. Is this behavior correct? > > Bob W5OV > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Sound like you've unintentionally LINKed the two VFOs. Hold SUB to toggle between LINK and UNLINK. You probably want UNLINK. 73, Bill |
Re: Newbie operational quirks?
|
|
Bill,
I don't have the sub rx, and as suggested, I tried holding SUB to toggle. It doesn't make any difference regardless of it showing LINK or UNLINK. Band UP or Band Down - both VFOs go. Enter a freq for VFO A, VFO B follows to the same band as VFO A - but not the same frequency. Bob W5OV -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bill W4ZV Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 8:38 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Newbie operational quirks? Robert Naumann wrote: > > I now see that when I change frequency on VFOA, VFOB also changes to some > frequency in the same band as VFO A. Band up and band down moves both VFOs > also. This linked VFO behavior strikes me as "unusual". > Sound like you've unintentionally LINKed the two VFOs. Hold SUB to toggle between LINK and UNLINK. You probably want UNLINK. 73, Bill -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/K3---pace-of-development-tp2244953p2258214.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 |
Re: Newbie operational quirks?
|
|
> Band UP or Band Down - both VFOs go. Enter a freq for VFO A, > VFO B follows to the same band as VFO A - but not the same frequency. That is normal operation - the VFOs can not be on different bands. If you enter a frequency on VFO A, VFO B will change to the last used VFO B frequency on the same band as VFO A. > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert Naumann > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 9:58 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Newbie operational quirks? > > > Bill, > > I don't have the sub rx, and as suggested, I tried holding > SUB to toggle. > > It doesn't make any difference regardless of it showing LINK > or UNLINK. > > Band UP or Band Down - both VFOs go. Enter a freq for VFO A, > VFO B follows to the same band as VFO A - but not the same frequency. > > Bob W5OV > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bill W4ZV > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 8:38 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Newbie operational quirks? > > > > > Robert Naumann wrote: > > > > I now see that when I change frequency on VFOA, VFOB also > changes to > > some frequency in the same band as VFO A. Band up and band > down moves > > both VFOs also. This linked VFO behavior strikes me as "unusual". > > > > Sound like you've unintentionally LINKed the two VFOs. Hold > SUB to toggle between LINK and UNLINK. You probably want UNLINK. > > 73, Bill > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/K3---pace-of-development-tp2244953p2258214.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 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |