Musings on a K4
Locked
123
123
 
|
Hello Lew,
I have no disagreement to your suggested arrangement. However, in the reality, the market for HF radios is far bigger than V/U radios. The R&D expenses in HF radios can be spreaded among commercial and insitutional variants. Perhaps, this explains why HF radio technology has been advancing so quick that we get quite a number of radio choices from different manufacturers. The technology in the currrent V/U ham radios is not much different from that of 20 years ago. This perhaps explains the reason why some of the hams are stilling chasing for the FT736R. The big names Y,I,K would rather spend their R&D in a more profitable radio segment such as HF. Even for the latest production of IC9100, of which I consider a good radio, I feel Icom is very brave in trying to launch an expensive radio targeting at the V/U segment. Without any intention to discriminate between HF and V/U operators, I feel HF hams are prepared to spend more in their radios. I did not know whether high end V/U radio will be profitable enough for Elecraft. Back to the price of FT736R, I feel it was overpriced in US or western countries. A nice second hand FT736 equipped with1.2G modules are selling at JPY70,000 in Japan. Regrettably, local Japanese dealers do not entertain overseas order. I will not buy FT736 now because I am not a skillful radio technican good at repairing work. TNX & 73, Johnny VR2XMC 從︰ Lew Phelps K6LMP <[hidden email]> 收件人︰ "[hidden email] List" <[hidden email]> 傳送日期︰ 2011年07月27日 (週三) 8:05 AM 主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] K4 There once was sold an excellent rig (for its day) sold by Yaesu called the FT-736r. It was designed and marketed primarily for satellite work, but became very popular among VHF-UHF contesters. In fact, I know of quite few who still use it, but they are looking for alternatives, since the '736 is becoming unreliable with age. The FT-736r had internal slot for four band-specific modules (transverters); the owner could mix and match among 6 meter, 2 meter, 220, 440, and 1296 mhz SSB. The modules were rated for 25 watts output through 220 mHz and 20 watts on 440 and above. Its receiver was not very impressive compared with what you can get with a K3 and transverters, but those who own it love it. Given the physical size and relatively high running temp of existing Elecraft transverters, my guess is that they'd have to be redesigned for slightly less power output to fit within the K3 case on a K3-based motherboard. But 16 watts out from a transverter module into an amplifier with 15 db gain would yield 500 watts out, and that's plenty for the uses such a rig would be put to. Marry a "K4" to a purpose-built VHF/UHF amplifier (akin to the KPA-500) and you would have a killer rig for VHF-UHF contesting. As for price, take a look at the eHam reviews of the FT-736r. The basic unit sells today for more than $500, even though decades old, and the "scarce" 222 mhz and 1296 mHz modules sometimes fetch $1,000 on eBay. People who are into satellite work and VHF/UHF contesting would fight for a place in line to buy such a rig, and for many it would be a bargain compared with trying to set up a complete FT-736r. If space allowed, five bands would be even better, but since most VHF/UHF contesters use a separate rig for 6 meters anyway, you could get by with four, covering 2m, 1.25 m, 70 cm, and 23 cm bands. You can easily spend $3k or $4k to put together a comparably equipped FT-736, which suggests that the market would accept a price of up to $5k for a new and very high-quality rig such as the hypothetical K4. And it absolutely would not pirate sales from the K3, although it would put a dent in sales of transverters. Please don't think that's a reason for not producing such a radio. If Elecraft followed that philosophy we'd not have the K3 or KX3. I would sell my car and walk 25 miles to work to get a "K4". Lew K6LMP > On 26 Jul 2011, at 14:08, Daniel Brown wrote: > >> A purpose built VHF/UHF/uWave and Satellite focused rig would be great >> - small section of the market, likely, but would be great for those of >> us who are interested there. >> >> 73, >> N8YSZ. ______________________________________________________________ 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 K6LMP
Lew, Other than the fact that the FT-736R had all of the modules in the case, what is the difference between a K4 such as you propose and a K3/10 with a XV-144/XV-222/XV-432 stack? Perhaps Elecraft could be persuaded to work on an XV-1290 to round out the offering ... Of more interest would be the ability to activate two of the XVs at the same time and feed the second one to the K3's Aux input (sub RX) for monitoring two bands, working satellites, or working cross band. It would take some work with both the XVs and the K3 control code but might pay off more than a VHF/UHF only "K4." 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 7/26/2011 8:05 PM, Lew Phelps K6LMP wrote: > There once was sold an excellent rig (for its day) sold by Yaesu called the FT-736r. It was designed and marketed primarily for satellite work, but became very popular among VHF-UHF contesters. In fact, I know of quite few who still use it, but they are looking for alternatives, since the '736 is becoming unreliable with age. > > The FT-736r had internal slot for four band-specific modules (transverters); the owner could mix and match among 6 meter, 2 meter, 220, 440, and 1296 mhz SSB. The modules were rated for 25 watts output through 220 mHz and 20 watts on 440 and above. Its receiver was not very impressive compared with what you can get with a K3 and transverters, but those who own it love it. > > Given the physical size and relatively high running temp of existing Elecraft transverters, my guess is that they'd have to be redesigned for slightly less power output to fit within the K3 case on a K3-based motherboard. But 16 watts out from a transverter module into an amplifier with 15 db gain would yield 500 watts out, and that's plenty for the uses such a rig would be put to. Marry a "K4" to a purpose-built VHF/UHF amplifier (akin to the KPA-500) and you would have a killer rig for VHF-UHF contesting. > > As for price, take a look at the eHam reviews of the FT-736r. The basic unit sells today for more than $500, even though decades old, and the "scarce" 222 mhz and 1296 mHz modules sometimes fetch $1,000 on eBay. People who are into satellite work and VHF/UHF contesting would fight for a place in line to buy such a rig, and for many it would be a bargain compared with trying to set up a complete FT-736r. If space allowed, five bands would be even better, but since most VHF/UHF contesters use a separate rig for 6 meters anyway, you could get by with four, covering 2m, 1.25 m, 70 cm, and 23 cm bands. You can easily spend $3k or $4k to put together a comparably equipped FT-736, which suggests that the market would accept a price of up to $5k for a new and very high-quality rig such as the hypothetical K4. > > And it absolutely would not pirate sales from the K3, although it would put a dent in sales of transverters. Please don't think that's a reason for not producing such a radio. If Elecraft followed that philosophy we'd not have the K3 or KX3. > > > I would sell my car and walk 25 miles to work to get a "K4". > > Lew K6LMP > > >> On 26 Jul 2011, at 14:08, Daniel Brown wrote: >> >>> A purpose built VHF/UHF/uWave and Satellite focused rig would be great >>> - small section of the market, likely, but would be great for those of >>> us who are interested there. >>> >>> 73, >>> N8YSZ. > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 |
|
|
The K4 would be better off, with NO HF :-) Similar to the 736R and the later Icom 910H. Now that the 910H has been replaced with the higher priced Icom 9100, that includes HF. The market is short on VHF/UHF only radios with Multimode and SAT capability, as standalone radios. 73, Jack VK4JRC Sent from my iPad On 27/07/2011, at 12:18 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Lew, > > Other than the fact that the FT-736R had all of the modules in the > case, what is the difference between a K4 such as you propose and > a K3/10 with a XV-144/XV-222/XV-432 stack? Perhaps Elecraft could > be persuaded to work on an XV-1290 to round out the offering ... > > Of more interest would be the ability to activate two of the XVs at > the same time and feed the second one to the K3's Aux input (sub RX) > for monitoring two bands, working satellites, or working cross band. > It would take some work with both the XVs and the K3 control code > but might pay off more than a VHF/UHF only "K4." > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > On 7/26/2011 8:05 PM, Lew Phelps K6LMP wrote: >> There once was sold an excellent rig (for its day) sold by Yaesu called the FT-736r. It was designed and marketed primarily for satellite work, but became very popular among VHF-UHF contesters. In fact, I know of quite few who still use it, but they are looking for alternatives, since the '736 is becoming unreliable with age. >> >> The FT-736r had internal slot for four band-specific modules (transverters); the owner could mix and match among 6 meter, 2 meter, 220, 440, and 1296 mhz SSB. The modules were rated for 25 watts output through 220 mHz and 20 watts on 440 and above. Its receiver was not very impressive compared with what you can get with a K3 and transverters, but those who own it love it. >> >> Given the physical size and relatively high running temp of existing Elecraft transverters, my guess is that they'd have to be redesigned for slightly less power output to fit within the K3 case on a K3-based motherboard. But 16 watts out from a transverter module into an amplifier with 15 db gain would yield 500 watts out, and that's plenty for the uses such a rig would be put to. Marry a "K4" to a purpose-built VHF/UHF amplifier (akin to the KPA-500) and you would have a killer rig for VHF-UHF contesting. >> >> As for price, take a look at the eHam reviews of the FT-736r. The basic unit sells today for more than $500, even though decades old, and the "scarce" 222 mhz and 1296 mHz modules sometimes fetch $1,000 on eBay. People who are into satellite work and VHF/UHF contesting would fight for a place in line to buy such a rig, and for many it would be a bargain compared with trying to set up a complete FT-736r. If space allowed, five bands would be even better, but since most VHF/UHF contesters use a separate rig for 6 meters anyway, you could get by with four, covering 2m, 1.25 m, 70 cm, and 23 cm bands. You can easily spend $3k or $4k to put together a comparably equipped FT-736, which suggests that the market would accept a price of up to $5k for a new and very high-quality rig such as the hypothetical K4. >> >> And it absolutely would not pirate sales from the K3, although it would put a dent in sales of transverters. Please don't think that's a reason for not producing such a radio. If Elecraft followed that philosophy we'd not have the K3 or KX3. >> >> >> I would sell my car and walk 25 miles to work to get a "K4". >> >> Lew K6LMP >> >> >>> On 26 Jul 2011, at 14:08, Daniel Brown wrote: >>> >>>> A purpose built VHF/UHF/uWave and Satellite focused rig would be great >>>> - small section of the market, likely, but would be great for those of >>>> us who are interested there. >>>> >>>> 73, >>>> N8YSZ. >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4
* On 2011 26 Jul 21:19 -0500, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
> > Lew, > > Other than the fact that the FT-736R had all of the modules in the > case, what is the difference between a K4 such as you propose and > a K3/10 with a XV-144/XV-222/XV-432 stack? Perhaps Elecraft could > be persuaded to work on an XV-1290 to round out the offering ... > > Of more interest would be the ability to activate two of the XVs at > the same time and feed the second one to the K3's Aux input (sub RX) > for monitoring two bands, working satellites, or working cross band. > It would take some work with both the XVs and the K3 control code > but might pay off more than a VHF/UHF only "K4." As my interest has recently been piqued by the satellites, this was just the solution I had in mind with my K3. I day dreamed that with the sub receiver the K3 might be able to do full duplex. My reading of this list's archives led me to the conclusion that this is not possible at this time. Should the K3 be developed as you suggest, Joe, I would be happy to go that route. At the moment I have more pressing needs such as antenna construction and getting familiar with various aspects of satellite operation. For that I will concentrate on receiving and my FT-817 needs a purpose. :-) 73, de Nate N0NB >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true." Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us ______________________________________________________________ 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 Jack Chomley
> The K4 would be better off, with NO HF :-) Why? Considering that 28 MHz is required as the IF for the VHF/UHF "band modules" (transverters) and the base K3/K4 would include the 8/10 Watt six meter capability, there is no cost difference/impact. I would think that providing a way to keep the sub-receiver active during transmit, allowing a second transverter to feed the sub RX for cross band/multi band receive, and providing an "inverted link" mode for the VFOs (for inverted transponder satellite work) would make the K3/10 with XV stack essentially the perfect VHF/UHF rig - other than the lack of a large case to hold the XV stack internally. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 7/26/2011 11:21 PM, Jack Chomley wrote: > > The K4 would be better off, with NO HF :-) Similar to the 736R and the later Icom 910H. > Now that the 910H has been replaced with the higher priced Icom 9100, that includes HF. > The market is short on VHF/UHF only radios with Multimode and SAT capability, as standalone radios. > > 73, > > Jack VK4JRC > Sent from my iPad > > On 27/07/2011, at 12:18 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"<[hidden email]> wrote: > >> >> Lew, >> >> Other than the fact that the FT-736R had all of the modules in the >> case, what is the difference between a K4 such as you propose and >> a K3/10 with a XV-144/XV-222/XV-432 stack? Perhaps Elecraft could >> be persuaded to work on an XV-1290 to round out the offering ... >> >> Of more interest would be the ability to activate two of the XVs at >> the same time and feed the second one to the K3's Aux input (sub RX) >> for monitoring two bands, working satellites, or working cross band. >> It would take some work with both the XVs and the K3 control code >> but might pay off more than a VHF/UHF only "K4." >> >> 73, >> >> ... Joe, W4TV >> >> >> On 7/26/2011 8:05 PM, Lew Phelps K6LMP wrote: >>> There once was sold an excellent rig (for its day) sold by Yaesu called the FT-736r. It was designed and marketed primarily for satellite work, but became very popular among VHF-UHF contesters. In fact, I know of quite few who still use it, but they are looking for alternatives, since the '736 is becoming unreliable with age. >>> >>> The FT-736r had internal slot for four band-specific modules (transverters); the owner could mix and match among 6 meter, 2 meter, 220, 440, and 1296 mhz SSB. The modules were rated for 25 watts output through 220 mHz and 20 watts on 440 and above. Its receiver was not very impressive compared with what you can get with a K3 and transverters, but those who own it love it. >>> >>> Given the physical size and relatively high running temp of existing Elecraft transverters, my guess is that they'd have to be redesigned for slightly less power output to fit within the K3 case on a K3-based motherboard. But 16 watts out from a transverter module into an amplifier with 15 db gain would yield 500 watts out, and that's plenty for the uses such a rig would be put to. Marry a "K4" to a purpose-built VHF/UHF amplifier (akin to the KPA-500) and you would have a killer rig for VHF-UHF contesting. >>> >>> As for price, take a look at the eHam reviews of the FT-736r. The basic unit sells today for more than $500, even though decades old, and the "scarce" 222 mhz and 1296 mHz modules sometimes fetch $1,000 on eBay. People who are into satellite work and VHF/UHF contesting would fight for a place in line to buy such a rig, and for many it would be a bargain compared with trying to set up a complete FT-736r. If space allowed, five bands would be even better, but since most VHF/UHF contesters use a separate rig for 6 meters anyway, you could get by with four, covering 2m, 1.25 m, 70 cm, and 23 cm bands. You can easily spend $3k or $4k to put together a comparably equipped FT-736, which suggests that the market would accept a price of up to $5k for a new and very high-quality rig such as the hypothetical K4. >>> >>> And it absolutely would not pirate sales from the K3, although it would put a dent in sales of transverters. Please don't think that's a reason for not producing such a radio. If Elecraft followed that philosophy we'd not have the K3 or KX3. >>> >>> >>> I would sell my car and walk 25 miles to work to get a "K4". >>> >>> Lew K6LMP >>> >>> >>>> On 26 Jul 2011, at 14:08, Daniel Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>> A purpose built VHF/UHF/uWave and Satellite focused rig would be great >>>>> - small section of the market, likely, but would be great for those of >>>>> us who are interested there. >>>>> >>>>> 73, >>>>> N8YSZ. >>> >>> ______________________________________________________________ >>> 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Nate Bargmann
The new radio should not be a Swiss army of the frequency spectrum, but a "tour de force" of Elecraft. It should have an on board computer with a tethered human interface. It should have a generous sized display allowing the user to control the radio's function with a terse set of knobs or the human interface with the screen sharing radio functions and a spectrum analyzer.
What I have seen here in the way of suggestions is just packaging more functions rather revolutionary radio changes. Radios today should be treated as a computing device whose output happens to be an RF signal. There have be some attempts at what I suggesting. However, these attempts were just too pioneering. As we say in electronics, pioneers are those that get shot in the back. But, as an outsider looking in, Elecraft seems to have in hand the ability to build a truly revolutionary radio. And, if you guys at Elecraft do this, sign me up for S/N 1. By the way, I think the new radio, the KX-3, is the trial balloon. Love my two K3s George, W6GF --- On Tue, 7/26/11, Nate Bargmann <[hidden email]> wrote: From: Nate Bargmann <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 To: Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 8:40 PM * On 2011 26 Jul 21:19 -0500, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > > Lew, > > Other than the fact that the FT-736R had all of the modules in the > case, what is the difference between a K4 such as you propose and > a K3/10 with a XV-144/XV-222/XV-432 stack? Perhaps Elecraft could > be persuaded to work on an XV-1290 to round out the offering ... > > Of more interest would be the ability to activate two of the XVs at > the same time and feed the second one to the K3's Aux input (sub RX) > for monitoring two bands, working satellites, or working cross band. > It would take some work with both the XVs and the K3 control code > but might pay off more than a VHF/UHF only "K4." As my interest has recently been piqued by the satellites, this was just the solution I had in mind with my K3. I day dreamed that with the sub receiver the K3 might be able to do full duplex. My reading of this list's archives led me to the conclusion that this is not possible at this time. Should the K3 be developed as you suggest, Joe, I would be happy to go that route. At the moment I have more pressing needs such as antenna construction and getting familiar with various aspects of satellite operation. For that I will concentrate on receiving and my FT-817 needs a purpose. :-) 73, de Nate N0NB >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true." Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
Administrator
|
Thanks for all the input, everyone. We'll save it all up for future
reference. And if you have an idea that's too hot to post to the reflector, feel free to send it to me directly. But just to be clear: there is *no* new radio in the works -- other than the KX3. Please don't call Lisa or Madelyn and ask for a K4. Please *do* ask for a K3, P3, KPA500, and a stack of transverters. 73, Wayne N6KR On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:53 PM, george fritkin wrote: > The new radio should not be a Swiss army of the frequency spectrum, > but a "tour de force" of Elecraft. It should have an on board > computer with a tethered human interface. It should have a generous > sized display allowing the user to control the radio's function > with a terse set of knobs or the human interface with the screen > sharing radio functions and a spectrum analyzer. > What I have seen here in the way of suggestions is just packaging > more functions rather revolutionary radio changes. > Radios today should be treated as a computing device whose output > happens to be an RF signal. There have be some attempts at what I > suggesting. However, these attempts were just too pioneering. As > we say in electronics, pioneers are those that get shot in the back. > But, as an outsider looking in, Elecraft seems to have in hand the > ability to build a truly revolutionary radio. And, if you guys at > Elecraft do this, sign me up for S/N 1. By the way, I think the new > radio, the KX-3, is the trial balloon. > Love my two K3s > George, W6GF ______________________________________________________________ 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 Joe Subich, W4TV-4
Fair comment, Joe :-) Just trying to avoid the super sized radio concept. Rather see standalone purpose built radios, yes I know it can mean multiple units to make a station. If one breaks, you are not totally off air and they are less complex to drive.......I need a good replacement for my 736R, that is easy to use field portable :-)
73, Jack. VK4JRC Sent from my iPad On 27/07/2011, at 1:48 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > The K4 would be better off, with NO HF :-) > > Why? Considering that 28 MHz is required as the IF for the VHF/UHF > "band modules" (transverters) and the base K3/K4 would include the > 8/10 Watt six meter capability, there is no cost difference/impact. > > I would think that providing a way to keep the sub-receiver active > during transmit, allowing a second transverter to feed the sub RX > for cross band/multi band receive, and providing an "inverted link" > mode for the VFOs (for inverted transponder satellite work) would > make the K3/10 with XV stack essentially the perfect VHF/UHF rig - > other than the lack of a large case to hold the XV stack internally. > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > > On 7/26/2011 11:21 PM, Jack Chomley wrote: >> >> The K4 would be better off, with NO HF :-) Similar to the 736R and the later Icom 910H. >> Now that the 910H has been replaced with the higher priced Icom 9100, that includes HF. >> The market is short on VHF/UHF only radios with Multimode and SAT capability, as standalone radios. >> >> 73, >> >> Jack VK4JRC >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 27/07/2011, at 12:18 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"<[hidden email]> 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by wayne burdick
Hi Some features that I would like to see on the K4. Tuning Pulser tones on SSB(variable duty cycle) OCXO with a 4 port distribution amplifier. Built in sequencer several outputs. The ability to send relay voltages such as 26 or even 50 volts volts directly to the amps relays from the sequencer. Directional coupler RF sniffer port for both the transceiver and AMP. Direct integration of any SDR including mute protection. Multiple mute ports for external accessories. S-meter calibration in DBuV, Dbm or whatever. The ability to control and switch between 2 amplifiers with memorized drive power for each amp. This would include separate Key-out lines. Direct Ethernet port for remote operation Removable front panel with ethernet port for remote operation using the front panel. Pre-distortion PA with 200 watts of output power with excellent IMD performance. Built in 200 watt dummy load. Voice recorder that can be connected to a PC via USB for file storage. Audio playback path that disables compression automatically ISB and double sideband suppressed carrier modes. Full HF spectrum analyzer with tracking generator that could use the SDR second receiver for this. VNA Option of a second receiver conventional or a SDR receiver. Ability to phase lock 2 X K4s (4 receivers) for DF work. ALE modem built in Meet NTIA type acceptance standards for MARS. A good tuner with the same capabilities as the SGC230 that can be fully remoted. Another option would be an interface that will drive any modern Harris antenna coupler. External 19 inch half rack external power supply 12 volt DC to DC converter option. 19 inch rack dimensions. Power Divider built into the radio allowing the ability to drive say 4 X KPA 500s with a combiner. The K4 would fault monitor the combined KPA500s. Modular construction with each module shielded, Euro rack type cards. Nice Kenwood Blue VFD type displays like the Harris receivers This would be good start in my dreams! 73 John --- On Tue, 7/26/11, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote: > From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 > To: "george fritkin" <[hidden email]> > Cc: [hidden email] > Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 10:01 PM > Thanks for all the input, everyone. > We'll save it all up for future > reference. And if you have an idea that's too hot to post > to the > reflector, feel free to send it to me directly. > > But just to be clear: there is *no* new radio in the works > -- other > than the KX3. Please don't call Lisa or Madelyn and ask for > a K4. > Please *do* ask for a K3, P3, KPA500, and a stack of > transverters. > > 73, > Wayne > N6KR > > On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:53 PM, george fritkin wrote: > > > The new radio should not be a Swiss army of the > frequency spectrum, > > but a "tour de force" of Elecraft. It should > have an on board > > computer with a tethered human interface. It > should have a generous > > sized display allowing the user to control the > radio's function > > with a terse set of knobs or the human interface with > the screen > > sharing radio functions and a spectrum analyzer. > > What I have seen here in the way of suggestions > is just packaging > > more functions rather revolutionary radio changes. > > Radios today should be treated as a computing > device whose output > > happens to be an RF signal. There have be some > attempts at what I > > suggesting. However, these attempts were just > too pioneering. As > > we say in electronics, pioneers are those that > get shot in the back. > > But, as an outsider looking in, Elecraft seems > to have in hand the > > ability to build a truly revolutionary radio. > And, if you guys at > > Elecraft do this, sign me up for S/N 1. By the > way, I think the new > > radio, the KX-3, is the trial balloon. > > Love my two K3s > > George, W6GF > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 george fritkin
Is it legal to ship a tethered human across state lines? What if I didn't like the
one I got? 73, Mike NF4l On 7/27/2011 12:53 AM, george fritkin wrote: > The new radio should not be a Swiss army of the frequency spectrum, but a "tour de force" of Elecraft. It should have an on board computer with a tethered human interface. It should have a generous sized display allowing the user to control the radio's function with a terse set of knobs or the human interface with the screen sharing radio functions and a spectrum analyzer. > What I have seen here in the way of suggestions is just packaging more functions rather revolutionary radio changes. > Radios today should be treated as a computing device whose output happens to be an RF signal. There have be some attempts at what I suggesting. However, these attempts were just too pioneering. As we say in electronics, pioneers are those that get shot in the back. > But, as an outsider looking in, Elecraft seems to have in hand the ability to build a truly revolutionary radio. And, if you guys at Elecraft do this, sign me up for S/N 1. By the way, I think the new radio, the KX-3, is the trial balloon. > Love my two K3s > George, W6GF > > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Chris W7CTH
The FT-736R was well liked by satellite and weak-signal fans,
alike. The Mutek conversion of the receiver fixed all those issues making it a superb radio for its time. In 1998 I bought its successor, the FT-847. It added HF to 6m/2m/70cm making possible almost one radio ham shack (and this was copied by many other radios). But one of the attractions of the 736 was the band module concept that permitted one to taylor-make their radio. Actually, I see this approach with Elecraft and my K3 was built in that fashion. Actually I am surprised at the introduction of the Icom-9100, since amateur satellite activity has taken a dive with the lack of high-orbiting linear-passband "birds". Most of what is available today uses FM single channel technology so one need not invest in a radio like the 736 (with a few exceptions). I guess Icom felt a need to compete in the HF-light market. I have made a major decision to move over to using the K3 with adding VHF/UHF transverters starting two years ago. I am looking to add 222 and 432 to make the conversion complete (with the exception of 900-MHz). As soon as I receive info from DEMI on availability and delivery times, I will post my FT-847 for sale on e-bay. It is too bad that cross-band full-duplex cannot be supported in the K3/KRX3 combo. I do have an idea that might work. It would entail adding a receiver on the 1st IF or the KRX3 and using the Aux antenna input connected to a transverter for receiving satellite downlinks. If the KRX3 1st IF is not defeated when the main K3 is transmitting it will work in duplex. I propose to use my SDR-IQ this way. For satellite uplink/downlink tuning, it will probably require a computer interface for tuning. What firmware mods would be required for the K3 - is the question? VFO-A and B need to be controlled separately and ideally VFO-A can be tuned while transmitting (but not entirely necessary). Tracking sw exists to generate commands for dual Rx /Tx tuning. A K4, Tayored after the 736 module concept covering 6m-23cm with all the bells of the K3 would find a large following in the weak-signal VHF+ crowd. That crowd includes satellite, tropo-scatter Dxing, meteor scatter, and eme. It could be based on a standard 28-32 MHz IF radio or a 50-54 MHz IF. The existing Elecraft transverters use 28-MHz. So my K3/10 is becoming the K4 (in effect): 50/144/222*/432*/1296. 73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 ====================================== BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com EME: 50-1.1kw?, 144-1.4kw, 432-100w, 1296-60w, 3400-? DUBUS Magazine USA Rep [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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Joseph Trombino, Jr
I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be:
Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course . . . |
|
|
I know for a fact that I wouldn't buy one and price has nothing to do with
it. A 400w transceiver is worthless IMHO and any built-in Panadapter is just like the rest. The KPA500/KAT500 is a better choice and if they problems you pull it out for repair and still able to use radio same for P3/SVGA. Other than those two you have a K3 with a P3 and KPA500 a much better setup plus it runs on 12v. Sorry I can't see any advantage with those add-ons in fact they would be draw backs. I sold my FTDX-5000MP that I owned for 2 yrs and now have 2 K3's one fully loaded, a full line as you put it on that one with the KPA500 for 6m and on the main loaded one an Alpha amp just HF. The FTDX-5000MP was a very good radio in many respects a few of them better than the K3 but you see what I choose. As I tell many people as far as I know there has never been a perfect radio....yet! Don't tell anyone but my KX3 has to be close to the best QRP all mode ever made 8>) The TS-990 still has no test results released yet and I personally have no use for 130+ knobs and buttons that may only be used once during setup for many. I have a few things I might wish for on a K4 but very few and all could be done with a couple of new boards and small items. Keep it "SMALL" once I got used to it it's great! 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of KY6R Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course . . . -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6347 - Release Date: 05/22/13 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Hi All,
KY6R is entitled to dream as we all do. For me though any rig with more than 100 Watts output is problematic. I want to be able to drive an amplifier without danger of instantly frying its grids or input circuit. Most casual operations here are at 65 Watts without an amplifier. The modular construction of the K line is one of its strong points. One can purchase a basic K3 for a modest cost and then develop the station to suit pocket and needs. I believe this has been a feature for Elecraft. I even now accept the smaller size and light weight K3 as preferable. It seems our favourite radio will be around for a long time to come and somehow Elecraft will continue to improve this fine piece of engineering. Thank you for this. In the meantime we all dream and this drives progress. Now to become accustomed to a KX3 driving an Alex Loop while visiting in W land. 73 Doug EI2CN -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Fred Smith Sent: 23 May 2013 13:42 To: 'KY6R'; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I know for a fact that I wouldn't buy one and price has nothing to do with it. A 400w transceiver is worthless IMHO and any built-in Panadapter is just like the rest. The KPA500/KAT500 is a better choice and if they problems you pull it out for repair and still able to use radio same for P3/SVGA. Other than those two you have a K3 with a P3 and KPA500 a much better setup plus it runs on 12v. Sorry I can't see any advantage with those add-ons in fact they would be draw backs. I sold my FTDX-5000MP that I owned for 2 yrs and now have 2 K3's one fully loaded, a full line as you put it on that one with the KPA500 for 6m and on the main loaded one an Alpha amp just HF. The FTDX-5000MP was a very good radio in many respects a few of them better than the K3 but you see what I choose. As I tell many people as far as I know there has never been a perfect radio....yet! Don't tell anyone but my KX3 has to be close to the best QRP all mode ever made 8>) The TS-990 still has no test results released yet and I personally have no use for 130+ knobs and buttons that may only be used once during setup for many. I have a few things I might wish for on a K4 but very few and all could be done with a couple of new boards and small items. Keep it "SMALL" once I got used to it it's great! 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of KY6R Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course . . . -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6347 - Release Date: 05/22/13 ______________________________________________________________ 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 Joseph Trombino, Jr
Good points. You have convinced me that my full K Line already is an FT-5000 and TS-990s "killer".
73, Rich KY6R No radios were killed in the making of this email ----- Reply message ----- From: "Fred Smith" <[hidden email]> To: "'KY6R'" <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]> Subject: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Date: Thu, May 23, 2013 5:41 am I know for a fact that I wouldn't buy one and price has nothing to do with it. A 400w transceiver is worthless IMHO and any built-in Panadapter is just like the rest. The KPA500/KAT500 is a better choice and if they problems you pull it out for repair and still able to use radio same for P3/SVGA. Other than those two you have a K3 with a P3 and KPA500 a much better setup plus it runs on 12v. Sorry I can't see any advantage with those add-ons in fact they would be draw backs. I sold my FTDX-5000MP that I owned for 2 yrs and now have 2 K3's one fully loaded, a full line as you put it on that one with the KPA500 for 6m and on the main loaded one an Alpha amp just HF. The FTDX-5000MP was a very good radio in many respects a few of them better than the K3 but you see what I choose. As I tell many people as far as I know there has never been a perfect radio....yet! Don't tell anyone but my KX3 has to be close to the best QRP all mode ever made 8>) The TS-990 still has no test results released yet and I personally have no use for 130+ knobs and buttons that may only be used once during setup for many. I have a few things I might wish for on a K4 but very few and all could be done with a couple of new boards and small items. Keep it "SMALL" once I got used to it it's great! 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of KY6R Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course .. . . -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6347 - Release Date: 05/22/13 ______________________________________________________________ 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 KY6R
In spite of what others say, I generally agree with the list. Although I think 400W may be "over the top" - 150 to 200W output with a 48V PA power supply would be extremely useful for those who do not use external power amplifiers and would provide much better transmit IMD numbers (cleaner signals). In addition to the built-in P3, I would include an SVGA output (P3SVGA), separate "TERMINAL" (DB9) I/O, and USB accessory jacks (support for keyboard, mouse, and "Shuttle Pro" as a remove VFO and macro device). I would also include - "band stacking" registers with true single button per band band selection; selectable optimized preamps for 6m and 10/12m; operation to 400 KHz (for the 490 KHz allocation when it becomes available); place the "notch" *inside* the AGC; make the noise reduction more effective; review/eliminate some of the dual function (tap/hold) switches - particularly operation of "SUB" and AFX/DATA MD; wideband (100 KHz) I/Q input and output for external software support. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 5/23/2013 7:57 AM, KY6R wrote: > I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: > > Two receivers > 400 watts > Built in panadapter > Built in antenna tuner > 160-6M > Separate RX > Choice of several filters > > Price = $5000 or less > > Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". > > I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course > . . . > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 |
|
|
Please don't put everything in one enclosure.
My loaded K3 can now easily fly along when we go on dxpedition. I purchased the KPA500 for that same reason. Decent amount of power at moderate weight. If it would be in one enclosure, I would have trouble taking it with me. Low weight per item is key for me. 73 Arie PA3A ______________________________________________________________ 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 Joseph Trombino, Jr
Rich those were only my opinions from having a few of those features in other radios. But I do like my Elecraft K lines.
73, Fred/N0AZZ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 8:37 AM To: Fred Smith; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Good points. You have convinced me that my full K Line already is an FT-5000 and TS-990s "killer". 73, Rich KY6R No radios were killed in the making of this email ----- Reply message ----- From: "Fred Smith" <[hidden email]> To: "'KY6R'" <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]> Subject: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Date: Thu, May 23, 2013 5:41 am I know for a fact that I wouldn't buy one and price has nothing to do with it. A 400w transceiver is worthless IMHO and any built-in Panadapter is just like the rest. The KPA500/KAT500 is a better choice and if they problems you pull it out for repair and still able to use radio same for P3/SVGA. Other than those two you have a K3 with a P3 and KPA500 a much better setup plus it runs on 12v. Sorry I can't see any advantage with those add-ons in fact they would be draw backs. I sold my FTDX-5000MP that I owned for 2 yrs and now have 2 K3's one fully loaded, a full line as you put it on that one with the KPA500 for 6m and on the main loaded one an Alpha amp just HF. The FTDX-5000MP was a very good radio in many respects a few of them better than the K3 but you see what I choose. As I tell many people as far as I know there has never been a perfect radio....yet! Don't tell anyone but my KX3 has to be close to the best QRP all mode ever made 8>) The TS-990 still has no test results released yet and I personally have no use for 130+ knobs and buttons that may only be used once during setup for many. I have a few things I might wish for on a K4 but very few and all could be done with a couple of new boards and small items. Keep it "SMALL" once I got used to it it's great! 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of KY6R Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course .. . . -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6347 - Release Date: 05/22/13 _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3162/5850 - Release Date: 05/23/13 ______________________________________________________________ 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 Arie Kleingeld PA3A-2
I would expect the K3 to remain the premiere "on the go" radio but I still want a "real radio" for *home station operation* without the need for four or five boxes. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 5/23/2013 10:23 AM, Arie Kleingeld PA3A wrote: > Please don't put everything in one enclosure. > My loaded K3 can now easily fly along when we go on dxpedition. I > purchased the KPA500 for that same reason. Decent amount of power at > moderate weight. If it would be in one enclosure, I would have trouble > taking it with me. Low weight per item is key for me. > > 73 > Arie PA3A > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 Joseph Trombino, Jr
If I stack the KPA-500 on the bottom, KAT-500 next up and K3 and put the P3 next to that stack, then it will look like one radio - hi hi.
Hey, that's what I will do. 73, Rich KY6R ----- Reply message ----- From: "Fred Smith" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]> Subject: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Date: Thu, May 23, 2013 7:24 am Rich those were only my opinions from having a few of those features in other radios. But I do like my Elecraft K lines. 73,Fred/N0AZZ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 8:37 AM To: Fred Smith; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Good points. You have convinced me that my full K Line already is an FT-5000 and TS-990s "killer". 73, Rich KY6R No radios were killed in the making of this email ----- Reply message ----- From: "Fred Smith" <[hidden email]> To: "'KY6R'" <[hidden email]>, <[hidden email]> Subject: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 Date: Thu, May 23, 2013 5:41 am I know for a fact that I wouldn't buy one and price has nothing to do with it. A 400w transceiver is worthless IMHO and any built-in Panadapter is just like the rest. The KPA500/KAT500 is a better choice and if they problems you pull it out for repair and still able to use radio same for P3/SVGA. Other than those two you have a K3 with a P3 and KPA500 a much better setup plus it runs on 12v. Sorry I can't see any advantage with those add-ons in fact they would be draw backs. I sold my FTDX-5000MP that I owned for 2 yrs and now have 2 K3's one fully loaded, a full line as you put it on that one with the KPA500 for 6m and on the main loaded one an Alpha amp just HF. The FTDX-5000MP was a very good radio in many respects a few of them better than the K3 but you see what I choose. As I tell many people as far as I know there has never been a perfect radio....yet! Don't tell anyone but my KX3 has to be close to the best QRP all mode ever made 8>) The TS-990 still has no test results released yet and I personally have no use for 130+ knobs and buttons that may only be used once during setup for many. I have a few things I might wish for on a K4 but very few and all could be done with a couple of new boards and small items. Keep it "SMALL" once I got used to it it's great! 73, Fred/N0AZZ K3 Ser #'s 6730/5299--KX3 # 2573--K2/100--KAT100 P3/SVGA--KPA500--KAT500--W2 -----Original Message----- From: elecraft-bounces@mailman..qth.net [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of KY6R Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Musings on a K4 I have the full K-Line and love it. However, my dream K4 would be: Two receivers 400 watts Built in panadapter Built in antenna tuner 160-6M Separate RX Choice of several filters Price = $5000 or less Basically, an FT-5000 and TS990s "killer". I guess it would be my K-Line in a single box. Larger than the K3 of course .. . . -- View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Musings-on-a-K4-tp6619854p7574060.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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6347 - Release Date: 05/22/13No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3162/5850 - Release Date: 05/23/13 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |