Re: K3/K3S DB9 Conn - If it plugs in, then it should work

[Jerry Moore]

I respectfully offer that it's a very good thing Elecraft used a commonly
found connector in their radio designs. One bane of technology is when
manufacturers use a myriad of proprietary connections. The huge advantage
that we have in using common connections is the availability of plugs,
sockets, and cables. The responsibility we have is to always ensure the
connections are as intended. In the case of Elecraft radios with a DB9
connection we CAN use an RS-232 spec cable from the rig to our computer with
the requirement that certain pins or wires be removed/cut/disconnected due
to the nature of the connection. The Beauty of RS-232 is that it's a 3 wire
system. The other connections are typically used for HARDWARE support
(DTS/RTS) and aren't required for RS-232. So out of a DB9 connection we are
left with 6 usable lines. What's a better design, combining purposes into a
common connection where the consumers are technically skilled and educated,
or having 10 extra connections on the back?

If you were homebrewing the radio how would you build it? I'm betting that
most of us would use single connectors and bundle the functions/features
there. It just makes more sense.

One thing that may help would be to label a warning on the connector if you
may tend to forget that it's not a modem connection, rather, it's a
multi-function DB9 connection.

Just my opinion.
Jerry Moore


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[ae4pb]

I respectfully offer that it's a very good thing Elecraft used a commonly
found connector in their radio designs. One bane of technology is when
manufacturers use a myriad of proprietary connections. The huge advantage
that we have in using common connections is the availability of plugs,
sockets, and cables. The responsibility we have is to always ensure the
connections are as intended. In the case of Elecraft radios with a DB9
connection we CAN use an RS-232 spec cable from the rig to our computer with
the requirement that certain pins or wires be removed/cut/disconnected due
to the nature of the connection. The Beauty of RS-232 is that it's a 3 wire
system. The other connections are typically used for HARDWARE support
(DTS/RTS) and aren't required for RS-232. So out of a DB9 connection we are
left with 6 usable lines. What's a better design, combining purposes into a
common connection where the consumers are technically skilled and educated,
or having 10 extra connections on the back?

If you were homebrewing the radio how would you build it? I'm betting that
most of us would use single connectors and bundle the functions/features
there. It just makes more sense.

One thing that may help would be to label a warning on the connector if you
may tend to forget that it's not a modem connection, rather, it's a
multi-function DB9 connection.

Just my opinion.
Jerry Moore


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Bob McGraw - K4TAX]

Standard use of connectors is a good thing.  It saves the various number
of different connectors that we must retain for various uses.  However,
there is no standards in the ham radio community regarding the use and
types of connectors.

In the military, they use a different connector for every different
application and a different connector for each series of equipment. The
result is that no two connectors are really alike.  However, the
advantage is the fact if one didn't have the proper connector and cable
for the specific application, then the user could not connect anything.

Both methods are correct just as both methods are incorrect, depending
on the users point of view.

73
Bob, K4TAX
K3S s/n 10,163

On 8/23/2015 10:25 AM, Jerry Moore wrote:

> I respectfully offer that it's a very good thing Elecraft used a commonly
> found connector in their radio designs. One bane of technology is when
> manufacturers use a myriad of proprietary connections. The huge advantage
> that we have in using common connections is the availability of plugs,
> sockets, and cables. The responsibility we have is to always ensure the
> connections are as intended. In the case of Elecraft radios with a DB9
> connection we CAN use an RS-232 spec cable from the rig to our computer with
> the requirement that certain pins or wires be removed/cut/disconnected due
> to the nature of the connection. The Beauty of RS-232 is that it's a 3 wire
> system. The other connections are typically used for HARDWARE support
> (DTS/RTS) and aren't required for RS-232. So out of a DB9 connection we are
> left with 6 usable lines. What's a better design, combining purposes into a
> common connection where the consumers are technically skilled and educated,
> or having 10 extra connections on the back?
>
> If you were homebrewing the radio how would you build it? I'm betting that
> most of us would use single connectors and bundle the functions/features
> there. It just makes more sense.
>
> One thing that may help would be to label a warning on the connector if you
> may tend to forget that it's not a modem connection, rather, it's a
> multi-function DB9 connection.
>
> Just my opinion.
> Jerry Moore
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
>

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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[Bob-2]

Well, yes.   But a major design consideration used to be, "available at Radio
Shack".

73,
Bob
K2TK

On 8/23/2015 11:28 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

SNIPPED:
> If you were homebrewing the radio how would you build it? I'm betting that
> most of us would use single connectors and bundle the functions/features
> there. It just makes more sense.
>
>
> Just my opinion.
> Jerry Moore
>
>


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

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]

[bs usb]

Bob wrote:
> Well, yes.   But a major design consideration used to be, "available
> at Radio Shack".


That was true in 1980,  before the Shack began specializing in cell
phones and ring tones.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]