Elecraft

The KX2

Classic

List

Threaded

39 messages Options

Phil Wheeler-2

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
must be large enough to justify the investment. I
wonder if it really is?

73, Phil W7OX

On 5/24/16 2:33 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:

> I replied in depth to Barry but let me share
> that more briefly with the List:
>
> My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a
> 50-MHz direct conversion SDR (if that is
> practical at this time).
> That would establish the IF for other bands
> which would be accomplished with transverters.
> HF would be unnecessary and just take up
> valuable real estate inside the radio.
>
> To keep a KX3 sized concept power would likely
> be held to 10w on 2m and 70cm. The radio would
> have IQ baseband access for running other sw on
> external computers. Similar I/F for Line in
> audio and computer PTT would enable use of sw
> other than the internal DSP. SDR means any
> number of modes could be accommodated. Stable
> LO would be required for NB digital modes and
> use with mw. Full cross-band duplex plus
> computer tuning of both VFO's to enable
> satellite auto-tune from external sw. BNC would
> suffice for ANT connections since power is low.
> Battery operation (option).
>
> An option would be a K3 sized transverter
> housing which modules for 222, 432, 902, and 1.2
> GHz that could be added making a complete
> 50-1296 package, or just what you want. The
> KXV3sat would dock to this "console" for 'no
> external interconnect' wiring package. Probably
> modules would be 10w or maybe 25w. If enough
> room, 60-80w PA boards might be included for
> 6m/2m/70cm. Though there are ext. PA's
> available from the ham community.
>
> Keeping the power down in the KXV3sat would make
> it usable for portable operating and keep it
> light. Also 100w linears would likely add $300
> per band to the total price.
>
> Design considerations would emcompass VHF/UHF
> SSB/CW/FM plus digital modes. Interconnection
> for ext amps, ext freq. source, ext computer
> I/F, Panadaptor. One could operate satellite in
> full-duplex and operating eme/ms/weak-signal
> modes. Perhaps optional Rx antenna ports could
> be incorporated as options.
>
> My belief there is a large market for such a
> radio. Satellite population is on the rise, so
> is small-scale eme. VHF/eme Dxpeditions are on
> the rise for which a small footprint is
> desirable for airline baggage.
>
> Who will build it?
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
> "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
> [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]

Kevin Stover

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Edward R Cole

I like it!
Especially the laptop style dock.

On 5/24/2016 4:33 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:

> I replied in depth to Barry but let me share that more briefly with
> the List:
>
> My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a 50-MHz direct conversion
> SDR (if that is practical at this time).
> That would establish the IF for other bands which would be
> accomplished with transverters. HF would be unnecessary and just
> take up valuable real estate inside the radio.
>
> To keep a KX3 sized concept power would likely be held to 10w on 2m
> and 70cm. The radio would have IQ baseband access for running other
> sw on external computers. Similar I/F for Line in audio and computer
> PTT would enable use of sw other than the internal DSP. SDR means
> any number of modes could be accommodated. Stable LO would be
> required for NB digital modes and use with mw. Full cross-band duplex
> plus computer tuning of both VFO's to enable satellite auto-tune from
> external sw. BNC would suffice for ANT connections since power is
> low. Battery operation (option).
>
> An option would be a K3 sized transverter housing which modules for
> 222, 432, 902, and 1.2 GHz that could be added making a complete
> 50-1296 package, or just what you want. The KXV3sat would dock to
> this "console" for 'no external interconnect' wiring package.
> Probably modules would be 10w or maybe 25w. If enough room, 60-80w PA
> boards might be included for 6m/2m/70cm. Though there are ext. PA's
> available from the ham community.
>
> Keeping the power down in the KXV3sat would make it usable for
> portable operating and keep it light. Also 100w linears would likely
> add $300 per band to the total price.
>
> Design considerations would emcompass VHF/UHF SSB/CW/FM plus digital
> modes. Interconnection for ext amps, ext freq. source, ext computer
> I/F, Panadaptor. One could operate satellite in full-duplex and
> operating eme/ms/weak-signal modes. Perhaps optional Rx antenna ports
> could be incorporated as options.
>
> My belief there is a large market for such a radio. Satellite
> population is on the rise, so is small-scale eme. VHF/eme Dxpeditions
> are on the rise for which a small footprint is desirable for airline
> baggage.
>
> Who will build it?
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
> "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
> [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]
>

Kevin Stover

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

I have changed my thinking on this.

My suggestion would be a kick butt single band 6m rig in a K3s box. All
the bells and whistles the K3s has now with the addition of cross band
duplex and 100W any mode no time limit. The other bands would be
installed as transverters in a computer style main board in the rig.
Each transverter would be capable of 50W minimum output, have it's own
SO239/N connector. The current K3EXTREF would be standard for 10MHz
reference, as well as a 0.5 ppm TCXO along with RX I/Q out ala KX3. A
V/UHF version of the P3 would have to be offered for the computer averse
among us.

Call it the K3s SAT+.

On 5/24/2016 6:44 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:

> I like it!
> Especially the laptop style dock.
>
> On 5/24/2016 4:33 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:
>> I replied in depth to Barry but let me share that more briefly with
>> the List:
>>
>> My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a 50-MHz direct
>> conversion SDR (if that is practical at this time).
>> That would establish the IF for other bands which would be
>> accomplished with transverters. HF would be unnecessary and just
>> take up valuable real estate inside the radio.
>>
>> To keep a KX3 sized concept power would likely be held to 10w on 2m
>> and 70cm. The radio would have IQ baseband access for running other
>> sw on external computers. Similar I/F for Line in audio and computer
>> PTT would enable use of sw other than the internal DSP. SDR means
>> any number of modes could be accommodated. Stable LO would be
>> required for NB digital modes and use with mw. Full cross-band
>> duplex plus computer tuning of both VFO's to enable satellite
>> auto-tune from external sw. BNC would suffice for ANT connections
>> since power is low. Battery operation (option).
>>
>> An option would be a K3 sized transverter housing which modules for
>> 222, 432, 902, and 1.2 GHz that could be added making a complete
>> 50-1296 package, or just what you want. The KXV3sat would dock to
>> this "console" for 'no external interconnect' wiring package.
>> Probably modules would be 10w or maybe 25w. If enough room, 60-80w
>> PA boards might be included for 6m/2m/70cm. Though there are ext.
>> PA's available from the ham community.
>>
>> Keeping the power down in the KXV3sat would make it usable for
>> portable operating and keep it light. Also 100w linears would likely
>> add $300 per band to the total price.
>>
>> Design considerations would emcompass VHF/UHF SSB/CW/FM plus digital
>> modes. Interconnection for ext amps, ext freq. source, ext computer
>> I/F, Panadaptor. One could operate satellite in full-duplex and
>> operating eme/ms/weak-signal modes. Perhaps optional Rx antenna
>> ports could be incorporated as options.
>>
>> My belief there is a large market for such a radio. Satellite
>> population is on the rise, so is small-scale eme. VHF/eme
>> Dxpeditions are on the rise for which a small footprint is desirable
>> for airline baggage.
>>
>> Who will build it?
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>> http://www.kl7uw.com
>> "Kits made by KL7UW"
>> Dubus Mag business:
>> [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]
>>
>
>

Elecraft mailing list

KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Hello Elecrafters,
I, of course, like the idea of SAT derivative. However, as mentioned in my previous post, both KX2 and K3S are product life cycle extension to fully utilize the spent R&D. These products are only evolution and not revolution.
I have much doubt on the market size of so called satellite radio from Elecraft. With a look of the XV transverters especially the XV432, they are not cheap but there are issues such as heat issues under full specification output / power and frequency instabilities etc.
Hence, I am looking for something revolutionary and not evolutionary from Elecraft. Both K3 and KX3 were revolutionary at the time of announcement. When I saw KX3 in 2011 Dayton, I was surprised and thought KX3 would kill all other brands QRP ham radios.
73
Johnny VR2XMC
previously XV50, XV144 and XV432

寄件人︰ Kevin Stover <[hidden email]>
收件人︰ [hidden email]
傳送日期︰ 2016年05月25日 (週三) 8:17 AM
主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

I have changed my thinking on this.

My suggestion would be a kick butt single band 6m rig in a K3s box. All
the bells and whistles the K3s has now with the addition of cross band
duplex and 100W any mode no time limit. The other bands would be
installed as transverters in a computer style main board in the rig.
Each transverter would be capable of 50W minimum output, have it's own
SO239/N connector. The current K3EXTREF would be standard for 10MHz
reference, as well as a 0.5 ppm TCXO along with RX I/Q out ala KX3. A
V/UHF version of the P3 would have to be offered for the computer averse
among us.

Call it the K3s SAT+.

On 5/24/2016 6:44 PM, Kevin Stover wrote:

--
R. Kevin Stover
AC0H
ARRL
FISTS #11993
SKCC #215
NAQCC #3441

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
______________________________________________________________
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]

Phil Wheeler-2

Re: The KX2

In reply to this post by w7aqk

Dale,

You closed with "I'll be very interested in seeing
some real in-depth reviews of the KX2." I am
surprised we've seen few if any comments here from
early owners of the KX2, even though I think I
read that 50 were sold in Dayton. True, there are
now five reviews at eham
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/12852 -- and
one even mentions success with JT-65 -- but those
all seem to be from field testers.

73, Phil W7OX

On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The ink is barely dry on the release
> announcement for the KX2, but it has created
> quite a stir. A lot of people are very curious
> about this rig, including me. As a KX3 owner
> already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a
> KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the
> meaningful differences are.
>
> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to
> make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the
> KX3. I can certainly see how this has
> stimulated a lot of interest. What I'm trying
> to figure out is whether or not it does anything
> better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller,
> and less capable, radio. At this point, I'm
> inclined to think the latter. That's not
> necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a
> better generalization. Nonetheless, what you
> give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you
> might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the
> user.
>
> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the
> volume) and lighter, although the footprint is
> not quite that much different. The price is
> lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see
> this as a nice advantage. SOTA ops probably
> will really appreciate this! You still have a
> very competent radio with just about all the
> features a portable op would want or need.
>
> The things you give up are not insignificant.
> There is a slight power differential, which may,
> or may not, be a concern. Possibly more of a
> concern might be not having roofing filters.
> I've become a huge fan of having those. Also,
> losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be
> problematic for some. I'm not all that
> concerned about no AM or FM, but others might
> be. With the emphasis on being a "hand held"
> radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>
> I can only guess at the decreased capability of
> the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still
> be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to
> see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3
> and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get
> nervous about less. The ATU's in the KX1 and K1
> were only moderately useful, and it was their
> reduced size that caused that. Elecraft can
> obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need
> some room to do that.
>
> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not
> mate with the KX2. In their "FAQ's", Elecraft
> sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that
> capability is more appropriate for a larger rig,
> like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.
> Personally, I think it would have been a big
> plus if they could have made it work, but again,
> just not enough room in that smaller package--or
> I assume that was the problem. Or, maybe it was
> to just hold the cost down???
>
> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's,
> and have found the KX3 to be a very effective
> substitute/back-up in their main station.
> Lately I've been tinkering with that same
> process, and it works pretty darned well.
> However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good
> a substitute, or back-up. The lesser
> capabilities described above would explain much
> of that. I still much prefer the K3, but I
> don't give up all that much with the KX3. It's
> a great reason to own both!
>
> So, how do you describe the difference in ten
> words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down
> version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?
> In any event, there are sufficient differences
> to require some analysis if you are trying to
> pick one over the other. If I didn't already
> have a KX3 I could probably get a headache
> trying to make that decision. Either way you go
> you are probably a "winner!" The "easy" way may
> be to just conclude you want both, and
> apparently some have already made that
> decision! I'm not sure that would be my
> decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a
> KX2 yet either! Hi.
>
> I'll be very interested in seeing some real
> in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave W7AQK

Edward R Cole

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Kevin Stover

There are about 1500-2000 hams active on 2m-eme worldwide; probably
another 1000 on other bands on eme.
VHF+ is huge in EU with contests every month and literally hundreds
of stations working on 10-GHz in the UK and EU.
2m is the most used IF for mw.

On VHF and UHF up to 1296 there are probably five times as many
active hams as in the US. A radio as I described would be well
received by this segment of ham radio.

Would 1,000 ordered the first month be adequate?

73, Ed - KL7UW
PS: you would be surprised how many KX3 are in use as IF for VHF and
higher bands. KX2 will probably see some of this use as well.

Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
From: Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed

Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
must be large enough to justify the investment. I
wonder if it really is?

73, Phil W7OX

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
"Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
[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]

Andy McMullin

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Barry Baines

I hate saying "me too" but I think you've put it succinctly.

There used to be a range of VHF/UHF capable satellite rigs but these days the user seems left to secondhand, huge base station or complex Yaesu menus (with tiny display). Elecraft could wipe the floor.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 24 May 2016, at 18:56, Barry Baines <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Ed:
>
> Please allow me to second your suggestion for a “KXV3Sat”, though a KX2 derivative with FM + VHF + UHF and full duplex would certainly be another option that would be very intriguing. Whether such a design built into a K2/K3 footprint (with or without HF) is feasible from an engineering/cost of production perspective is something else…
>
> Given the rapid growth of the amateur satellite ’fleet,’ there are plenty of opportunities to take advantage of such a product for satellite operations. AMSAT-NA’s AO-85 (FM) was placed in service in October, 2015. Between now and January there will be three more FM Cubesats built by AMSAT-NA that will be launched. In addition, AMSAT-NA is building a 30 KHz wide linear transponder satellite (Fox-1E). AMSAT-UK launched FunCube-1 (AO-73) which is also a linear transponder satellite. The Chinese placed a number of sats last fall in orbit on one launcher with a variety of capabilities, including liner transponder. These satellites, coupled with FO-29 and AO-7 are certainly candidates for operating with a low power, SSB/CW capable transceiver operating duplex.
>
> As you know, a number of satellite operators are working these satellites in the field using an Arrow or Elk Antenna with the FT-817x class transceivers which to my knowledge is the only backpack size QRP-capable HF-VHF-UHF multimode radio with built-in battery for portable operation in the field currently on the market. The FT-817x is not full duplex, so satellite operators use two of these radios to be able to hear their downlink when working the linear transponder satellites. While the FT-817x does work well for this type of operation, it does have a confusing set of options in the menu and in my opinion is more difficult to learn to operate than what Elecraft offers in their firmware architecture; having to use for FT-817s for full duplex adds to the complexity and cost of such operations. Interest in satellite operations is increasing and such a product would spur further growth. It seems to me that an Elecraft-designed radio capable of FM + UHF + VHF + full duplex in an integrated package with the footprint of a KX2 or the KX3 would be a winner; a HT-size transceiver (KX2) capable of working the linear satellites plus the FM sates would be a game changer for satellite operators.
>
> FWIW,
>
> Barry Baines, WD4ASW
> Westborough, MA
> (Currently in Deshler, OH after ’surviving’ Hamvention)
>
>
>
>
>> On May 24, 2016, at 1:11 PM, Edward R Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> One type of radio that Elecraft has avoided making to date:
>> multi-band, multi-mode VHF/UHF, cross-band duplex radio.
>>
>> I recently bought a (not new) radio that, at its time, was considered one of the finest radios for this:
>> Yaesu FT-736R. It is still held in considerable respect.
>>
>> I wanted a VHF/UHF multi-mode radio capable of satellite operation and had considered a cross-band duplex-capable FM mobile radio, but it would have limited me to FM. For approximately $200 more I obtained a "cherry" FT-736R with basic 2m/70cm capability.
>>
>> The radio is capable of expansion to two more bands via installation of internal modules for 6m, 220, and 1.2 GHz. Quite a remarkable model of adaptability for its time.
>>
>> I previously owned its successor, the FT-847, which was HF, 6m, 2m, 70cm. But on used market cost double what I spent on the FT-736R.
>>
>> Had Elecraft offered a VHF/UHF cross-band duplex multi-mode radio I would have considered it. Nothing on the current market equals the Elecraft radio quality (my opinion). I chose the K3/10 plus transverters for eme, but the K3 is not capable of duplex operation.
>>
>> If a KVX3sat were produced - I think the market is there. Current competitors: IC-9100 and TS2000X;Yaesu is out of the satellite radio market.
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>> http://www.kl7uw.com
>> "Kits made by KL7UW"
>> Dubus Mag business:
>> [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]
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Edward R Cole

When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13 I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great! However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like the old wide linear transponders.

Only recently with FunCube and the Chinese Sats have we started to get linear voice transponders back, but again in low fast moving orbits.

Many are now making use of SDR dongles or other SDR receivers as their receiver for sats, because they have many advantages over the old way of just being able to listen to your own receive channel. With an SDR and panoramic can see all of the passband of the transponder or transponders on multiple satellites at once. You can point and click on a signal of interest. Record the whole pass and play it back and see who you missed in the very short pass. You can run the SDR on a tablet computer in the field, and have more capability than your old FT-736R of olden days.

In short, until we have high orbit transponders on VHF UHF like AO-10/13 no manufacturer is going to produce an FT-736R replacement. Any plans for a geostationary satellite would not use VHF UHF, but microwave to get the bandwidth required for a third of the world trying to access it at one time all the time.

Things have moved on, a single duplex box isn't what is needed. A transmitter CAT coupled to an SDR panoramic receiver is much better. Point on the screen on the signal you see and with Doppler corrected software set the transmitter you have via CAT to the uplink frequency. It is also magnitudes cheaper.

73 from David GM4JJJ
______________________________________________________________
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]

Andy McMullin

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

But isn't that the point?

The KXn family ARE SDR, with I and Q outputs ready for excellent pandapter display with the PXn.

Just want VHF/UHF instead of HF and it's all there.

Andy, G8TQH

Sent from my iPhone

> On 25 May 2016, at 09:43, David Anderson via Elecraft <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13 I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great! However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like the old wide linear transponders.
>
> Only recently with FunCube and the Chinese Sats have we started to get linear voice transponders back, but again in low fast moving orbits.
>
> Many are now making use of SDR dongles or other SDR receivers as their receiver for sats, because they have many advantages over the old way of just being able to listen to your own receive channel. With an SDR and panoramic can see all of the passband of the transponder or transponders on multiple satellites at once. You can point and click on a signal of interest. Record the whole pass and play it back and see who you missed in the very short pass. You can run the SDR on a tablet computer in the field, and have more capability than your old FT-736R of olden days.
>
> In short, until we have high orbit transponders on VHF UHF like AO-10/13 no manufacturer is going to produce an FT-736R replacement. Any plans for a geostationary satellite would not use VHF UHF, but microwave to get the bandwidth required for a third of the world trying to access it at one time all the time.
>
> Things have moved on, a single duplex box isn't what is needed. A transmitter CAT coupled to an SDR panoramic receiver is much better. Point on the screen on the signal you see and with Doppler corrected software set the transmitter you have via CAT to the uplink frequency. It is also magnitudes cheaper.
>
>
> 73 from David GM4JJJ
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Edward R Cole

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

David,

At 12:43 AM 5/25/2016, David Anderson wrote:
>When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13
>I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much
>better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in
>particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great!
>However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by
>digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like
>the old wide linear transponders.

The FT-736R and other dual-band multi-mode duplex radios were
produced for the early Heo linear transponder sats - true. And the
market for expensive big box radios faded with only single channel FM
Leo sats. Understandable that mfrs would go where the market is
largest. Kenwood and Icom still market such a radio; Yaesu
stopped. But they didn't drop out of the multi-mode VHF radio
market...just a duplex model.

>Only recently with FunCube and the Chinese Sats have we started to
>get linear voice transponders back, but again in low fast moving orbits.
>
>Many are now making use of SDR dongles or other SDR receivers as
>their receiver for sats, because they have many advantages over the
>old way of just being able to listen to your own receive channel.
>With an SDR and panoramic can see all of the passband of the
>transponder or transponders on multiple satellites at once. You can
>point and click on a signal of interest. Record the whole pass and
>play it back and see who you missed in the very short pass. You
>can run the SDR on a tablet computer in the field, and have more
>capability than your old FT-736R of olden days.

And my proposal was not for such? Clearly I stated it should be a
direct frequency SDR, but married with a transmitter which the
funcubes aren't. I mentioned a panadapter and IQ interface to
computer to support modern sw.

>In short, until we have high orbit transponders on VHF UHF like
>AO-10/13 no manufacturer is going to produce an FT-736R replacement.

I bought an old FT-736R for more reasons than for satellite. But
that should not be confused with my proposal for a KX3-like duplex
radio. Certainly one would not compare the KX3 with a
FT-840. Totally a different product. Totally new tech.

> Any plans for a geostationary satellite would not use VHF UHF, but
> microwave to get the bandwidth required for a third of the world
> trying to access it at one time all the time.

Yes, that is true. That will involve a new mw radio designed for the
digital modes to be used. Amsat is cognizant of the fact that hams
will not be easily do this as was done for AO-40 s-band using surplus
stuff. The VHF radio + transverter will not suffice. The concept
under consideration includes SDR tech.

>Things have moved on, a single duplex box isn't what is needed. A
>transmitter CAT coupled to an SDR panoramic receiver is much better.
>Point on the screen on the signal you see and with Doppler corrected
>software set the transmitter you have via CAT to the uplink
>frequency. It is also magnitudes cheaper.

Is that not what I talked about? The KX3 is a SDR though limited to
HF/6m + 2m transverter. Perhaps a wide-range SDR would be better but
you still need a comparable transmitter which can operate in
duplex. At present this still is a bunch of boxes wired together
requiring a lot of engineering by the individual vs a complete package.

And such equipment should have more than a single application like
satellite but instead offer a wide range of VHF+ operational activity
- so one could buy just one box for doing all. But you are correct
that the concept should incorporate newest SDR technology with ample
use of computing power. I believe I mentioned all those requirements.

Maybe one can build a wide-range SDR based radio without need for
transverters. A SDR that tunes 50-4000 MHz but with comparable
transmit capability. I'm not sure that one can do direct freq SDR
that far with existing tech. One thing to guard against is thinking
SDR means only a receiver (which current funcube are).

It may be that we are too soon to accomplish that? The first guy to
do it will have the market.

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
"Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
[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]

Elecraft mailing list

KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Instead of developing a new radio for SAT. Can there be a device that can link two elecraft radios for up / downlink of SAT?
In the past, CT16 can link Icom IC275 and IC475 to work as a pair.
I think this route will save a lot of R&D for a new radio.
73
Johnny VR2XMC

寄件人︰ Edward R Cole <[hidden email]>
收件人︰ David Anderson <[hidden email]>
副本(CC)︰ [hidden email]
傳送日期︰ 2016年05月25日 (週三) 6:47 PM
主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

David,

At 12:43 AM 5/25/2016, David Anderson wrote:
>When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13
>I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much
>better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in
>particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great!
>However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by
>digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like
>the old wide linear transponders.

The FT-736R and other dual-band multi-mode duplex radios were
produced for the early Heo linear transponder sats - true. And the
market for expensive big box radios faded with only single channel FM
Leo sats. Understandable that mfrs would go where the market is
largest. Kenwood and Icom still market such a radio; Yaesu
stopped. But they didn't drop out of the multi-mode VHF radio
market...just a duplex model.

briancom

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Edward R Cole

I should be the last person on earth to comment on this.

If there is such a large market in EU then it suggests that an EU
manufacturer ought to be the source. Why hasn't that happened?

One factor missing from your 1000 estimate is the fraction that are
likely to buy. Clearly active stations already have their own gear.

My experience with satellites is minimal. 1000 contacts. The trouble
was that represented less than 50 different stations. The novelty
quickly died. Haven't been back since.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 5/25/2016 4:38 AM, Edward R Cole wrote:

> There are about 1500-2000 hams active on 2m-eme worldwide; probably
> another 1000 on other bands on eme.
> VHF+ is huge in EU with contests every month and literally hundreds of
> stations working on 10-GHz in the UK and EU.
> 2m is the most used IF for mw.
>
> On VHF and UHF up to 1296 there are probably five times as many active
> hams as in the US. A radio as I described would be well received by
> this segment of ham radio.
>
> Would 1,000 ordered the first month be adequate?
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> PS: you would be surprised how many KX3 are in use as IF for VHF and
> higher bands. KX2 will probably see some of this use as well.
>
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
> From: Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
> must be large enough to justify the investment. I
> wonder if it really is?
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
> "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
> [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]

Elecraft mailing list

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Andy McMullin

That is the point yes.

I wasn't saying it wasn't.

Excuse my previous comments which came across as confrontational, they weren't meant to be and my only excuse is lack of coffee ;-) I was merely outlining my thoughts which may be in agreement with what has already been said by others.

I use the KX3 with external transverter for TX and an SDRPlay for receive.

The point is there are many ways to skin a cat, and we have excellent cheap SDR receivers now which combined with any transmitter you have will accomplish what we need for the existing LEO linear transponders.

Like Ed KL7UW, I also have an FT-736R which I picked up a few years ago when nobody wanted them as they thought the FT-847 was a better radio because it was newer. The FT-736R has a much cleaner transmitter (can be improved further with some simple mods), lacks a few important things like transmit inhibit for use with sequencers, and has a poor 435 MHz receiver in terms of strong signal handling. The 23cm modules are like rocking horse s**t to find though :-( but despite all that I am hanging on to mine as a backup rig and occasional satellite use.

First we need the sats, and until then the manufacturers are not going to pull the trigger on an all in one VHF/UHF satellite box I fear. So the easiest option -now- for many who want to get their feet wet is a cheap wideband SDR receiver combined with any multi mode transmitter old or new.

Many of the young new hams who are going to be interested in cube sats just don't have much money to spend unlike the relatively rich retired hams on this list, myself included. They will go for new technology which they can put together themselves, SDR dongles, Raspberry Pi, Etc. At a fraction of the cost of the cheapest all in one duplex box. They are the future of the hobby, and will have entirely different ideas than we old timers. This is a good thing.

Similar things happened with the pacsats where many used old CB transceivers as their IF for Transverters to get PSK or FSK modems going for store and forward sats. Experimentation with cheap gear repurposed was the order of the day for many.

The Icom 7300 with built in touch panoramic display points the way forward for all manufacturers, in a couple of generations we will have higher frequency versions with multiple receivers. If the 7300 had transverter facilities I might even have tried one, the price is right I feel. But I have no interest in a radio that only goes up to 70 MHz. I never operate below 50 MHz.

I still love the KX3 which is my main transceiver for VHF, using an external transverter on 2m, building one for 70cm, and just bought a used 4m internal transverter for it which should do me for now. It isn't ideal as Elecraft didn't put in a transverter socket, but there are ways round it, a lot of switch boxes are required to route audio on receive and transmit for digital and SSB, and a frequency decoder on the RS-232 is needed to route RF and PTT send to the appropriate transverter.

Perhaps a future KX4 might be less of a field radio and more of a shack radio so that less clutter is needed in the shack.

I didn't go for a K3 or K3S as the KX3 does nearly everything I need and I feel that a new generation SDR radio must be coming along, so I will wait and see what happens.

73 from David GM4JJJ

> On 25 May 2016, at 11:01, Andy McMullin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> But isn't that the point?
>
> The KXn family ARE SDR, with I and Q outputs ready for excellent pandapter display with the PXn.
>
> Just want VHF/UHF instead of HF and it's all there.
>
> Andy, G8TQH
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 25 May 2016, at 09:43, David Anderson via Elecraft <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> When I was active on the linear transponders of AO6 through to AO13 I never used a satellite duplex radio, always separates. We had much better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great! However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like the old wide linear transponders.
>>
>> Only recently with FunCube and the Chinese Sats have we started to get linear voice transponders back, but again in low fast moving orbits.
>>
>> Many are now making use of SDR dongles or other SDR receivers as their receiver for sats, because they have many advantages over the old way of just being able to listen to your own receive channel. With an SDR and panoramic can see all of the passband of the transponder or transponders on multiple satellites at once. You can point and click on a signal of interest. Record the whole pass and play it back and see who you missed in the very short pass. You can run the SDR on a tablet computer in the field, and have more capability than your old FT-736R of olden days.
>>
>> In short, until we have high orbit transponders on VHF UHF like AO-10/13 no manufacturer is going to produce an FT-736R replacement. Any plans for a geostationary satellite would not use VHF UHF, but microwave to get the bandwidth required for a third of the world trying to access it at one time all the time.
>>
>> Things have moved on, a single duplex box isn't what is needed. A transmitter CAT coupled to an SDR panoramic receiver is much better. Point on the screen on the signal you see and with Doppler corrected software set the transmitter you have via CAT to the uplink frequency. It is also magnitudes cheaper.
>>
>>
>> 73 from David GM4JJJ
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by briancom

The Europeans have produced the FunCube dongle and the SDRPLay. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chinese producing something as they are launching more satellites than anyone else just now.

For many most of the fun with satellites is building up the gear and antenna tracking, playing with the software, and not buying a do it all box and just working people, that gets boring quickly. It was more useful when we had high orbit birds, then it was a way of chatting to people on another continent about technical matters with almost no QRM for an hour or so. That has largely been replaced by the Internet.

73 from David GM4JJJ

> On 25 May 2016, at 13:05, brian <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I should be the last person on earth to comment on this.
>
> If there is such a large market in EU then it suggests that an EU manufacturer ought to be the source. Why hasn't that happened?
>
> One factor missing from your 1000 estimate is the fraction that are likely to buy. Clearly active stations already have their own gear.
>
> My experience with satellites is minimal. 1000 contacts. The trouble was that represented less than 50 different stations. The novelty quickly died. Haven't been back since.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
>
>> On 5/25/2016 4:38 AM, Edward R Cole wrote:
>> There are about 1500-2000 hams active on 2m-eme worldwide; probably
>> another 1000 on other bands on eme.
>> VHF+ is huge in EU with contests every month and literally hundreds of
>> stations working on 10-GHz in the UK and EU.
>> 2m is the most used IF for mw.
>>
>> On VHF and UHF up to 1296 there are probably five times as many active
>> hams as in the US. A radio as I described would be well received by
>> this segment of ham radio.
>>
>> Would 1,000 ordered the first month be adequate?
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>> PS: you would be surprised how many KX3 are in use as IF for VHF and
>> higher bands. KX2 will probably see some of this use as well.
>>
>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
>> From: Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
>> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
>> must be large enough to justify the investment. I
>> wonder if it really is?
>>
>> 73, Phil W7OX
>>
>>
>>
>> 73, Ed - KL7UW
>> http://www.kl7uw.com
>> "Kits made by KL7UW"
>> Dubus Mag business:
>> [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]
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Dr. William J. Schmidt, II

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Edward R Cole

I would buy a 736R updated replacement in a microsecond.... Specially with some of the capabilities of the K3. I sold my 736R and have regretted it ever since. (I have no interest in QRP/ being weak).

Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ

Owner - Operator
Big Signal Ranch – K9ZC
Staunton, Illinois

Owner – Operator
Villa Grand Piton - J68HZ
Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I.
Rent it: www.VillaGrandPiton.com

email: [hidden email]

> On May 24, 2016, at 11:38 PM, Edward R Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> There are about 1500-2000 hams active on 2m-eme worldwide; probably another 1000 on other bands on eme.
> VHF+ is huge in EU with contests every month and literally hundreds of stations working on 10-GHz in the UK and EU.
> 2m is the most used IF for mw.
>
> On VHF and UHF up to 1296 there are probably five times as many active hams as in the US. A radio as I described would be well received by this segment of ham radio.
>
> Would 1,000 ordered the first month be adequate?
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> PS: you would be surprised how many KX3 are in use as IF for VHF and higher bands. KX2 will probably see some of this use as well.
>
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:16:38 -0700
> From: Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Ed, re "Who will build it?": It seems the market
> must be large enough to justify the investment. I
> wonder if it really is?
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
> "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
> [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]

Edward R Cole

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Kevin Stover

Sure - I have done no market analysis survey - its just a shot in the dark.

To address why no EU mfr - really? How many ham mfrs are
US-based? ALL three top brands are in Japan.
Only Tentec and Elecraft are US. There are many VHF-mw transverter
mfr's located in EU and only one in the US. (David should comment on
UK-EU VHF activity).

OK. When the Flex-5000, came out many eme stations bought it - they
already had equipment. Many eme'rs have bought the K3, as
well. They traded their old radios. How many hams traded their
FT-817 to buy the KX3? I did.

New tech doesn't just attract HFers.

Satellite experience faded with the end of the Heo linear transponder
era. Leo sat are lower altitude so max range is much more limited
which also limits the number of stations that are workable - got
that. Having one channel causes "traffic jams" also negative.

That is why the radio I envision cannot be just for satellite
users. In fact it should be thoroughly researched for what the full
spectrum of VHF+ users want. I (not very humbly) believe I represent that.

I tried to list the features wanted. The market is beyond just
satellite users or eme'rs or FM repeater users, or contesters, or
meteor scatter users, or Emcomm users, or digital mode users, ...only
if the radio offers something for all of them - big hint!

All the big three are marketing multiple models for VHF multi-mode;
only two radios do satellite in duplex (I'm not counting the
HT's). So there must be a market.

MY point it nothing made today offers all the feature that VHFers
want, and many are not state of the art tech. Elecraft has shown the
willingness to venture into new tech. Why I suggest they might
consider making such a radio.

Some day someone will - watch the stampede when that happens!

73, Ed

To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed

I should be the last person on earth to comment on this.

If there is such a large market in EU then it suggests that an EU
manufacturer ought to be the source. Why hasn't that happened?

One factor missing from your 1000 estimate is the fraction that are
likely to buy. Clearly active stations already have their own gear.

My experience with satellites is minimal. 1000 contacts. The trouble
was that represented less than 50 different stations. The novelty
quickly died. Haven't been back since.

73 de Brian/K3KO

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
"Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
[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]

Edward R Cole

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Kevin Stover

Johnny,

I was actually planning to try doing exactly that: use my K3+432
transverter with KX3-2M. But this is new territory which no one has
ventured. First one would need sw to interface the radios, then sw
to link to satellite tracking sw, and also a program that would
provide both inverting and non-inverting dual band frequency
tracking. The UHF radio needs to change frequency at a faster rate
than the VHF radio in order to compensate for Doppler. Just linking
VFO's will not do it.

I'm not a programmer so that would depend on patching together from
other sw and I kept putting that off.
I had wanted a dual-band mobile radio to replace radios I had sold in
buying transverters which don't cover the full band. I figured one
with cross-band duplex would get me back with a usable satellite
radio (but only FM).

There are a couple sats that have linear transponders for SSB/CW use
though not in high earth orbit (Heo). That thinking morphed into my
acquiring the old FT-736R which adds all-mode operation and CAT.

The KX2 got me thinking how nice a dual-band VHF/UHF KX3 would be
(doing duplex would add extra nice).

Somebody will marry the two Elecraft radios some day for full
cross-band duplex.

Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 11:33:24 +0000 (UTC)
From: Johnny Siu <[hidden email]>
To: Edward R Cole <[hidden email]>, David Anderson
<[hidden email]>
Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Instead of developing a new radio for SAT. ?Can there be a device
that can link two elecraft radios for up / downlink of SAT?
In the past, CT16 can link Icom IC275 and IC475 to work as a pair.
I think this route will save a lot of R&D for a new radio.
73
Johnny VR2XMC

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
"Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
[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]

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

Seems that this is a strong argument against a "satellite radio" -- if
they launch a new satellite, and it does something different, you might
not have the right bands and/or modes built in.

General purpose UHF/VHF is a different story.

On 5/25/2016 1:43 AM, David Anderson via Elecraft wrote:
> We had much better satellites then, in decent orbits like AO-10. So Yaesu in particular brought out lovely expensive duplex radios. Great! However then the linear sats gradually died and were replaced by digital radio sats. Some FM one channel toy sats, but nothing like the old wide linear transponders.

______________________________________________________________
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]

briancom

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

In reply to this post by Edward R Cole

I seem to recall this was functionality was available way back when (>10
years ago) for a two rig satellite setup.

From memory (perhaps faulty):

There was a software program which compensated for the Doppler shift
with an RS232 link to the downlink radio. No correction was made to the
uplink radio.

There was also one or more program(s)/hardware board(s) to control the
EL-AZ rotors (various outputs so that most rotors could be controlled).

I do recall using the downlink Doppler shift compensation program. It
worked fine in the CW mode I tested. I abandoned it because it was easy
enough to manually tune the radio to follow the Doppler on 70 cm downlinks.

Didn't use the rotor control hardware/software with the U100 (clack box)
rotors I had. They were easy enough to manually operate. Set the
declination rotor, track azimuth in steps for a while, reset declination
rotor etc. An available satellite tracking computer program gave the
needed elevations/azimuths.

"Integration" was an exercise for the user. Some guys did indeed
integrate the all the pieces. I found it unnecessary to do so.

Biggest pain was waiting for passes of the few useable birds available.

Guys interested in something narrow bandwidth modes would perhaps need
to refine the old technology or maybe not. Moonbounce programs
apparently compensate for Doppler.

73 de Brian/K3KO

On 5/25/2016 16:04 PM, Edward R Cole wrote:

> Johnny,
>
> I was actually planning to try doing exactly that: use my K3+432
> transverter with KX3-2M. But this is new territory which no one has
> ventured. First one would need sw to interface the radios, then sw to
> link to satellite tracking sw, and also a program that would provide
> both inverting and non-inverting dual band frequency tracking. The UHF
> radio needs to change frequency at a faster rate than the VHF radio in
> order to compensate for Doppler. Just linking VFO's will not do it.
>
> I'm not a programmer so that would depend on patching together from
> other sw and I kept putting that off.
> I had wanted a dual-band mobile radio to replace radios I had sold in
> buying transverters which don't cover the full band. I figured one with
> cross-band duplex would get me back with a usable satellite radio (but
> only FM).
>
> There are a couple sats that have linear transponders for SSB/CW use
> though not in high earth orbit (Heo). That thinking morphed into my
> acquiring the old FT-736R which adds all-mode operation and CAT.
>
> The KX2 got me thinking how nice a dual-band VHF/UHF KX3 would be (doing
> duplex would add extra nice).
>
> Somebody will marry the two Elecraft radios some day for full cross-band
> duplex.
>
> Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 11:33:24 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Johnny Siu <[hidden email]>
> To: Edward R Cole <[hidden email]>, David Anderson
> <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [Elecraft] KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)
>
> Instead of developing a new radio for SAT. ?Can there be a device that
> can link two elecraft radios for up / downlink of SAT?
> In the past, CT16 can link Icom IC275 and IC475 to work as a pair.
> I think this route will save a lot of R&D for a new radio.
> 73
> Johnny VR2XMC
>
>
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
> "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
> [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]