Date   

LCD display too dark

iz oos
 

I have seen a potentiometer on the raduino board. Is this that controls the brightness of the LCD board? 73 Franco


Re: BITX QSO Afternoon/Evening, Sunday, April 29, 3PM & 7PM Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere.

Jay - WS4JM
 

Go troll somewhere else


Re: A steal for Arduino Experimenters

_Dave_ AD0B
 

Thanks for the insight between the different breeds of nano's how inconvenient to use the same name for two different boards. 

When I blew out the nano on the bitx40 I replaced it with a nano that I had here. Am pretty sure that it was the older chip as I bought the least expensive that I could find. 

The Allard files loaded on it. and it seems to work. But it isn't a ubitx.


Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

K9HZ <bill@...>
 

If such a radio is just CW and SSB, those ultra-cheap transverters from the Ukraine are by far the best solution.  If the radio will operate FM… that’s where a redesign is required.

 

I’m using one of the transverters now and they work fine with some simple interfacing.

 

 

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

Like us on Facebook! facebook icon

 

Moderator – North American QRO Group at Groups.IO.

 

email:  bill@...

 

 

From: BITX20@groups.io [mailto:BITX20@groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 9:58 AM
To: BITX20@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BITX20] mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

 

Looks like the goal is to build something more challenging than the uBitx.
Beyond that what it is or does is totally up in the air.
Discussion seems to be moving toward a single band rig capable of SSB/CW about uBitx size.

A few thoughts of my own:
Phase noise from that si5351 gets worse as the freq goes up, maybe an si5338 or si5341?
Having all oscillators off a single reference makes calibration much easier.
Could be used for cross band ops if it receives on more bands than it transmits.
A wideband receiver could also be a spectrum analyzer, use digital techniques
on the audio when resolution better than the crystal filters is required.
Transmit mixer, drivers, final could be a separate board for each band desired,
zero transmit boards is an option for receive only.

Jerry


On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 05:55 am, Tim Gorman wrote:

I'm lost as to what your goal is here.
1. The baofeng won't do SSB. Are you wanting to build a SSB unit or an
FM unit?
2. Are you thinking of a handheld or a desktop?
3. a phase line at 432Mhz won't be correct for 144Mhz. Are you thinking
a two-band unit or one-band unit?


Virus-free. www.avg.com


Re: Diagnostic software for uBitx #ubitx

Jerry Gaffke
 

A tandem match such as this:  http://www.kitsandparts.com/bridge1.4.php
monitored by the microcontroller could do that,
and could shut down the transmitter if reverse power gets out of hand.


On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 06:57 am, Bo Barry wrote:
And don't forget a test and big warning "you forgot to hook up the antenna, dummy".   Bo W4GHV since '54


Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

Jerry Gaffke
 

Looks like the goal is to build something more challenging than the uBitx.
Beyond that what it is or does is totally up in the air.
Discussion seems to be moving toward a single band rig capable of SSB/CW about uBitx size.

A few thoughts of my own:
Phase noise from that si5351 gets worse as the freq goes up, maybe an si5338 or si5341?
Having all oscillators off a single reference makes calibration much easier.
Could be used for cross band ops if it receives on more bands than it transmits.
A wideband receiver could also be a spectrum analyzer, use digital techniques
on the audio when resolution better than the crystal filters is required.
Transmit mixer, drivers, final could be a separate board for each band desired,
zero transmit boards is an option for receive only.

Jerry


On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 05:55 am, Tim Gorman wrote:
I'm lost as to what your goal is here.
1. The baofeng won't do SSB. Are you wanting to build a SSB unit or an
FM unit?
2. Are you thinking of a handheld or a desktop?
3. a phase line at 432Mhz won't be correct for 144Mhz. Are you thinking
a two-band unit or one-band unit?


Re: For those keeping track of uBITX shipping times #ubitx

Ken Peck <kenbpeck@...>
 

I ordered mine on 4/6, received a shipping notice 4/25, and tracking information indicates delivery expected May 1.


Re: Diagnostic software for uBitx #ubitx

Bo Barry <wn4ghv@...>
 

And don't forget a test and big warning "you forgot to hook up the antenna, dummy".   Bo W4GHV since '54


Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

Tim Gorman
 

I'm lost as to what your goal is here.
1. The baofeng won't do SSB. Are you wanting to build a SSB unit or an
FM unit?
2. Are you thinking of a handheld or a desktop?
3. a phase line at 432Mhz won't be correct for 144Mhz. Are you thinking
a two-band unit or one-band unit?

tim ab0wr



On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 10:43:31 +0530
"Ashhar Farhan" <farhanbox@...> wrote:

there are just a few challenges and many ways to meet them in
transiting to 435 MHz, VHF is just a milestone along the way. The
idea of making something on VHF/UHF is no longer economically
justified if you are doing it just to save money. You can buy a
baofeng for twenty dollars. Probably, it is a good idea to do that in
anycase, you will have a ready rig to test your homebrew with.

The local oscillator:
The first challenge is to get a local oscillator going at around 400
MHz. There are three ways to do it:
- A crystal oscillator with a multiplier chain. This needs you to
have a good way to sniff RF frequencies. A wavemeter of a lecher line
would do the trick.
- Just triple the Si5351. This means, you need to tune just one
bandpass filter at 435 MHz
- Use an Si589 or Si570, LVDS version. This costs as much as a
Baofeng, you can order it from Mouser.

Architecture: The options are:
- Two diode mixers that directly mix down to audio, to make a
phasing, direct conversion transceiver. This is simple, it involves
cutting a phase line down by millimeters until you get the phase
angle right. But you don't dabble with all the fun (really??) of a
superhet.
- Single conversion to 20-25 MHz IF with stripline filters to keep
the image rejection high, it is a bitx from the other side
- double conversion to 45 MHz, this throws the image to around 350
MHz, easily suppressed by LC bandpass filters.

Modulation/Demodulation:
There are many ways to achieve it. You can build analog mod/demod
with conventional technology as done in the bitx transceivers. Or...
add an SDR back-end (if you are lazy).

What do you guys think?

- f




On Saturday 28 April 2018 08:32 AM, Tim Gorman wrote:
Respectfully, as Allison points out, it's not just the PA active
element that will be the problem. When your frequency width is an
order of magnitude, e.g. 14Mhz to 144Mhz, you begin to run into all
kinds of issues with components. Lead lengths and circuit trace
lengths/widths at 2m cause many more problems than at 14Mhz. It
gets even worse at 432Mhz.

I agree with others on here. It would be a lot more feasible to do
one band modules, e.g. one for 2m and another one for 432Mhz, that
are small enough they could be placed in one case along with a ubitx
being used as an IF amplifier.

tim ab0wr

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 01:12:16 +0000
"Ashhar Farhan" <farhanbox@...> wrote:

Allison,
For a power chain of about 5 watts that goes from 50 mhz to 500
mhz, what would be your recommendations? The RD15HVF1 seems to be
used frequently at 435 Mhz. Are there any broadband alternatives?
What kind of cores can we use at UHF?
- f

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 06:37 ajparent1/KB1GMX, <kb1gmx@...>
wrote:
Several things, like others have repeatedly pointed out the uBITX
is very unsuited for FM or AM.
FM needs wider filter and far more gain to get the needed limiting
action. Its not drop in its full
replacement. A Baofeng UV5R goes for 30 bucks and does 2M and
70CM. AM there are
issues with drive level and sustained power out, that and its
sparsely used. My opinion is
that if you want all that get a FT817, its a do all and has a
noise blanker.

To get the front end to cover VHF the LO system deliver a VHF LO
(95mhz for 6M, about 99 or 189mhz for 2m)
and the input filter needs to pass the VHF band and not a low
pass. IF memory sers the 5351 can go to 220Mhz
A LNA before the mixer would be required for reasonable
performance. For UHF if you had a version of the
5351 or maybe used a si570 flavor to generate the LO and an
improved mixer 432 is possible but its more
effort and would likely need a board redesign.

UHF is better done with a competent converter/transverter with a
404mhz LO and run that into a uBitx at 28mhz.

In all cases 6 though 70cm the tx power chain would need work as
the drivers are all 300mhz FT devices
just will not do it. The IRF510 I've used at 50mhz as a monoband
linear and its respectable
(40+W for push pull @ 28V properly done for 6M only) but I think
maybe 70mhz is a stretch without
first trying. In all cases the TX chain is mono band only as VHF
impedance matching from stage
to stage is required. Just dropping in higher FT devices will not
help its a across the board redesign
for a specific band.

Receiving is easy enough, transmit above 50mhz is going to be
harder.


Allison








Re: RadioKits.in Case #ubitx

lou_w2row
 

John,

Attached is a photo of the connection I used. Just cut a mini USB cable to length. The colors seem to be standard. The shield for the cable is soldered underneath to the shield of the USB jack.

Lou   W2ROW


Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

Rahul Srivastava
 

Hi ! 

Getting cores for such high frequency is easy. Use one from cable TV splitters/ They work on VHF Band III and beyond. 

Rahul


Re: A steal for Arduino Experimenters

David Wilcox <Djwilcox01@...>
 

Check out the Chat With The Designers site.  Arduino based test gear it the project for 2018.


Get in touch with George.  Your idea sounds like a great addition to the already proposed projects.

Dave K8WPE

On Apr 27, 2018, at 6:13 PM, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:

DuWayne  KV4QB

Love your little 0.96 inch meter faces.  8-)

In doing something similar I used two ADC inputs as DC voltmeters so I could
measure the voltage on either side of a component and subtract the lowest to
show the difference.  This allows for measuring current through a component
that has both ends above ground. 

I am beginning to wonder why someone has not started a line of Arduino assisted
test equipment?  Products could evolve from simple voltmeters to fancy spectrum
analyzers.

Keep up the good work. 

Arv  K7HKL
_._


On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 3:52 PM, DuWayne Schmidlkofer <duwayne@...> wrote:
I have been playing with a Pro Mini and a small OLED display to use as a stand alone replacement for a analog meter.  The existing Raduino does not have enough analog input pins to provide everything I wanted to measure.  info on my blog at
 https://kv4qb.blogspot.com/2018/04/stand-alone-simulated-analog-meter.html
Still working on a small board to provide forward and reflected power readings for a SWR/power measurement.


--
DuWayne  KV4QB





Re: Diagnostic software for uBitx #ubitx

David Wilcox <Djwilcox01@...>
 

I, a 73 y/o ham of 63 years fully agree.  I love this new radio stuff but getting it to work after it is built is sometimes a head scratching problem even with the help of all my .io group friends.

Also, don't ever think you are wasting your time on these sites.  I read 100 emails a day re my radio interests and am learning so much even about kits I haven't built yet.  THANK YOU ALL!

Dave

On Apr 27, 2018, at 10:49 PM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:

All:

I think Chuck Adams has the right approach to this. His video series on YouTube for building W8DIZ's 1 Watter (1Watter Transceiver Build, Phase 1 by K7QO) has a lot of good stuff about kit building in general.


However, his approach addresses the subject line here: How do you diagnose problems with a homebrew or kit project. If you are going to use the µC as part of the process, it would be much more successful if the diagnoses are done at stages along the way, rather than deferring until the project is done. It's much easier to diagnose a stage as it is built rather than waiting to a point where several stages can interact and be causing issues.

This suggests building the PS first, checking the voltages, etc. and pronouncing it "healthy". I would immediately then constuct the µC section, utilizing the the Serial object to verify it is working (e.g., the simple Blink program). Then (and you EE guys are better at deciding what's next) perhaps build the audio section and have program code that sends a 700Hz tone to the amplifier for replay through the headphones/speaker. If you get to a section where the test from the µC doesn't pass its test, you have limited the source of the error to the most recent section. It's the same concept as Encapsulation in software engineering.

My point is: If you're going to the trouble of building diagnostic software into the rig, utilize it through the entire construction process...don't defer it to the end. Not only does the approach enhance the odds of a working piece of equipment when the project is done, it builds confidence in the builder along the way--a double win!

Jack, W8TEE


On Friday, April 27, 2018, 8:35:43 PM EDT, Howard Fidel <sonic1@...> wrote:


Great idea. If the Arduino only had more inputs we could do a really thorough job with some mods.
On 4/27/2018 8:09 PM, John wrote:
I have started developing a diagnostic software for the uBitx. 

The need arose following a forum member's trouble with his Raduino.

The objective is to help both the original kit builder for issues like wiring or "not working" problems, but also to the more advanced experimenters both during construction and after "oops moments" like after a bad wiring or when a loose lead that "is only there for 5 seconds and will never touch another part of the circuit" went wandering around the board (I raise my hand here).

So far it only tests the I2C bus, the communication with the SI5351 and the analogue inputs of the Raduino in a graphical form.

The plan is to expand to the audio circuit, the receiver chain, the TX low pass filters' relays and hopefully more.

This is where I need your input to determine what to test for in the first instance and then some ideas to make the test results as simple but still useful to more advanced users.

So if you can give me some feedback as to what issues you had when building the kit that I could incorporate in the diagnostic software either as a new test or as a suggestion as to how solve the issue, as a self help, that would be great.

Tests need not be Arduino only tests. Operator 's interpretation, as in "Do you hear the tone in the speaker, Y/N" are quite ok.

I have uploaded the beta version of the software at https://groups.io/g/BITX20/files/uBitx%20Diagnostic%20software%20by%20VK2ETA/ubitx-Diagnostic%20-%20Version%20B0.2-2018-04-28.zip

Passed the tests are the questions of deployment and the best way to do that since new kit builders may not be familiar or confident to setup the Arduino's IDE. So maybe HEx files and a simple terminal...ideas welcomed.

All the best,

73, John (VK2ETA)



Re: BITX QSO Afternoon/Evening, Sunday, April 29, 3PM & 7PM Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere.

derrekgardener@...
 

Are you kids still doing this. I thought you would have learned by now that QRP low power SSB is what to do if you don't to be heard. Or am I missing your point? If you could you should at least try CW or digital modes. If you are just smart enough to get your Indian POS BITX 40 or uBITX upgraded and running on digital modes making QSO'S with each other and real hams in nearby DX stations with rotatable beam antennas, and real name brand Japanese radios.


Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

Ashhar Farhan
 

I would add that Si5351 could be directly to drive a harmonic mixer. A harmonic diode mixer is singly balanced mixer (like the one in the bitx transceivers) except that there is an additional pair of diodes strapped across each of the two diodes. So, the mixer turns on on the high positive peak of the oscillator as well as the lowest negative peak of the oscillator, in effect it turns on twice for every oscillator cycle. this would reduce the requirement to just your regular radiuno driving 1N5711 or 1N4148 diodes in the mixer. The big question is, what core do we use for these mixers? Should be mangle an ADE-1 to get at its transformers? Allison, can you help?

- f

On Saturday 28 April 2018 10:43 AM, Ashhar Farhan wrote:
there are just a few challenges and many ways to meet them in transiting to 435 MHz, VHF is just a milestone along the way. The idea of making something on VHF/UHF is no longer economically justified if you are doing it just to save money. You can buy a baofeng for twenty dollars. Probably, it is a good idea to do that in anycase, you will have a ready rig to test your homebrew with.

The local oscillator:
The first challenge is to get a local oscillator going at around 400 MHz. There are three ways to do it:
- A crystal oscillator with a multiplier chain. This needs you to have a good way to sniff RF frequencies. A wavemeter of a lecher line would do the trick.
- Just triple the Si5351. This means, you need to tune just one bandpass filter at 435 MHz
- Use an Si589 or Si570, LVDS version. This costs as much as a Baofeng, you can order it from Mouser.

Architecture: The options are:
- Two diode mixers that directly mix down to audio, to make a phasing, direct conversion transceiver. This is simple, it involves cutting a phase line down by millimeters until you get the phase angle right. But you don't dabble with all the fun (really??) of a superhet.
- Single conversion to 20-25 MHz IF with stripline filters to keep the image rejection high, it is a bitx from the other side
- double conversion to 45 MHz, this throws the image to around 350 MHz, easily suppressed by LC bandpass filters.

Modulation/Demodulation:
There are many ways to achieve it. You can build analog mod/demod with conventional technology as done in the bitx transceivers. Or...
add an SDR back-end (if you are lazy).

What do you guys think?

- f




On Saturday 28 April 2018 08:32 AM, Tim Gorman wrote:
Respectfully, as Allison points out, it's not just the PA active element
that will be the problem. When your frequency width is an order of
magnitude, e.g. 14Mhz to 144Mhz, you begin to run into all kinds of
issues with components. Lead lengths and circuit trace lengths/widths
at 2m cause many more problems than at 14Mhz. It gets even worse at
432Mhz.

I agree with others on here. It would be a lot more feasible to do one
band modules, e.g. one for 2m and another one for 432Mhz, that are
small enough they could be placed in one case along with a ubitx
being used as an IF amplifier.

tim ab0wr

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 01:12:16 +0000
"Ashhar Farhan" <farhanbox@...> wrote:

Allison,
For a power chain of about 5 watts that goes from 50 mhz to 500 mhz,
what would be your recommendations? The RD15HVF1 seems to be used
frequently at 435 Mhz. Are there any broadband alternatives? What
kind of cores can we use at UHF?
- f

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 06:37 ajparent1/KB1GMX, <kb1gmx@...> wrote:

Several things, like others have repeatedly pointed out the uBITX
is very unsuited for FM or AM.
FM needs wider filter and far more gain to get the needed limiting
action.  Its not drop in its full
replacement.  A Baofeng UV5R goes for 30 bucks and does 2M and
70CM.    AM there are
issues with drive level and sustained power out, that and its
sparsely used.  My opinion is
that if you want all that get a FT817, its a do all and has a noise
blanker.

To get the front end to cover VHF the LO system deliver a VHF LO
(95mhz for 6M, about 99 or 189mhz for 2m)
and the input filter needs to pass the VHF band and not a low
pass.  IF memory sers the 5351 can go to 220Mhz
A LNA before the mixer would be required for reasonable performance.
For UHF if you had a version of the
5351 or maybe used a si570 flavor to generate the LO and an
improved mixer 432 is possible but its more
effort and would likely need a board redesign.

UHF is better done with a competent converter/transverter with a
404mhz LO and run that into a uBitx at 28mhz.

In all cases 6 though 70cm the tx power chain would need work as the
drivers are all 300mhz FT devices
just will not do it.   The IRF510 I've used at 50mhz as a monoband
linear and its respectable
(40+W for push pull @ 28V properly done for 6M only) but I think
maybe 70mhz is a stretch without
first trying.  In all cases the TX chain is mono band only as VHF
impedance matching from stage
to stage is required. Just dropping in higher FT devices will not
help its a across the board redesign
for a specific band.

Receiving is easy enough, transmit above 50mhz is going to be
harder.


Allison






Re: mono band 2 meters rig based on the micro BITx circuit #ubitx #2meters

Ashhar Farhan
 

there are just a few challenges and many ways to meet them in transiting to 435 MHz, VHF is just a milestone along the way. The idea of making something on VHF/UHF is no longer economically justified if you are doing it just to save money. You can buy a baofeng for twenty dollars. Probably, it is a good idea to do that in anycase, you will have a ready rig to test your homebrew with.

The local oscillator:
The first challenge is to get a local oscillator going at around 400 MHz. There are three ways to do it:
- A crystal oscillator with a multiplier chain. This needs you to have a good way to sniff RF frequencies. A wavemeter of a lecher line would do the trick.
- Just triple the Si5351. This means, you need to tune just one bandpass filter at 435 MHz
- Use an Si589 or Si570, LVDS version. This costs as much as a Baofeng, you can order it from Mouser.

Architecture: The options are:
- Two diode mixers that directly mix down to audio, to make a phasing, direct conversion transceiver. This is simple, it involves cutting a phase line down by millimeters until you get the phase angle right. But you don't dabble with all the fun (really??) of a superhet.
- Single conversion to 20-25 MHz IF with stripline filters to keep the image rejection high, it is a bitx from the other side
- double conversion to 45 MHz, this throws the image to around 350 MHz, easily suppressed by LC bandpass filters.

Modulation/Demodulation:
There are many ways to achieve it. You can build analog mod/demod with conventional technology as done in the bitx transceivers. Or...
add an SDR back-end (if you are lazy).

What do you guys think?

- f

On Saturday 28 April 2018 08:32 AM, Tim Gorman wrote:
Respectfully, as Allison points out, it's not just the PA active element
that will be the problem. When your frequency width is an order of
magnitude, e.g. 14Mhz to 144Mhz, you begin to run into all kinds of
issues with components. Lead lengths and circuit trace lengths/widths
at 2m cause many more problems than at 14Mhz. It gets even worse at
432Mhz.

I agree with others on here. It would be a lot more feasible to do one
band modules, e.g. one for 2m and another one for 432Mhz, that are
small enough they could be placed in one case along with a ubitx
being used as an IF amplifier.

tim ab0wr

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 01:12:16 +0000
"Ashhar Farhan" <farhanbox@...> wrote:

Allison,
For a power chain of about 5 watts that goes from 50 mhz to 500 mhz,
what would be your recommendations? The RD15HVF1 seems to be used
frequently at 435 Mhz. Are there any broadband alternatives? What
kind of cores can we use at UHF?
- f

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 06:37 ajparent1/KB1GMX, <kb1gmx@...> wrote:

Several things, like others have repeatedly pointed out the uBITX
is very unsuited for FM or AM.
FM needs wider filter and far more gain to get the needed limiting
action. Its not drop in its full
replacement. A Baofeng UV5R goes for 30 bucks and does 2M and
70CM. AM there are
issues with drive level and sustained power out, that and its
sparsely used. My opinion is
that if you want all that get a FT817, its a do all and has a noise
blanker.

To get the front end to cover VHF the LO system deliver a VHF LO
(95mhz for 6M, about 99 or 189mhz for 2m)
and the input filter needs to pass the VHF band and not a low
pass. IF memory sers the 5351 can go to 220Mhz
A LNA before the mixer would be required for reasonable performance.
For UHF if you had a version of the
5351 or maybe used a si570 flavor to generate the LO and an
improved mixer 432 is possible but its more
effort and would likely need a board redesign.

UHF is better done with a competent converter/transverter with a
404mhz LO and run that into a uBitx at 28mhz.

In all cases 6 though 70cm the tx power chain would need work as the
drivers are all 300mhz FT devices
just will not do it. The IRF510 I've used at 50mhz as a monoband
linear and its respectable
(40+W for push pull @ 28V properly done for 6M only) but I think
maybe 70mhz is a stretch without
first trying. In all cases the TX chain is mono band only as VHF
impedance matching from stage
to stage is required. Just dropping in higher FT devices will not
help its a across the board redesign
for a specific band.

Receiving is easy enough, transmit above 50mhz is going to be
harder.


Allison





Re: Sideband Suppression (receive) #ubitx #ubitx-help

David Beal
 

Thank you very much. 
This is very helpful, easy, and it works well. 


--
Dave Beal
AE6RQ


Re: Diagnostic software for uBitx #ubitx

John (vk2eta)
 

Thank you all for your inputs. Much appreciated. I will read/watch and digest.

Rod, the current software does use the serial interface as I had to assume the display was not working and since the software would have been uploaded that means the USB post is working. So I use the same setting for the serial monitor built in the IDE. I like the idea of the LCD pins cycling as I was wondering what could be done to test the LCD at a lower level than sending characters via the library.

Jerry, looking forward to you new software.

Bill, yes just a few components and some simple software. Smart and inexpensive.

Jack, I need to view the whole video. Thanks.

73, John (VK2ETA)


Re: WSJT-X Settings

Mike
 

Update:

I had forgotten about the cat.ino file . . . so I guess the question should be - any plans on making this functional? Any fixes for the timeout error?


WSJT-X Settings

Mike
 

Is there any method of keying the uBitx thru WSJT-X with the "stock" firmware?

I'm not interested in full CAT control, just simple keying -  using USB cable between PC and uBitx to control  PTT.