Date   

Re: QRP Labs VFO/ Signal Generator

Terry W6LEO
 

Spare time?


QRP Labs VFO/ Signal Generator

Leland L. Bahr
 

I was complaining on the Novice Rig Reflector about the lack of available VFO kits to drive old tube transmitters.  I love QRP and QRP rigs but I also have another life.  I love older ham tube gear. Crystals today cost a bunch and are not readily available.  Band plans have changed and finding a desirable crystal today at any cost is becoming very hard to find and afford.  All the VFO units I have seen available today don't fill the bill for a CW transmitter.  Non of them seem to address how to key one for CW use.  That also seems to include the one offered by Hans.  Yes, I know one must boost the output voltage and change over to a sinusoidal wave form plus add low pass filters to any of these kits sold today.  But it comes back to non of these kits seem to be made to key a CW transmitter.  I would be the first guy to buy a VFO kit that could drive a tube type CW transmitter.  Hans, in your spare time please work out a way to key your VFO/Signal generator kit.  I am sure I am not alone for this type VFO.
Lee, w0vt


Re: QCX future?

James Daldry W4JED
 

Hi, Vince

Google K7QO. He has a code course in mp3 audio form that you can download to your phone and listen to while taking your twice-daily walks like I did. BTW, I'm 72 and do maybe 6 miles a day in 2 chunks, after breakfast and after lunch. By the end of the course you will have listened to "The War Of The Worlds" in CW, the last end of it at 25 wpm.

The course is in .iso format, so you can either mount the .iso (Google "mount iso file") or burn the iso to a blank cd and pull the files off that. Either way once you have the files in a directory you can drag them onto your phone or mp3 player.

73

Jim W4JED

On 12/18/18 11:18 AM, V Zecchinelli wrote:
Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!


Re: QCX future?

Jack <vhfplus@...>
 

It's all real CW to me, Bob. I copy and decode with my ears so the source is irrelevant. A significant percentage of those contest ops who are sailing along at 30wpm are perfectly capable of doing the same by hand.

73,

Jack K0JP (ex-W6NF)/VE3RUA

On 12/18/2018 12:49 PM, Bob Macklin wrote:
I don't hear much CW between contests. But on contest days I usually hear a lot.
 
Today there is a lot of computer generated CW during contests. Possibly more computer generated CW than real CW.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
From: Jess Gypin
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

With CW keyboards and decoders, for brief contacts it it just one more “digital” mode. The original 1’s and 0’s. 

Jess AE0CW<————

On Dec 18, 2018, at 7:44 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:

Braden:

I don't think it's a rhetorical question at all. I'm one of those old guys who's been licensed continually since 1954. I swore when I got my General I would NEVER use CW again. Yet, after I retired, I built a QRP kit and fell in love with CW again. I've tried to get new (young?) people interested in CW (March, 2016, QST), but it seems to be the same people who build and use the CW rigs. I've offered to teach a CW course and 85 percent of my club members say they want to learn CW. Yet, when I offer dates/times for the course, all of a sudden everyone needs to rearrange their sock drawer. If anyone has a way to move non-CW people off dead center, I'd really love to hear it.

BTW, I had a guy brag that he got his CW DXCC and he said he doesn't know any code other than S, T, O, and E. Should we give the award to him or the computer software?

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:33:28 AM EST, Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:


Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!


Re: QCX future?

Paul Kiener <pkiener@...>
 

Vince,

The ARRL web site also has a number of files of past practice sessions at all the different speeds.  You could download the files for the speeds you want and then transfer them to an audio device so you could listen to them at your leisure.  I downloaded a bunch of files for 20-45 wpm, and I listen to them when I have to wait somewhere, like at the MD office or at the car dealership for routine maintenance. 

 

Once you have learned the code, then I suggest that you listen to a speed that is much faster than you can actually copy.  Don't worry about trying to copy everything at 100%.  Keep listening and just be satisfied to copy one letter out of a bunch.  With more time, you'll be picking up 2 letters; then 3; and so on.  At the much faster speeds, you'll be picking up words instead of just individual letters.  So when you reach, say 40 wpm, then 20 wpm becomes a lot more easier and you'll find you're copying most of the transmission. 

 

Important thing is not to become frustrated.  Listening to a speed much faster than you can copy, you cannot get 100% copy; so don't worry about it and don't get frustrated.  Be satisfied at just copying a letter here-and-there.  What you are trying to do is getting used to "hearing" the tones; the rest will come later.

 

Don't give up.  You're supposed to be having fun, after all!!  ;) 

 

73,

Paul  (NC9W)

 

 

From: QRPLabs@groups.io [mailto:QRPLabs@groups.io] On Behalf Of V Zecchinelli
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 1:22 PM
To: QRPLabs@groups.io
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

 

Thank you PJH.  All input helps. 
73 Vince N1VIN

On 12/18/2018 1:11 PM, N7PH wrote:

Hey Vince,

If you have a computer try one of the code practice programs. The two I recommend are a. G4FON Koch Trainer and b. Just Learn Morse. Once you decide on the settings either will help greatly. One thing not often emphasized is copying off the air. There are so many non-code variables with on air signals that it is terrific practice.
I'm still trying to get there also and I found the above prgms very useful.

PJH, N7PH

 


Re: Waiting for the QSX? #qsx

George H. Gates <w2bpi1@...>
 

Where do I find the building instructions in English? 72 Tnx  George/W2BPI

In a message dated 12/18/2018 2:11:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, ceschwaerzler@... writes:

Dan,
the link to the kit is:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/DIY-Kits-70W-SSB-linear-HF-Power-Amplifier-For-YAESU-FT-817-KX3-Ham-Radio/32807365037.html
(same as endnote #3 in the instructions, but there are many other vendors around as well).

I checked the attachment, looks good here. But just in case I attach my original german version and the english one here as well.

73,
Chris, OE1CGS


Re: RBN Was QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Michael,
 
I don't have anything recent. Here is one at 7PM Pacific Time a few years ago.
 
I just meant these to show an example of what you can see if you have a computer and the software.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] RBN Was QCX future?

Is this 40 meters? If so, I would love to see one after the entire US is dark.

Michael N6MST


Re: RBN Was QCX future?

Michael N6MST
 

Is this 40 meters? If so, I would love to see one after the entire US is dark.

Michael N6MST


Re: RBN Was QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Let's see if this come through?
I use DX Lab with DX Atlas to monitor RBN activity. It gives me a picture of what is happening kind of real time. But it only shows stations sending "CQ" or "TEST".  
But I do find it good to see here to look for activity.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Vince,
 
These are RECEIVE only sessions but are a good place to start. They have both fast and slow sessions.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

I didn't realize they had practice sessions.  I will check that out.  Thank you Bob.
73 Vince N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 1:56 PM, Bob Macklin wrote:
Vince,
 
Can you hear W1AW? Have you tried listening to the W1AW CW practice sessions?
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!



Re: frequency calculation FP error? #u3s #synth

HF
 

Typo:  Instead of "492, ...518, and ...497", I meant "492, ...497, and ...518".  Oops.  -HF


frequency calculation FP error? #u3s #synth

HF
 

Hello all...
I recalibrated my U3S (now clocked with a Taitien TCXO) using the frequency setting of 26,999,984.  My TXs nominally at 144,490,480, ...500, and ...520 were then decoded at ...492, ...518, and ...497 respectively at VE7UTS's RX and ...475, ...479, and ...500 at VE7BPB.  The gap between the nominally 500 and 520 TXs was correct at both receivers, but both receivers picked up the nominally 480 TX about 14 Hz higher than expected.  I tried power-cycling the U3S; no change.  But when I reduced the frequency setting by 1 Hz to ...983, the frequency spacing at both RXs were back to the expected ~20 Hz.  Would a floating point calculation error generate an discrepancy of this magnitude? 
Halden NR7V


Re: QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Vince,
 
These are RECEIVE only sessions but are a good place to start. They have both fast and slow sessions.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

I didn't realize they had practice sessions.  I will check that out.  Thank you Bob.
73 Vince N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 1:56 PM, Bob Macklin wrote:
Vince,
 
Can you hear W1AW? Have you tried listening to the W1AW CW practice sessions?
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!



Re: QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Michael,
 
I cannot operate right now but I can listen.
 
Do you know about the "Novice Rig Roundup"? NRR. They operate on the high end of 40M between 7100 and 7125.
 
It would be nice to see some regular West Coast CW activity.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Bob Macklin wrote:
CW activity here in the PNW is pretty sparse.
Pick a frequency and us slower hams will be there. "West Coast QRS" has a nice ring to it :)

Michael N6MST


Re: QCX future?

V Zecchinelli <n1vin@...>
 

I didn't realize they had practice sessions.  I will check that out.  Thank you Bob.
73 Vince N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 1:56 PM, Bob Macklin wrote:
Vince,
 
Can you hear W1AW? Have you tried listening to the W1AW CW practice sessions?
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!



Re: QCX future?

Michael N6MST
 

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Bob Macklin wrote:
CW activity here in the PNW is pretty sparse.
Pick a frequency and us slower hams will be there. "West Coast QRS" has a nice ring to it :)

Michael N6MST


Re: QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

About 15 years ago I bought a set of the ARRL practice tapes. I was almost at 90%+ when I got diverted.
 
Then I found out I could not send CW anymore unless I went really slow.
 
So now I just listen to see what I can hear.
 
Most activity is east of the Rockies and then most of that is east of the Mississippi.
 
CW activity here in the PNW is pretty sparse.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
From: N7PH
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hey Vince,

If you have a computer try one of the code practice programs. The two I recommend are a. G4FON Koch Trainer and b. Just Learn Morse. Once you decide on the settings either will help greatly. One thing not often emphasized is copying off the air. There are so many non-code variables with on air signals that it is terrific practice.
I'm still trying to get there also and I found the above prgms very useful.

PJH, N7PH


Re: Waiting for the QSX? #qsx

Christoph Schwärzler
 

Dan,
the link to the kit is:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/DIY-Kits-70W-SSB-linear-HF-Power-Amplifier-For-YAESU-FT-817-KX3-Ham-Radio/32807365037.html
(same as endnote #3 in the instructions, but there are many other vendors around as well).

I checked the attachment, looks good here. But just in case I attach my original german version and the english one here as well.

73,
Chris, OE1CGS


Re: QCX future?

Andy G0FTD
 

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 05:23 PM, Frank Waarsenburg wrote:
If the youth ask me why they should learn CW, I direct them tot YouTube and look for Dentron morse torture.
Morse *torture* ?

Poor little kids ;-)

73 de Andy


Re: QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Vince,
 
Can you hear W1AW? Have you tried listening to the W1AW CW practice sessions?
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

Hans and Jack,

I am a new ham, only 5 years licensed.  And 70 years of age.  I would love to learn CW again (learned in Scouts back in the 1950's) and I am sure there are many others out there struggling as well.  I have tried Gordon West CDs and the Zilak Method CDs.  There has to be a better way.  Once these guys get going I can't even tell the difference between dits and dahs.  I have even tried my own method of assigning a different letter to learn every day.  If anyone has any suggestions I am all ears.

73 Vince  N1VIN


On 12/18/2018 10:37 AM, jjpurdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Hans:

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, nor am I down-playing the success of the QCX...indeed, I said just the opposite. What I really want, however, is for someone to tell me how we get others to invest the effort in learning and using CW. Daniel's post about young people learning CW is great and perhaps coattailing the Merit Badge is one avenue to pursue. The digital modes don't seem to be the answer I'm looking for, since it does little to augment interest in CW. SSB rules and it's where most hams sit in the spectrum. Your wave of sales of the QCX are impressive, but I think you're going to see a tsunami when the QSX is released. You think the Turkish postal authorities were curious before...

We all realize where the bulk of the market is...you wouldn't have spent the time and effort on the QSX if you weren't aware of the potential and I think all of us out here hope it's twice as successful as you expect. Still, I do want to expand the non-CW hams' horizon so they, too, can enjoy it. I just don't know how...

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:15:16 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Jack

Yes, I know - that many QCX's is a small proportion of the overall ham population, still. But my point is this - only a small proportion of the ham population are CW operators. Within that, a small proportion are QRPers. Within that, a small proportion are kit builders. Even then, look at QCX, a mono-band CW-only QRP rig. It's a really small niche market. There have been other single-band CW transceiver kits before. Has any single-band CW transceiver kit ever sold 6,269 copies? If so, I bet it hasn't happened often. So it seems to indicate a healthy level of interest, even if it's a small proportion of the total ham population. 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 6:04 PM jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hans:

I hear ya'. As you know, in my mind (Feb., 2018, CQ), you have produced the best QRP CW rig to come down the pike in...well, forever. A lot of other people agree, as evidenced by your sales of the QCX. Still, despite the wild success of the QCX, only 0.00208 of the ham population are using one. Why aren't more people using one? It sure can't be the price. I guess this is partly a good-news, bad-news story. Multiply that number by a factor of 1000x and you still have a fairly small percentage of the total. The good news (??) is that fewer CW operators means less QRM. The bad news is what Braden alluded to.

My gnashing of teeth on this topic solves nothing and I honestly do wish someone had a viable solution that, somehow, would convey the enjoyment that is derived from operating CW.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:39:55 AM EST, Hans Summers <hans.summers@...> wrote:


Hi Braden

Given that QRP Labs has shipped 6,269 QCX kits in the last 16 months since launch (21-Aug-2017), I would say that indicates there is still quite a healthy interest in CW. Or perhaps even a resurgent interest. 

Furthermore - people have been saying that ham radio is dying out, for decades. As well as CW dying out. But neither have come true. I got my first license (G0UPL) aged 23 in 1994. I know 1994 is nothing, compared to some of the people here. But even then, everyone was saying "CW is dead", "all amateurs have grey or white hair and it's dying out". In any historic ham magazine you can read for the last 50 years or more, you can find the occasional concerned editorials about the aging ham population. Doom and gloom. Hasn't happened... 

Anyway even if it does... I'll be one of those 6 for you to QSO with Ok? 

73 Hans G0UPL

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:33 PM Braden Glett <bradenglett@...> wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but as I work CW using the QCX or other rig, I can't help but notice that nearly everyone I QSO with is older than I am, and I'm no spring chicken (59). Most are in their 70s and a fair number in their 80s, a few are in their 60s still.
I'm really wondering if in a few years I'm going to have to QSO with the same 6 people over and over again, assuming I'm still alive and kicking. So will a CW-only rig even be relevant except in a contest or on Field Day, or the occasional SOTA op? 
Please, none of the "they never should have given out no-code licenses" powerless griping - that ship has sailed and it's not coming back to port.
Rhetorical question. Any original or encouraging thoughts on the subject much appreciated!


Re: QCX future?

Bob Macklin <macklinbob@...>
 

Building your own gear was the way it was back in the 50's and 60's.
 
But the transition to SSB made it more complex so kits like the Heathkit SB series and RICEBOXES became the norm. After about 1980 simple CW kits faded into history.
 
We didn't have the Internet until the mid 90's.
 
Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX future?

My two cents

I'm a recently licensed 18 years old ham. I discovered this hobby through the hacker community and have never participated in a club. 

The QCX is my first rig and I loved building and operating it. There are few things as good as spending hours assembling a kit and watching it spring to life in the end.

One of the things that made me choose the QCX as my first rig was its hackability. Although the firmware is closed source, the hardware is not and this has enabled me to understand what's going on and modify the radio to my linking.

I believe ham radio is becoming less about communicating and more about experimenting. The internet is already reliable enough for most uses and civil defense units already have their own infrastructure. The fun for me is in building my own equipment and developing new stuff. Hopefully the QCX will allow me to achieve my goals.

Best regards,
Pedro 

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 at 13:48 jjpurdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hi Peter:

One of my club members is currently taking your course and absolutely loves it! In fact, he is giving a presentation to our club in February telling us about the experience. Obviously, I hope his enthusiasm spreads!

Jack, W8TEE


On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 10:35:17 AM EST, Peter GM0EUL <gm0eul@...> wrote:


Hi
I'm a member of CWops and a CW Academy advisor, we're seeing a lot of people coming through the CWA and a resurgence of enthusiasm for CW.  There are waiting lists for places and we even have a youth academy now organised by Rob, K6RB.  In spite of no-code licenses and various digital modes I think that for a lot of people HF CW still epitomises ham radio.  I suspect it will remain relevant for a long time to come.

I'm also a new member of this forum so hello everybody.  I have just ordered my first 40m QCX, hoping it arrives before Christmas!

73, 
Peter, GM0EUL
 

--
Att Pedro H. Kopper