|
Re: QRP Labs VFO/ Signal Generator
Take a look at the VFO in the Forty-9er, which is detailed in the Arduino Projects for Amateur Radio. It uses the AD9850 instead of the Si5351 and has two outputs: unbuffered and buffered. The buffered output is specifically designed for tube-type use.
Jack, W8TEE
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 6:27:52 PM EST, Leland L. Bahr <w5drc@...> wrote:
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
|
|
|
Charlie McEwen was a friend of mine and we got our Novice licenses about the same time, and rode the bus to Cleveland together to take our General exam. Years later we played HS football together, me offensive end, him offensive tackle. We used Morse code to call cross blocks off and on during our games. It worked well until this huge brute beat the stuffing out of both of us no matter how hard we tried. After the game, he introduced himself...another ham who could understand Morse code.
Jack, W8TEE
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018, 9:13:48 PM EST, Ronald Taylor <wa7gil@...> wrote:
Great topic. I am a volunteer operator at W7ASC, the Amateur radio station at the Arizona Science Center. We have all kinds of equipment and computers to wow the kids with when they visit but by far the thing they take the most interest in every time is the Morse Code. We teach them to send their own name in CW. They take home a copy of the code and a message to decode when they get home. Doesn’t sound like much but I’ve seen the spark in their eyes and many times they end up being the ones asking for information on how to become a ham.
One young man I’ve been Elmering since he was about 12 decided to learn CW before getting his license even though it wasn’t required. He’s never had a voice QSO yet since getting his license. He doesn’t own a VHF handheld radio and has never used a repeater. He’s in college now and studying Engineering and computer science and has had no desire to get on FT8.
My brothers both re-learned Morse Code and we get together and use CW for Field day now and we do it with QRP and battery power. My brothers learned CW at 5 WPM to get their extra class licenses but never used it until a few years ago and then building QCX radios and then seeing how well CW gets through with low power. Their QRP sideband efforts fell short and they saw the benefit and efficiency of what some people call an antique mode of communication.
I think CW is here to stay and I applaud Hans for the part he is playing to re-spark that interest in a lot of folks.
Ron
Never did learn Morse from tapes, but I did end up memorizing the tapes ;/ In October 2017 after I got my license, decided it was time to learn. lesson CW course with MorseRunner, CWA Level 1 (Thank you Dennis K2SX), to get to copying comfortably at 13wpm.
In a couple of weeks, I start CWA level 2 (Thank you John AJ1DM). Looking forward to getting more comfortable and faster.
73 Jonathan kc3kbe
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:52 PM James Daldry W4JED < jim@...> wrote:
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
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
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
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!
|
|
|
Mine outputs around 300mW on 30m from 5 volts. Into a vertical it routinely reaches 15000 km. Not enough Earth to need more power on 30m.
Good question on 40m operation. I would try it casually. Most HF rigs share 2 bands with a LPF.
On lower bands a friend of mine is getting nice output with 3 bs170, but by 30m there is oittle difference likely limited by drive from the PLL.
Curt
|
|
|
Ronald Taylor
Great topic. I am a volunteer operator at W7ASC, the Amateur radio station at the Arizona Science Center. We have all kinds of equipment and computers to wow the kids with when they visit but by far the thing they take the most interest in every time is the Morse Code. We teach them to send their own name in CW. They take home a copy of the code and a message to decode when they get home. Doesn’t sound like much but I’ve seen the spark in their eyes and many times they end up being the ones asking for information on how to become a ham.
One young man I’ve been Elmering since he was about 12 decided to learn CW before getting his license even though it wasn’t required. He’s never had a voice QSO yet since getting his license. He doesn’t own a VHF handheld radio and has never used a repeater. He’s in college now and studying Engineering and computer science and has had no desire to get on FT8.
My brothers both re-learned Morse Code and we get together and use CW for Field day now and we do it with QRP and battery power. My brothers learned CW at 5 WPM to get their extra class licenses but never used it until a few years ago and then building QCX radios and then seeing how well CW gets through with low power. Their QRP sideband efforts fell short and they saw the benefit and efficiency of what some people call an antique mode of communication.
I think CW is here to stay and I applaud Hans for the part he is playing to re-spark that interest in a lot of folks.
Ron
Never did learn Morse from tapes, but I did end up memorizing the tapes ;/ In October 2017 after I got my license, decided it was time to learn. lesson CW course with MorseRunner, CWA Level 1 (Thank you Dennis K2SX), to get to copying comfortably at 13wpm.
In a couple of weeks, I start CWA level 2 (Thank you John AJ1DM). Looking forward to getting more comfortable and faster.
73 Jonathan kc3kbe
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:52 PM James Daldry W4JED < jim@...> wrote:
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
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
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
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: 13.8v to 5v Voltage Converter
Well guys I found part of my problem. When I knew that I had to remove C5 I put two headers in there and soldered C5 to. That way if I ever had to retune the output of the U3S I could resolved C5 to the headers temporarily. Much to my surprise when I was looking for an issue I pulled out the filter board and saw that when I removed C5 I had bridged some solder across the header.
So so I removed the solder bridge and put everything back together. The device powers up fine now no matter what is connected to. I no longer have 5v on the antenna connector. When I connect everything up to my Bird 43 and the dummy load I can see about 300mW if I turn the pot up all the way on the amp but I do not get 5 watts out. The amp is getting power and drawing .18 amps idle and .95 amps with the tune button pressed on the U3S. The heatsink is slightly warm but not hot. It acts like the signal is passing though the amp but not being amplified. When C5 terminals on the U3S were shorted I was getting 5 watts out of the amp.
Not it sure what I should be checking now. I have a DVM but no scope or signal generator?
|
|
|
Re: 13.8v to 5v Voltage Converter
Hi Ken, for some reason I have 5vdc on the antenna connection. Now sure why? Any ideas?
if I take my Fluke meter and go between the - terminal of the 5v input on the U3S and the antenna ground connection I read a short. Likewise if I measure between the + terminal of the U3S 5v input and the + antenna connection I read a short.
This is is my 4th U3S that I’ve built. While the first was a 6 band U3S the other two were clock kits, all of which have worked properly. So I doubt it’s the power supply but why I’m getting voltage out there, I have no idea.
|
|
|
Allen. It is a 4. Somehow in trouble shooting the receiver I
have changed the frequency reading to another band. The instructions say that
after turn on and seeing the display then select the band for calibration.
I am unable to return the band selection to 40. Any advice? Regards
Glen n8we
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
From: Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2018 8:29 PM
To: QRPLabs@groups.io
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX 40
Hi Glen
On 16/12/2018 00:44, Glen Sr wrote:
I have a built unit that is transmitting 4 watts with 12 volts. I
have no receive. There is place for C54 above C22. I have three other QCX and
none have a place for C54. Is this possibly a mistake in manufacture?
(make sure you
use the correct assembly manual that corresponds to the PCB version, if it's a
recent kit it should be Ver4??)
Bottom of page 7 of the current assembly manual
parts list says C54 is not used, also as part of continuous improvement C21/2
have also changed construction type & value @ step 3.16
see also write up in section 5.8 of the
manual
Is there a number on the board for reference?
PCB Version No# located bottom RHS by mounting
pillar hole.
regards Alan
|
|
|
Re: Waiting for the QSX?
#qsx
Better yet, buy Hans' QSX PA (which is available now). Then buy the QSX kit later without it (Hans promised this option for buying). Without even looking I can tell you it is a virtual certainty that Hans' design is far superior (albeit lower power).
|
|
|
Jonathan Bresler <jonathan.m.bresler@...>
Never did learn Morse from tapes, but I did end up memorizing the tapes ;/ In October 2017 after I got my license, decided it was time to learn. lesson CW course with MorseRunner, CWA Level 1 (Thank you Dennis K2SX), to get to copying comfortably at 13wpm.
In a couple of weeks, I start CWA level 2 (Thank you John AJ1DM). Looking forward to getting more comfortable and faster.
73 Jonathan kc3kbe
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:52 PM James Daldry W4JED < jim@...> wrote:
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
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
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
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: QRP Labs VFO/ Signal Generator
|
|
|
QRP Labs VFO/ Signal Generator
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
|
|
|
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
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
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
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
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
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!
|
|
|
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
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
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 -----
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!
|
|
|
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)
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
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:
|
|
|
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"
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- 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
|
|
|
Is this 40 meters? If so, I would love to see one after the entire US is dark.
Michael N6MST
|
|
|
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"
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- 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
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
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
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!
|
|
|
Typo: Instead of "492, ...518, and ...497", I meant "492, ...497, and ...518". Oops. -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
|
|
|
