Date   

Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

 

If I'm understanding correctly what's going on for you...

As I use the same QLG for two QCX rigs, I leave the power connected to one of them, and move only the signals from the one to the other (using a split ribbon cable). it maybe that removing the power causes a diode pull-down or something that trgiggers a reset. I'll try removing only the power from the actively connected unit when I'm up in my shed where the rigs are, tomorrow.

Julian N4JO

On 7/28/2020 10:19 PM, Tony McUmber wrote:
This seems like a good an helpful suggestion.  No, I have not left it on for an extended period, not realizing that this could make a difference.  I will give it a try.  Thanks!

Now if someone can help me understand why my clock resets to 00:00 when I unplug the QLG1 power plug from the PTT jack...

73, Tony N0BPA


Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Tony McUmber
 

This seems like a good an helpful suggestion.  No, I have not left it on for an extended period, not realizing that this could make a difference.  I will give it a try.  Thanks!

Now if someone can help me understand why my clock resets to 00:00 when I unplug the QLG1 power plug from the PTT jack...

73, Tony N0BPA


Re: Question for the group

@CurtisM
 

Vern

first reaction is that the QCX already possesses nice CW filtering - and it is narrow enough that most of the utility of that programmable filter isn't useful.  okay if you have up to 10 competing signals in your 200 or 300 Hz bandwidth - well in that case I suggest QSY!  I do confess this op tends to keep the bandwidth constant in his 2 all-band HF rigs, rarely changing even though both are adjustable.  the narrow filtering of the QCX means that there won't often be more than one signal to display on that little spectrum display - yes reminds me of those little extra dials on my wristwatch I really cannot see anymore - I forget what they are for (-: 

73 curt wb8yyy


Re: Small Circuit Board in mail.

Ron W3ZV
 

That’s it. Thanks

On July 28, 2020 at 18:23:02, N3MNT (bob@...) wrote:

TCXO Board?

--
Ron W3ZV


Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Gregg Myers
 

Hi Tony,

I saw your post and was curious about my QLG1 time compared to a WWVB corrected clock I have. When I first started up the QLG1, I saw a 2-3 second discrepancy between the two but after a few minutes (maybe 5 min), the two times were suddenly in lock step. Did you try leaving the GPS powered up for some time? Also, I don't know if you tried moving the GPS unit where it had an unobstructed view of the sky just to maximize the number of satellites received as a test?

73,
Gregg



On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 3:27 PM Tony McUmber <tmcumber@...> wrote:
I have been using WSPR with good success for the past couple of years with my original QCX.  Always have used NIST website for time -- they claim that the time tick is corrected for network delays.  I have no had a problem with the time when doing this.  My old QCX drifts away from the set time after a while, and if off by 2 seconds or more my observed hits diminish to none.

With the new QCX+ I use the same time setting routine and have good luck with it, plus the new rig holds the time better. The problem is this:  when I use the QLG1 to set the time clock on the rig, the result displayed is always about 3 seconds late compared to the NIST reference I have always used with good results.  The three second delay keeps me from getting good results on WSPR.  When I then correct the time manually, I get the usual good results, and the rig holds the time accurately for longer.  The NIST time is not the problem, the QLG1 time seems to be the problem in that it does not match the NIST Standard UTC tick.  I may have made an error in assembly, but I do not see one.  Also, when I unplug the QLG1 power plug from the QCX, this action causes the displayed time to reset to 00:00.

I am unable to access WWV signals because I do not have the equipment to do so, but getting accurate time is not my problem.

Thanks for the feedback.

73 N0BPA


Small Circuit Board in mail.

Ron W3ZV
 

I just got mail from the QRPLabs facility in Missouri. It contained a half inch square CB with no information or instruction. I have recently taken delivery of QCX+ and TXCO kits. Anyone have an idea of what it is?

Ron
W3ZV


--
Ron W3ZV


Re: QCX/QCX+ QSO AFTER-Party?

geoff M0ORE
 

Not certain what this interference has to do with the suggested party but XP and Win7 are not what I would call old. I use a reliable Dell laptop running Win 98 for digi modes and upgrades to my main station rig.

On 27/07/2020 20:21, George Korper wrote:
Catch 22. 

Why I never wanted a Flex. 

You must have a laptop. 

An old one with XP or Windows 7.





Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Tony McUmber
 

I have been using WSPR with good success for the past couple of years with my original QCX.  Always have used NIST website for time -- they claim that the time tick is corrected for network delays.  I have no had a problem with the time when doing this.  My old QCX drifts away from the set time after a while, and if off by 2 seconds or more my observed hits diminish to none.

With the new QCX+ I use the same time setting routine and have good luck with it, plus the new rig holds the time better. The problem is this:  when I use the QLG1 to set the time clock on the rig, the result displayed is always about 3 seconds late compared to the NIST reference I have always used with good results.  The three second delay keeps me from getting good results on WSPR.  When I then correct the time manually, I get the usual good results, and the rig holds the time accurately for longer.  The NIST time is not the problem, the QLG1 time seems to be the problem in that it does not match the NIST Standard UTC tick.  I may have made an error in assembly, but I do not see one.  Also, when I unplug the QLG1 power plug from the QCX, this action causes the displayed time to reset to 00:00.

I am unable to access WWV signals because I do not have the equipment to do so, but getting accurate time is not my problem.

Thanks for the feedback.

73 N0BPA


Re: Help needed to update QCX firmware #firmware #qcx

Snowist
 

I have a guide for Mac users but windows users can use the same avrdude directives described here. But you will need USBAsp device. It is cheap

http://www.ta1lsx.com/qcx-5w-cw-transceiver-kit-firmware-upgrade-guide/


Re: FS QCX 40M.

N3MNT
 

Item sold.


APRS-W not uploading

David Voit
 

I have compiled the code for the APRS-W transmitter but the upload fails.  The error message is for this failure.  Any suggestions?
Arduino: 1.8.13 (Windows 8.1), Board: "ATmega1284, Yes (UART0), Standard pinout, 1284P, BOD 2.7V, LTO disabled, External 8 MHz"
 
Sketch uses 52648 bytes (40%) of program storage space. Maximum is 130048 bytes.
 
Global variables use 3845 bytes (23%) of dynamic memory, leaving 12539 bytes for local variables. Maximum is 16384 bytes.
 
avrdude: stk500_recv(): programmer is not responding
 
avrdude: stk500_getsync() attempt 1 of 10: not in sync: resp=0x2d
 
This error message is repeated 10 times and I do not know what to do next.

David Voit
WB6TOU


Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Arv Evans
 

Tony N)BPA

In the past there have been comments regarding polarity of the GPS tick affecting 
clock setting.  Nor sure if that is at work here?

If relying on NIST via a PC using NTP...there could be some errors there in how it 
tracks time on your particular OS and computer hardware.  WWV or WWVB time 
references are probably the most accurate after GPS, but rumor has it that WWV 
transmissions may be discontinued soon.

It might be possible to extract accurate time references from DGPS (Differential GPS) 
which transmits offset strings to make GPS more accurate.  DGPS correction factor 
information are transmitted on various LF transmitters in specific geographic areas.


Arv  K7HKL
_._


On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 11:32 AM Tony McUmber <tmcumber@...> wrote:
As noted, I see that the time set by the QLG is about 3-4 seconds late compared to NIST UCT.  This is enough to cause the WSPR monitors to ignore it.  The clock resets whenever I unplug the power line for the QLG from the QCX, not only when I shut off the main power switch.  I puzzlement.

Thanks for the input!

Tony N)BPA


Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Tony McUmber
 

As noted, I see that the time set by the QLG is about 3-4 seconds late compared to NIST UCT.  This is enough to cause the WSPR monitors to ignore it.  The clock resets whenever I unplug the power line for the QLG from the QCX, not only when I shut off the main power switch.  I puzzlement.

Thanks for the input!

Tony N)BPA


FS QCX 40M.

N3MNT
 

I am selling my QCX 40M.  Firmware up to date 1.05 and 4.5W out @ 13.8V
$60  shipped to CONUS QRZ address. Please reply off list.


Re: QCX+40 WSPR not working

Dennis Rieger
 

Tony,
My QCX+ paired with a QLG1 matches my QRP-LABS GPS clock and my internet clock within a second. I am using the same method you are using. I am getting power from the PTT port and am feeding the QLG1 information in on the paddle port. I can unplug the QLG1 and the time does not rest to 00:00 but if you turn the QCX off it will not retain the time and will reset to 00:00. I don't think a 3-second difference will prevent you from successfully using WSPR. Right now I have the QLG1 disconnected and the time has drifted about 1 second in the last 8 hours. It is still working and I am still seeing many hits on http://wspr.aprsinfo.com/.Try it, even with the 3-second offset and see what happens. Once you get the time set with the QLG1 try just unplugging it without turning the QCX off and see if the time still reads correctly.

73
Dennis KK5DB


Re: QCX Challenge Non-QCX Radio Power Rule Question

N3MNT
 

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 09:10 AM, mrutkaus wrote:
Is there an 80m QCX Challenge?

Where are the QCX Challenges announced?

Mike
K4QET

 The QCX challenge is the last Monday of the month at 1300, 1900, 0300 ( next day) on any band you choose although most people choose a band appropriate for the conditions/time.  The exchange is your rcvd RST, Name, QTH, and Rig.  Results are reported on 3830scores.com


Re: QCX Challenge Non-QCX Radio Power Rule Question

jjpurdum
 

Steve:

I agree. What really frosts my butt is when someone stands up in a crowd and brags that they have a CW WAS award, but they don't know one letter of Morse. I think CW awards on digital modes should have an asterisk beside them, or just call it Digital WAS. I'm likely a crowd of 1 on this, but I'm doing all I can to get people to learn and use CW. So far, I've not done a good job of selling the enjoyment that is derived from CW. Every time I offer to teach a course, I always seem to pick the very time they are re-arranging their sock drawer. Any ideas welcomed.

Jack, W8TEE

On Tuesday, July 28, 2020, 6:48:03 AM EDT, Steven Dick <sbdick@...> wrote:


To add to the conversation, there is also QRPP, running 1 watt or less. You end your calls with "72" instead of "73".  That's a real challenge depending on patience and good band conditions.  On a different note with regard to QRP, It's also a somewhat unfair comparison when looking at two vastly different stations as far as antennas go,  when one has a dipole antenna the other has an antenna farm with multiple high performance tower-mounted high performance beams.  It's also somewhat unfair to compare CW to digital modes like FT8 where you have a tremendous processing advantage for weak signal operation.  It can easily get out of hand with some high end stations bragging how well they can do with QRP power.

https://www.qsl.net/qrpp/index.html

-Steve K1RF

------ Original Message ------
From: "Will, AI4VE" <ai4ve@...>
Sent: 7/27/2020 11:00:24 PM
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX Challenge Non-QCX Radio Power Rule Question

There is no definitive answer to the question, “What is QRP?”  
 
The ARRL says, “The QRP Q signal was created to mean "Shall I reduce power?" but has since been adopted by the enthusiasts of low-power operation as their banner. QRP has come to mean 5 W or less output for CW, or 10 W PEP output or less for SSB. Most amateur organizations and contests embrace these as the official QRP limits.” But the ARRL also requires 5W or less for their QRP DXCC award, “To apply for the QRP DXCC, just send a list of your contacts .... The list must also carry a signed statement from you that all of the contacts were made with 5 W RF output (as measured at the antenna system input) or less.”
 
QRP ARCI says, “QRP operation for QRP ARCI purposes is defined as operation with a transmitter power output equal to or less than 10 W PEP output for single-sideband or double-sideband phone (suppressed or full-carrier) and equal to or less than 5 W PEP output for other modes (e.g. CW, FM, AM, digital). QRP ARCI awards and contests are based on these output levels.”
 
Follow the guidance provided by the sponsor of whatever event you choose to participate in and when you operate independently, who cares what power you choose (within FCC limits?)
 
Will Ravenel, AI4VE

Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: Ultimate3S additional power transistors Help!!!!!!!

Phil Crockford
 

I have decided to add a heat sink to the single transistor @10M to dissipate any heat and apply 9 volts to the PA.
It works fine, I have 300mw @ 9v and any heat is dissipated because there seems to me no temperature rise in the heat sink.

It was just that 150mw Max.@ 10M from the one transistor @5V was to low and raising the voltage on the PA cause more heat than was health for me. All I wanted to do was to have a reasonable amount of RF with low heat generation from the PA stage and that is probably the case in lower HF bands.
So for the sake of a little metal bashing and some heat sink compound. I am now happy with the Power output of 300mw.
I am building a 5watt PA for the VHF and UHF Bands.
Many thanks for all the input you have all given me.
I hope this conversation will help someone else.
73 G8IOA.


Re: QCX Challenge Non-QCX Radio Power Rule Question

mrutkaus
 

Is there an 80m QCX Challenge?

Where are the QCX Challenges announced?

Mike
K4QET


Re: QCX Challenge tomorrow

G4GIR
 

Hi Hans
 
You were a reasonable signal on 20m QSB 529 -  579.
Called you  a few times but don’t think you heard me.
 
CU in the next round.
 
73
Ian G4GIR
 

From: Hans Summers
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2020 9:11 PM
To: QRPLabs@groups.io
Subject: Re: [QRPLabs] QCX Challenge tomorrow
 
Hi
 
Better luck this time! Antenna repaired. Computer switched off. Kids in bed. XYL asigned to new lab tech duty. QRP Labs HQ door locked shut.
 
I worked half an hour on 20m:
 
RK3AF
DL7JO
 
Then half an hour on 40m:
 
YU70HFG
YU2CW
OK2BMA Pavel (QCX)
OK2BQN Zdenek (QCX)
 
Whether or not I am conscious at 0300Z (6am local) will depend on how many interruptions I get during the next 7 hours :-/
 
73 Hans G0UPL
 
 
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020, 18:35 HB9FIH <erich.rieder@...> wrote:

Btw

Rules changed ???

QSO: QCX-QCX = 3 Points / QCX-otherRIG = 1

Still same ?
--
---
73 de Erich

HB9FIH

HS0ZLS

11161 - 11180 of 60995