Date   

Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Gerald Ball
 

Hi Hans
Not too sure how this topic started and don't understand how this is being added to firmware. In what form will it manifest itself. Or am I missing something simple?

Gerry G4OJF


QCX Mini - CAT??

Brian George
 

Apologies if I have missed the answer to this question but will the QCX Mini have a CAT socket?

Many thanks...

73
Brian
G3ZOH


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Hans Summers
 

Yeahbut... the question is, if the QCX/QCX+ decodes it... what should be shown on the display? VA or SK? 


On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 2:12 PM Roger Hill <rhill@...> wrote:

You can't: they are identical.

It's in YOUR head!

Roger

G3YTN

---
***************************
Roger Hill
***************************


On 2020-08-12 12:11, John Baines via groups.io wrote:

How can I tell if someone is sending SK or VA ?
 
If I can't tell the difference, does it matter which is used?
 
(sorry,I'm in an awkward mood)
 
72/73
John
M0JBA

On 12 Aug 2020, at 12:06, Evan Hand <elhandjr@...> wrote:

Thank you, Gerry.  That quenches my curiosity.

73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Gerald Ball
 

Hi Evan

Thanks for your vote of confidence. Having said what I said, after my training I went into industry and did not serve in the merchant navy. So perhaps it was something we where taught but was not necessarily defined as that by most serving sparks. Perhaps anyone who may have served as a sparks could confirm or blow a hole in my recollections. 


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Roger Hill
 

You can't: they are identical.

It's in YOUR head!

Roger

G3YTN

---
***************************
Roger Hill
***************************


On 2020-08-12 12:11, John Baines via groups.io wrote:

How can I tell if someone is sending SK or VA ?
 
If I can't tell the difference, does it matter which is used?
 
(sorry,I'm in an awkward mood)
 
72/73
John
M0JBA

On 12 Aug 2020, at 12:06, Evan Hand <elhandjr@...> wrote:

Thank you, Gerry.  That quenches my curiosity.

73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

John Baines
 

How can I tell if someone is sending SK or VA ?

If I can’t tell the difference, does it matter which is used?

(sorry,I’m in an awkward mood)

72/73
John
M0JBA

On 12 Aug 2020, at 12:06, Evan Hand <elhandjr@...> wrote:

Thank you, Gerry.  That quenches my curiosity.

73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Evan Hand
 

Thank you, Gerry.  That quenches my curiosity.

73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Roger Hill
 

Try Wikipedia.

Search for SK, and it says VA is an alternative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosigns_for_Morse_code

73

Roger

G3YTN

---
***************************
Roger Hill
***************************


On 2020-08-12 12:02, Evan Hand wrote:

I am curious as to where the VA as the proword "end of contact" is defined.  I have done a search on the internet and cannot find the reference.

Again, this is just curiosity, not meant to be negative in any way.
73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Evan Hand
 

I am curious as to where the VA as the proword "end of contact" is defined.  I have done a search on the internet and cannot find the reference.

Again, this is just curiosity, not meant to be negative in any way.
73
Evan
AC9TU


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Gerald Ball
 

Hi

As I remember from 52 yrs ago during my training as a merchant navy sparks, the correct way to end a transmission was to send AR VA. I think both sets of characters where shown with a bar above AR and a bar above VA which I think indicated that they where slurred together ie  DitDAHDITDAHDIT  DITDITDITDAHDITDAH And of course in the case of the latter it can be read as VA or SK. 

Gerry G4OJF


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Lup Schlueter
 

...and SK is the correct Abreviation. In no way VA, even in empire publications i can
not find this interpretation. Checked ARRL Handbook back up to 1932, always SK. 
Where VA is ever published?
73 de DJ7SW, cw for ever since 1958.



On 12.08.2020 09:37, Trystan G0KAY wrote:
Hans,

When I did my morse test,  it was "VA".

I think of dead people when I see "SK".

Trystan


Re: QCX mini: RF output BNC or SMA #poll-notice

The Crunchbird
 

BNC for me. N2SN 


Re: QCX+ German manual translation

Michael.2E0IHW
 

Eine fast monumentale Aufgabe - alle Achtung und verbindlichen Dank, Bernhard!

Michael UK

On Mi..12.August 08:51, Hans Summers wrote:
Hi all

Many thanks to Bernhard DK5FN who has made a German translation of the QCX+ manual, please see http://qrp-labs.com/qcxp 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com



QCX+ German manual translation

Hans Summers
 

Hi all

Many thanks to Bernhard DK5FN who has made a German translation of the QCX+ manual, please see http://qrp-labs.com/qcxp 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Mike
 

That is understandabl as SK, as in silent Key, derives from the SK as in end
of transmission.
You are just of a morbid mind Trystan <vbg>

On 12 Aug 2020 at 0:37, Trystan G0KAY wrote:

Hans,

When I did my morse test,  it was "VA".

I think of dead people when I see "SK".

Trystan




Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Trystan G0KAY
 

Hans,

When I did my morse test,  it was "VA".

I think of dead people when I see "SK".

Trystan


Re: Change request, add morse characters #firmware #qcx

Hans Summers
 

Hi Dick

Thanks, this was requested and is already on the list. 

One question I have - do some people say VA and some SK or is it always the same? Is one usage more common than the other? I always thought of it as VA.

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 10:39 PM Dick PA3CW <dick.hissink@...> wrote:
Great little rig the QCX +, very impressed.  A request for a small addition in next firmware:  Please add the morse character + (AR, di dah di dah dit) and VA (di di di dah di dah), i always use them in my messages, and unable to do so yet in QCX.  Small request :)
Thanks!
Dick PA3CW


Re: QCX mini: RF output BNC or SMA #poll-notice

Hans Summers
 

Yes, I can include the pads for SMA too..

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 7:17 PM <namerati@...> wrote:
I hope the suggestion for including SMA connector pads on the PCB will
still stand, even if SMA is not the "official" connector. (As noted
previously, the SMA connector pad layout also permits the more-reliable
MCX and probably other small-format RF connectors as well)

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 03:14:05PM +0300, Hans Summers wrote:
>Hi all
>
>On the topic of BNC vs SMA preference for the QCX mini RF connector... I
>closed the poll since it had been open for a few days and I think everyone
>had a chance.
>
>Of the 5,136 members of this group, 118 votes were received (2.3% voter
>turnout).
>
>Results:
>
>BNC:  90 votes (76%)
>SMA:  28 votes (24%)
>
>So. There you go. Democracy. Two mainstream choices, neither of which may
>actually represent your views. Only a minority of voters actually bother to
>vote. Wow. We might almost be voting for the leadership of our country! Hi
>hi. Except that the result would be a lot closer and then we could spend
>the next 4 years arguing about it :-)
>
>73 Hans G0UPL
>http://qrp-labs.com
>
>On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 3:44 PM Hans Summers via groups.io <hans.summers=
>gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>> A new poll has been created:
>>
>> On the proposed QCX-mini, do you prefer a BNC connector like on QCX, or an
>> SMA connector?
>>
>> 1. BNC
>> 2. SMA
>>
>> Vote Now <https://groups.io/g/QRPLabs/vote?pollid=15715>
>>
>> Do not reply to this message to vote in the poll. You can vote in polls
>> only through the group's website.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>





Re: discrepancy in the build instructions for receiver kit.

Hans Summers
 

Hi Geoff

Yes it is confusing, I agree. This is quite an old kit and my skills have improved, hopefully  ;-)

The schematic is labelled in a sensible way, i.e. filter IN is shown connected to the RF input, and filter OUT is shown connected to the trifilar transformer T3 (and I have no idea, why there are no T1, T2, as you observed - but that is not an important thing). 

I cannot change the IN and OUT labels on the BPF silkscreen because this would create enormous confusion, since there are already 7,558 BPF kits out there. 

Note that the BPF is symmetric so it makes no real difference which direction the signal flows through. 

The PCB layout is slightly wrong, this is the real problem. The correct solution to this is to re-route two traces and not change anything else. That way the whole thing becomes correct. The circuit diagram, IN/OUT locations, etc. 

So I have just made a change to my local PCB copy, so that in future it will be like the attached diagram. But this will have to wait for the next manufacturing run, which is some way away, since I have just started using a new batch of 250. 

ANYWAY as you said, this does not affect in any way the function or performance of the module. It's a technicality which as you said, could cause confusion during fault finding, and should be fixed. But not of critical importance. 

73 Hans G0UPL
http://qrp-labs.com





On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 12:40 AM geoff M0ORE via groups.io <m0ore=tiscali.co.uk@groups.io> wrote:
The assembly of my U3S kit + receiver is progressing well. U3S is completed and working OK.
Assembly of the receiver board nearly done and ready for intregation with the U3S. After building the BPF board and inserting into the mother board, I checked the connections to their destinations.
Using the schematic on page 2 of the instructions (rev 2), I could not get continuity from pins 3 & 4 of the OUT socket to the primary of T3. ( what happened to T1 & T2?)
I then could not get continuity from pins 1 & 2 of the IN socket to the source of Q1.
Looking at the PCB layout on page 5, the blue traces show that the pins of socket adjacent to IC2 go to the transformer winding and alternative RF input. Other blue traces show the pins on the socket adjacent to R21 / C16 go to the source of Q1. Buzzing out the connections on the board confirm these findings.
In conclusion, the IN and OUT labels on the schematic should be reversed and the screen printing on the BPF board needs to be changed and the diagram on page 17 also needs to be amended.
Given the number of these kits which apparently have been built, I am surprised that this anomaly has not been spotted before. It does not prevent operation of the kit but could hamper any faulting. Sorry if these findings cause any distress. I am very satisfied with the kits and the very high standard of the documention.


Re: U3S - construction mistake with SiS5351a Rev 4 pins

Alan G4ZFQ
 

will the synth work with a U3S regardless of whether the Pin 12 is present or not?
Arnie,

Yes. I use that method to avoid inserting a synth the wrong way round.
Cut off pin 12, fill in the corresponding hole in the header.

73 Alan GZFQ

10301 - 10320 of 60910