[TenTec] "PTT CW" vs. PTT-controlled CW redux

["Ten-Tec Inc. Amateur Radio Sales" <sales@tentec.com>]

At 09:19 AM 2/27/04 -0600, you wrote:
K5SF wrote:

> I think the PTT is a similar issue.  I've heard of at least one contesting 
> club move whole heartedly into the Orion, I've heard others shy away for 
> lack of things important to them.  There is more than one web site for 
> contesting that has said a tactic for reducing fatigue is to switch to PTT 
> during low activity.  During High activity, the QSK is useful to catch the 
> caller that hits just as you start to call CQ.  So this is a little 
> different than ice cream, there are points about it both sides.  Does the 
> PTT disqualify a rig?  now that's an ice cream choice.

Richard, take this in the polite spirit intended:

This is what makes it hard to discuss these issues - because the way this 
is presented here
is NOT the PTT issue that was being debated.  You can defeat the QSK in the 
Orion,
as-is and operate "PTT CW", just as you have described above.  Switching 
back and
forth from PTT to QSK when PTT -control- of CW is in place, is not an 
option.  PTT
-control- is used when other devices need the proper sequencing for 
switching, and/or
the operator wants to precisely control the start and stop of MOX CW 
operation.

This is completely different from the issue of PTT -control- of CW transmit 
where it was
suggested that Ten-Tec had no clue about engineering decisions vis-a-vis 
the ham
community's needs and that I personally didn't know anything about the 
needs of the
"serious" CW contest operator.   Which led to me blowing up on the 
reflector about
the issue - I should have kept my comments about what I think about the station
engineering of other contest operators to myself.   "PTT or semi-break in 
CW" is
something I personally use fairly often in contests.   PTT -control- of CW, 
is not.

Squeaky wheel gets the grease, though.  I insisted that PTT -control- of CW 
was not
something we were going to consider with the Orion AND that the engineering 
decision
to do so was the correct one.   It was still the correct engineering 
decision - but we'll
look into adding MOX PTT control of CW transmit as a future firmware 
upgrade.
Someone above me here at Ten-Tec put it to me very succinctly about this 
issue in the
last few weeks:   It's not about right, in this case.  Meaning, even though 
it may not
be "right", why not go ahead and put it in there?

Good point.   I'll leave it at that.

73
Scott Robbins W4PA

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ten-Tec, Inc., 1185 Dolly Parton Pkwy, Sevierville, TN 37862 USA
  Contact Mon-Fri Eastern: Office/Tech (865) 453-7172 9 am-5 pm.
  Repair (865) 428-0364 8-4.  Sales (800) 833-7373 9 am-5:30 pm.
  Fax (865) 428-4483 24 hrs.  Visit us at <http://www.tentec.com>
  Email:  New product sales/product info         sales@tentec.com
             Service department                         service@tentec.com
  While we make every effort to answer email in an expedient manner,
  the telephone is a much more efficient tool for getting a quicker and
  more complete answer to your inquiries.  Thanks!
  

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec