TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

[TenTec] Orion QSK

To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: [TenTec] Orion QSK
From: Lee Crocker <w9oy@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Tommy

I think you miss the point.  My start with QSK radios
dates back to the Atlas 350xl, then to a Ten Tec Delta
then an FT-1000D, a Pegasus and now an Orion, and a
few home brew single banders in the mix.  I have built
6 amps, 2 using relay based QSK and 4 with pin diode
QSK, and worked out the timing circuits specifically
for each transceiver-amp combination, and made other
timing circuits to allow proper sequencing using the
NIR-10 NIR-12 and 599 timewave DSP.  This often
amounts to going inside the radio and analyzing what
is the correct signal to use to key on, and it often
is not the same signal as the manufacturer provides at
the open collector at jack on the back of the radio.  
 

This was as much out of an interest in playing with
this circuitry as it was actually using the rig to
operate.  In other words I was enjoying building the
rig and understanding the limitations of the rig, as
much as driving the rig.  I do not operate at 100wpm,
but I do listen (and have for years) to you all around
7033.  I can copy around 45 to 50 and can send
accurately around 35.  I have friends who can do 100
wpm and been in their shacks while operating those
speeds so I don't have the slightest doubt 100 wpm is
a totally do-able speed.  My old boss, a commercial CW
op says he can do 120 in bursts and I don't doubt his
word for a second.  

The issue is given the advent of software defined
radio, how important to the overall operation of the
system resources should be devoted to 100 0r 150 wpm
QSK?  I think this is a legitimate question.  Given
always limited computing resources, where does QSK
fall in the economy of the system design?

When I was in broadcasting, we had transmitters that
used tubes.  We later went to solid state
transmitters.  Why?  Over the years they are cheaper
and more reliable to operate.  There were trade offs
however in performance between the tube and the
transistor transmitters.  So this is a similar issue
we face in going to SDR's.  There will be performance
trade-offs between digital and analogue circuit
behavior, and often this comes up as "timing" issues. 
So what is reasonable as far as "QSK" behavior in the
land of SDR? This is the question I propose.  You are
on record I presume as judging this as an absolute
necessity.  And maybe there are 15 other excellent
hams on the east coast that share your analysis.  That
is one end of the spectrum, Your vote is noted.  Now
how about other of us non-excellent operators who are
not 7033 QRQ aficionados, but may be DX chasers or
weak signal fanatics, or God forbid contesters what
are your perceptions?  I believe this to be an
interesting and quite discussable question that does
not necessarily require a dogmatic response but is
amenable to a reasoned analysis.  As I preciously
stated I used to think QSK was an absolute, but after
some further analysis I'm not so sure that diminishing
returns are reached long before 100wpm.  Each timing
cycle devoted to achieving 100wpm is a cycle that
isn't devoted to some other function.

  73   W9OY


        
                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>