--- NJ0IP <Rick@DJ0IP.de> wrote:
> I do NOT agree and don't want a radio full of buses and
> plug-ins... at least
> not for my main contest or dx rig. (On the side, I'll take
> one of those
> radios with PCI too, but make it PCI-x - 64-bit).
I didn't want to confuse anybody with the subtitles of the
PCI specification so I stuck with using the generic PCI
terminology.
> Ten-Tec has multiple product lines and it is great if users
> want and Ten-Tec
> builds such an open I/O rig, but I think "this" thread
> originally started
> out saying "give us a best of breed, simple radio that has
> a single receiver
> matching the Orion's performance". Let's please not change
> that. If you
> want another radio, ask for it, but please don't screw up
> our request for a
> "KISS" radio. A slightly more modern Omni VI will do just
> fine (for ours).
> Thanks.
You might be technically correct but in this case you are so
WRONG ;) - there are many who *do* want to see a radio from
Ten Tec with an exceptionally well *perfoming* spectrum
display. What do you think is one of the key reasons that so
many choose the IC-756Pro's over the Orion? It surely isn't
for the raw RX performance of the Pro's because the Orion is
unquestionably better. There are many that will tell you that
they would *not* buy another radio *without* a spectrum
display. And frankly the Icom spectrum displays are not that
impressive, it could be done *much* better on a PC.
If I were to design a KISS best of breed radio to better the
Omni VI/Orion I'd make it even simpler and less expensive to
build than the Omni VI. The Omni VI is an *expensive* design
to build. Never mind that many of the components are probably
no longer available. For example why use a synthesizer mixed
with crystals for the 1st LO? Why not just use the UHF
divided down DDS/PLL of the Orion instead? It has equal or
better phase noise performance than the Omni VI. And it
avoids that pesky problem with crystals being slightly off
frequency that some complain so much about. Better yet have
two such low phase noise LO's, one dedicated for RX and one
for TX, that would solve that other pesky problem
(microchirp) that yet others complain about. Since the LO's
would be "on frequency" for both RX and TX at all times there
would be no need to worry about synthesizer "settle time". As
an added benefit 100+ WPM CW operation should be *easily*
achievable.
> Another brief description of what I'm looking for is a
> Ten-Tec alternative
> to the K2 when contemplating which rig to take on a
> portable contest- or DX-
> pedition. It should have great basic functionality, be
> larger than the K2
> for better ergonomics, yet small enough to fit in a
> (carry-on) travel bag,and for a reasonable price.
How about a modern update of the Atlas 210X/215X series
design (ala Swan). Make it a single conversion radio like the
venerable 210/215 with just a plain and highly stable VFO
(digitally stabilized), no memories, and no synthesizer. You
would just use the "memory" that's between the ears. Use
rotary band switches, or perhaps latching relays for LP *and*
band pass filtering (K2-like)? Or maybe a manually tunable
and sharp preselector instead of band pass RX filters? That
would be very much a KISS design and I'll bet it could be
made to perform *very* well and sell for *much* less than
$1000. For low-budget SO2R buy two of them, and still have
$10K less into your station than a single FTDX-9000MP would
cost ya.
So yes I too can think of key design features for a "best of
breed" but simple radio. Heck I'd even be interested in
buying them. But for most of the things that I really want to
be doing such simple design radios just won't get the job
done.
Duane
N9DG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|