I have a similar mod for the Orion like the Omni VII mod that makes the
spare jack of the Orion be in parallel with the sub-reciever antenna
input. It would allow the Flex 5000 and Orion to work together.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
121 Little Bell Dr.
Hays, NC 28635
www.n4py.com
On 5/12/2011 8:14 PM, Floyd Sense wrote:
> Understood. That's the way I used Commander with the SDR-IQ and Mark V
> and the control was flawless. However, that's NOT the way things work
> with the Orion and Commander. Commander and N4PY exchange data using a
> file on disk (apparently known as the Pegasus interface) and when using
> that technique, Commander does NOT pass the data to and from the
> secondary CAT device. That was my experience and Dave verified that is
> the way Commander is supposed to work. But, in the case of the Orion I
> guess you could just cut the N4PY software out of the loop and connect
> both the Orion and Flex to Commander ports as primary and secondary CAT
> devices.
>
> Apparently, the Omni VII is a bit different in how the receive antenna
> is handled. In the Orion II, there's no receive out so no receive loop
> - only a receive antenna input. But, with the IF output fed to the
> Flex, that wouldn't be a problem. But then, how would one get the Flex
> to show the correct frequency given that it's looking at the IF output?
>
> Floyd
>
>
> On 5/12/2011 6:35 PM, CSM(r) Gary Huber wrote:
>> I'm using the Flex-1500 in the receive loop of a OMNI-VII and using DXLab's
>> Commander to control both radios in "Lead, Follow, Lead and Follow" so that
>> the OMNI-VII controls the Flex, the Flex controls the Omni, or Commander
>> controls both. In split the Flex always follows the on the Omni-VII transmit
>> frequency. Since the Flex-1500 is in the RX loop, it is protected when the
>> OMNI-VII is in transmit (I have optioned the FLEX-1500 as receive only to
>> protect the OMNI's RX from damage by the FLEX PA). And the 10 meter RX is
>> great.... I had lots of fun using both receivers during the ARRL 10M SSB
>> contest.
>>
>> At $650, the FLEX-1500 is about the cheapest panadapter one can buy. The mod
>> to the OMNI-VI (N4PY Sub-RX mod) takes less than 10 minutes, NO Solder, and
>> costs less than $5!
>>
>>
>> 73 es DX,
>>
>> Gary - AB9M
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Floyd Sense
>> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 1:52 PM
>> To: tentec@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] O3 wish list
>>
>> Haven't tried the Flex-1500, but have used an SDR-IQ that way with my
>> Yaesu FT-1000MP Mark V. Fed the SDR-IQ the same signal that went to the
>> Mk V receive antenna input using a hybrid splitter. The same approach
>> could be used with any transceiver with a receive antenna loop (output
>> and input). I ran into two problems: The SDR-IQ was relatively deaf on
>> 12 and 10 meters and weak signals that could be heard on the Mk V
>> couldn't be seen on the SDR-IQ. And - it was obviously necessary to
>> mute the SDR-IQ during transmit and there was apparently no way to
>> accomplish that (grounding antenna input wasn't adequate).
>>
>> What would be nice is a TenTec external spectrum scope similar to the
>> P3, that would sit on the PC to Orion serial port interface (as the P3
>> does with the K3) so the scope unit could send frequency setting
>> commands to the Orion. And, wouldn't it be nice if the very same scope
>> could be connected to the Eagle in the same fashion. A nice scope is
>> really a good addition to a 6M rig.
>>
>> 73, Floyd
>>
>> On 5/12/2011 1:02 PM, CSM(r) Gary Huber wrote:
>>> It may sound like heresy on this forum, but the use of an external SDR
>>> receiver like the Flex-1500 or any basic SDR running PowerSDR via the N4PY
>>> sub-RX mod provides the panadapter function without the IF port or tapping
>>> into the IF of older receivers. Or one MAY choose to receive the IF on the
>>> Eagle.
>>>
>>>
>>> 73 es DX,
>>>
>>> Gary - AB9M
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Barry N1EU
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 11:29 AM
>>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] O3 wish list
>>>
>>> Well said and totally agree Paul. Limited engineering resources can
>>> be put to much better use. If the rig mfr provides I.F. output,
>>> they've done their job.
>>>
>>> Barry N1EU
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Paul Christensen<w9ac@arrl.net> wrote:
>>>>> high speed display is missing the point entirely. The name of the game
>>>>> in panadaptors is RESOLUTION and the ability to twiddle sweep speed and
>>>>> AVERAGING parameters in such a way that best allows you to visually
>>>>> identify the weak signals you're looking for.
>>>> For the reason explained by Floyd, it seems to me that today, inclusion
>>>> of
>>>> a
>>>> panadapter into a transceiver is not a very good use of a company's
>>>> design
>>>> resources. The inclusion of a simple 8-9 MHz buffered IF port opens up a
>>>> whole new world to the operating experience that can never be completely
>>>> duplicated with internal band scopes. Of course, that assumes a
>>>> mid-frequency IF is available in the design that precludes such an option
>>>> with traditional up-conversion designs. Ten tec was smart to add an IF
>>>> port
>>>> to the Eagle. That one low-cost feature alone separates the Eagle from
>>>> the
>>>> Kenwood TS-590 by a long shot.
>>>>
>>>> In 2005, I purchased an Icom IC-7800. For the two years, my thought was
>>>> that any manufacturer who could not, or would not, include an internal
>>>> panadapter would soon face extinction. I held that view until something
>>>> quite abrupt occurred. I experimented with an SDR-IQ on the IF port of
>>>> an
>>>> Elecraft K3. After witnessing the panoramic detail, waterfall display
>>>> choices, secondary receivers (through SDR-IQ), there was no turning back.
>>>> Suddenly, I viewed internal panadapters as a millstone around the necks
>>>> of
>>>> manufacturers. None of the present manufacturers have the resources to
>>>> provide the pan ability and control utility provided by SDR-IQ,
>>>> SpectraVue,
>>>> LP-PAN, PowerSDR-IF, etc., nor should they. Look at the display
>>>> provided
>>>> by Yaesu with their FTdx-5000 product. Frankly, it's a panadpater in
>>>> name
>>>> only.
>>>>
>>>> Manufacturers only need to give us a high-quality IF port and a means for
>>>> rig control. The rest of the panadapter and control functions can be
>>>> better
>>>> managed by folks like Carl, N4PY, Moe, AE4JY, and Scott, WU2X. Despite
>>>> past
>>>> moans from Ten Tec users, I think that in the end, Ten Tec was right to
>>>> delay inclusion of an internal high-performance panadapter into the O2.
>>>> At
>>>> some point, perhaps Ten Tec may want to market an external panadapter
>>>> similar to the Elecraft P3, where that device could be used for more than
>>>> one Ten Tec transceiver. Even so, it's doubtful that the device could
>>>> approach the low cost and high performance provided by a small netbook PC
>>>> and SDR-IQ or Softrock receiver.
>>>>
>>>> Paul, W9AC
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|