[3830] SARTG W0YK SOAB HP

[webform at b4h.net]

                    SARTG WW RTTY Contest

Call: W0YK
Operator(s): W0YK
Station: W0YK

Class: SOAB HP
QTH: CA
Operating Time (hrs): 18
Radios: SO2R

Summary:
 Band  QSOs  Pts   Mults
-------------------------
   80:   66   635    22
   40:  183  1980    45
   20:  311  3510    71
   15:   40   455    22
   10:    0     0     0
-------------------------
Total:  600  6580   160  Total Score = 1,052,800

Club: Northern California Contest Club

Comments:

This will likely be a check-log as I forgot to sign '/6'.  I realized this a
couple hours in but didn't change so I wouldn't mess up other people's logs.

Conditions met expectations ... poor.  Mainly I wanted to pound on the Elecraft
K3 as one of the radios.  I ran a bandwidth of 250Hz which allowed the 250Hz
roofing filter to play, making the DSP's job easier.  QRM from the second radio
was much less severe in the K3 compared to the ProIII with its 15KHz roofing
filter.  (I haven't yet installed the INRAD 4-5KHz roofing filter mod in the
ProIII I used in SARTG.)

Both radios ran cool, although the ProIII fan could be heard with the
headphones off.  The K3 fans are super quiet, and while running, they were
virtually inaudible.  The K3 Dual-Tone Filter puts a 50Hz DSP filter around
each tone and provides better filtering than the ProIII Twin Peak Filter. 
However, I have yet to find an example where the K3 outperforms the ProIII in
signal copy, except for its greater immunity to large, close-in signals.

I swapped radios between the two bands I was on throughout the contest to get a
comparison.  For comparing weak signal reception, I connected the RX Antenna Out
from the K3 to the RX Antenna jack on the ProIII.  Then, by switching the RX ANT
on and off in the K3, I could alternately view the same signal on each radio. 
They were very similar on weak signals fading below the noise floor.  It seemed
that the K3 was a bit better, but that is subjective.  The MMTTY waterfall is
narrower (each tone) with the K3 50Hz tone filters compared to the ProIII twin
peaking circuit.  Also the null between the tones is much deeper on the K3. 
Again, I couldn't find any substantial examples where one performed better than
the other, save for IMD dynamic range.  However, the robust configuration
capability of the K3 and its built-in RTTY features make interconnection far
simpler than the ProIII or other radios.

73,
Ed - W0YK


Posted using 3830 Score Submittal Forms at: http://www.hornucopia.com/3830score/