Questions about Yaesu CAT interface with CT

zf8bs at zf8bs at
Sun Apr 10 19:16:50 EDT 1994

  I tried the resistor and it made absolutely no difference.  The hardware/
software system behaves exactly like it did before.  I'm becoming convinced
it's a generic problem with the rig.  N6TR told me he spent quite a bit of
time trying to get the FT990 to work with his logging program and never
could.  At least a dozen people sent me email and said they tried the Yaesu
interface, had the same problems I did, then gave up.  Unreal!  The only ray
of hope I've received so far is from N0AX, who says Yaesu has a special 
version of the ROM software that Yaesu can mount on the CPU control board--
at the factory, naturally--which avoids returning the whole 1492 bytes of 
info in response to each status query.  (The way I read the manual, a simple 
status query gets back the mode, frequency, RIT/XIT offsets, filter selections,
etc. for each of the 90 memory slots.  No wonder the logging software times 
out!)  I guess my next step is to call Yaesu support.  If that doesn't work,
maybe I should take my laptop and demo the whole thing at Visalia next week :-)

>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at  Mon Apr 11 02:48:56 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at (Peter G. Smith)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 18:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Questions about Yaesu CAT interface with CT
Message-ID: <Pine.3.85.9404101856.A5440-0100000 at netcom6>

For what it's worth, that's exactly the problem that they had with the 
FT-1000, and it was fixed with a new ROM that they inswtalled free opf 
charge.  so don't give upo -- call Chip Margelli!  

73, Pete
n4zr at
NOTE: New Address

>From Peter Hardie <hardie at>  Mon Apr 11 03:12:10 1994
From: Peter Hardie <hardie at> (Peter Hardie)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 20:12:10 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Questions about Yaesu CAT interface with CT
Message-ID: <Pine.3.88.9404101937.B16453-0100000 at>

On Sun, 10 Apr 1994 zf8bs at wrote:

>   I tried the resistor and it made absolutely no difference.
> [much deleted] ..... --which avoids returning the whole 1492 bytes of 
> info in response to each status query.  (The way I read the manual, a simple 
> status query gets back the mode, frequency, RIT/XIT offsets, filter 
> selections,
> etc. for each of the 90 memory slots.  No wonder the logging software times 
> out!)
>                                                   Bruce/AA6KX

This only confirms my opinion of the Yaesu, Kenwood and ICOM 
interfaces/protocols. By far the worst is Yaesu. They seem to have a 
different protocol for practically every rig and they're all inefficient, 
although Yaesu has outdone themselves if a simple status query on 
the FT-990 generates 1492 bytes. I don't know if they do it on all rigs 
but when I wrote a program to talk to the FT-767, I couldn't believe that 
the operator can't do anything with the rig while the computer has the 
CAT interface switched on when it is changing/reading frequency etc. 

Kenwood's protocol is better than YAESU and ICOM's is by far the best of 
the three.
Just my 2 cents worth (and of course it's *my* opinion - not the U. of S.)

ve5va.qrp at

>From Roland A. Anders ("Rol")" <AB88%CATCC.BITNET at VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU  Mon Apr 11 03:24:24 1994
From: Roland A. Anders ("Rol")" <AB88%CATCC.BITNET at VTBIT.CC.VT.EDU (Roland A. Anders ( Rol ))
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 22:24:24 EDT
Subject: Remembrances of KH6IJ
Message-ID: <10APR94.24199347.0055.MUSIC at CATCC>

Gosh--what sad news to hear of the passing of KH6IJ!  As others
have said, he set a great example for the ham community in many ways.
When I was first starting out in ham radio at Johns Hopkins Univ.
in 1959, my mentor, Dick, W3WZL (now AI3M) introduced me to KH6IJ's
technique as we tuned the SS and DX tests together as multiop at
W3GQF (now WA3EPT).  I would practice sending his call and ours exchange
off line at 60 wpm, then when I was ready I would call him!  I
couldn't copy 60 wpm then, but with all the practice listening to
him, I got the report!  I remember Dick working him in on a very heavy
QRN day (probably on 160--Dick's favorite band), and I
was barely copying anything.  Dick suddenly laughed and turned to me:
"Katashi says please QRQ hvy QRN"  Katashi could copy better at
high speed since the QRN was apparently hitting every letter at lower
speeds, but he could fill in at QRQ rates!  Katashi had a classic
article on contesting in QST back in the 60's--I wll have to dig it out.
In it he talked about "baiting the east coast"., that is, calling cq
several times without working anyone so that a big pile up of west coast
guys would attract the east coast, then he would work the east coast
through the resulting pile up!  The only thing with Katashi's advice,
you had to be pretty remarkably talented to make use of it sometimes!
We'll miss you Katashi.  As someone said: Vic W4KFC and Katashi
KH6IJ--two truly remarkable gentlemen!

>From k3lr <k3lr at>  Mon Apr 11 05:40:58 1994
From: k3lr <k3lr at> (k3lr)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 00:40:58 -0400
Subject: Heil Pro Set
Message-ID: <199404110440.AAA16102 at>

We used the Heil Pro Sets on 40 meters during the CQWW Phone.   
I listened to the audio on another radio in the shack and the
breathing noises really made the audio sound bad from the IC781.
Changing the mic to an old heil boom made the audio problem go away.

If you are strong and have bad audio, stations call and tell you.....
It is my opinion that if you have bad audio and you are weak, stations
pass you by....

I have a simple fix for the Pro Set mic audio problem.
If you cover the plastic mike holder with wind fabric, like you see
on the broadcast mics, the audio sounds great!
My first test used the fabric out of a Heil desk mic.
What a difference!
A rubber band holds the fabric in place, no problem.

Hope this helps.

See you at Dayton,

K3LR at

>From k3lr <k3lr at>  Mon Apr 11 05:45:42 1994
From: k3lr <k3lr at> (k3lr)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 00:45:42 -0400
Subject: Contest Dinner
Message-ID: <199404110445.AAA16189 at>

The deadline for getting your tickets to the 2nd Annual
CONTEST DINNER has been extended to April 23.

Key note speaker is Frank Donovan W3LPL
CQ Contest Hall of Fame Awards
Contester prizes and more.

Dinner will be held at 6:30 at the Stouffer Hotel in Downtown Dayton.

Saturday April 30.

Send $25.00 to reserve your spot.

Mail checks to   North Coast Contesters- Dayton Dinner
                 P.O. Box 59
                 New Bedford, PA 16140

Don't be left out this year!
Tim K3LR

K3LR at

>From Axel Karl <axelkarl at>  Mon Apr 11 09:44:26 1994
From: Axel Karl <axelkarl at> (Axel Karl)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 10:44:26 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <199404110844.AA13335 at>


>From Wirzenius Jari <HATJWI at>  Mon Apr 11 22:01:00 1994
From: Wirzenius Jari <HATJWI at> (Wirzenius Jari)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 14:01:00 PDT
Subject: SO&SOA
Message-ID: <2DA9BB23 at>

I think you don't know in Finland we have a system in our national 
TV-broadcast station in their text-TV which will show DX-spots from the 
local DX-cluster  and it is updated online. They broadcats their 
TV-transmissions throughout the country.

When I think about SO class in a contest, can I watch TV and read text-TV 
pages while taking part into a contest? I think you can't control in anyway 
 wathcing TV while attending contest.

Or you can use RX-cluster program and read the DX-spot off-line from your 
local DX-cluster. Nobody can control this either.

SOA will be the honest way, if you don't allow any additional help in 
contest for chasing multipliers in SO class. SOA gives you the passport to 
the local DX-cluster.

The only difference between SO and SOA is that in SOA you can send DX-spots 
to the cluster yourself and nobody will blame you cheating in contest. If 
you operated in SO class you can cheat easily, if you want or you may have 
to carry your TV-set to your local club station so that your friends want 
blame you wathing text-TV while attending contest in SO unassisted class.

To me SO class would be OK and you may, or may not, use whatever method you 
wish to follow DX-cluster. I will not and have never break any rules, but 
like most of you say, it does not make much difference in result, if you use 
packet or not, then why not allow to use packet?
I have not taken part in contest in past few years so I don't have 
compareable results which I could refer myself, but I feel I could improve 
my result only a litlle with the aid of packet cluster.

73's Jari
hatjwi at

>From Steven.M.London at (Steven M London +1 303 538 4763)  Mon Apr 11 15:38:00 1994
From: Steven.M.London at (Steven M London +1 303 538 4763) (Steven M London +1 303 538 4763)
Date: 11 Apr 94 14:38:00 GMT
Subject: Single-Op Assisted
Message-ID: <9404111437.AA26339 at>

K5ZD says ...

 >Now that we KNOW that packet is not that significant of an advantage, why
 >not combine the two single op categories back into one?

N2IC replies ...

I am not going to engage in an emotional debate, other than to say, I disagree
strongly with Randy.

After I did SOA in the 1990 CQWW CW, I tried to quantify the advantage, due
to the use of packet.  I compared my log against the packet cluster spotting
log.  There were only about 750 spots on the Denver-area network
for the whole weekend - about 1/3 of what you would see on an east coast network.

I made the following assumptions about the mults I worked:

1) If I worked a DX multi/multi, due to a packet spot, I discounted it,
   figuring that I would have worked it anyway, without the packet spot.

2) If I worked a new mult, thanks to a packet spot, but later worked that
   same mult, without a spot, I discounted it.

3) Finally, I figured that 50% of the mults I worked due to packet, I would
   have worked anyway, without packet.

With these assumptions, I found that my score was still increased by about
15%, due to the use of packet.  That sounds like a pretty significant
advantage to me !  I will admit that I was using only a single radio - a S/M
arrangement would have reduced the advantage due to packet.  On the other
hand, access to the east coast packet networks, now available part-time
on 10135 kHz, would have increased the advantage.

Steve, N2IC/0
#2, USA Single Op Assisted

>From n4hy at (Bob McGwier)  Mon Apr 11 16:31:31 1994
From: n4hy at (Bob McGwier) (Bob McGwier)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 11:31:31 EDT
Subject: Sadness
Message-ID: <9404111531.AA24479 at>

	Oft I sit in wonder,
	listening to 160 static and thunder,
	asking again for my eyes to stay alive
	again wondering why I do the world wide.
	Just as I begin to believe I will fold
	a singular fist comes out of a hole.
	Static and QRM yield a familiar sound.
	Eyes pop open and joy is found.
        There's the old man out in the middle of the sea.
        And again I will be given Hawaii.
	It just will never be as much fun
	without the omnipresent Nose san.
	My mind knows his was a life that was full
	but my heart aches for his fist in the lull.

	I listen, but only silence follows the silent key.

>From gswanson at (Glenn Swanson)  Sun Apr 10 16:25:36 1994
From: gswanson at (Glenn Swanson) (Glenn Swanson)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 11:25:36 edt
Subject: YAESU es CT..
Message-ID: <60 at gs>

Hi, Don't forget the issue raised in the QST review of the 990...
    NOV. 91 page 47: "Rough Edges" last 4 or 5 paragraphs are all
    about this YAESU problem.  In part: "..he (K1EA) found that it
    takes four seconds to read the radio's status via the interface-
    during which time most of the front-panel functions lock up-...".
    And: "...hopes of prompting YAESU to revise the FT-1000/FT-990
    control software to allow practical support by the authors of
    major contesting software...".  Thought YAESU had addressed this,
    are we talking about the same problem?  I imagine you'd have to
    check with YAESU to confirm which "LOT NUMBER" (part of the S.N.)
    they affected the change in, then compare to your lot number...
    Hope this helps.  P.S. The 990 (and 1000) reviews are also reprinted
    in the ARRL 'Radio Buyers Sourcebook' (Volume 2).  73, Glenn KB1GW

>From ken.silverman at atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman)  Mon Apr 11 19:04:56 1994
From: ken.silverman at atlas.ccmail.AirTouch.COM (ken silverman) (ken silverman)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 10:04:56 PST
Subject: IC736 P.S. ok 110/220v
Message-ID: <9403117660.AA766083896 at>

Just called Icom America to confirm the volatage on the power supply.  They say 
it is a 28v, internally strapable for 110 or 220v.   Makes more sense now.  
Sorry about the incorrect info. 

Ken WM2C

>From J.P. Kleinhaus" <kleinhaj at  Mon Apr 11 19:24:07 1994
From: J.P. Kleinhaus" <kleinhaj at (J.P. Kleinhaus)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 14:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Response to Rating Proposal
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9404111426.B19488-b200000 at mary>

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.


I posted Ward's message re:rating system to the local PacketCluster
and received this in reply! Feel free to make up your own minds about
this, but I am inclined to agree.

73, J.P. AA2DU

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name="RATING.CAP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64
Content-ID: <Pine.3.89.9404111407.A19782 at mary>


>From Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton at engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM  Mon Apr 11 21:44:00 1994
From: Skelton, Tom" <TSkelton at engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM (Skelton, Tom)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 13:44:00 PDT
Subject: Why others do Single Op Assisted
Message-ID: <2DA9BC59 at admin.ClemsonSC.NCR.COM>

I have been following this thread around, and have been
waiting for the OTHER answer.  Here goes another
alternative to the value of SOA as a separate category:

Very few contesters actually contest to win.  Many of
them contest for the purpose of increasing DX or
other award (WAZ, WAS, etc.) totals, which is made
easier and more FUN by the increased weekend
participation.  Those with packetcluster, or 2m FM
DX spotting repeaters (are there any left?), do so so
as not to miss a new band/mode country.  This is what
got me and countless others into contesting.  What
kept me was the thrill and desire to improve my

By offering a SOA category, we give the casual or
non-winning-goal contester a chance to participate
and whet their appetite for competition (I am NOT
NOT NOT making a demeaning statement about
SOA versus SO Unassisted.)  The experienced
operator also gets a "different" category in which
to compete.  To me, it is a win-win.  We enhance
our ranks and skills on different levels.
Quid pro quo -- keep it like it is!

By the way, I want to say thanks to the really top-
gun contesters who have shared a lot of info and
secrets on this reflector.  When I do return to a
greater level of contesting activity (even if it's just
to win from my state of category), I will have a lot
more tools!

73, Tom WB4iUX
Tom.Skelton at ClemsonSC.NCR.COM

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list