[CQ-Contest] Flex Radio Question
herbs at vitelcom.net
Tue May 6 11:16:33 EDT 2014
There is a remote station (NP2P) at my QTH which uses a DSL and mostly
fiber to the mainland hub. Afer experimenting with several ISP's using
Wi-Max connections and hops I found that all were unsuaitable for
serious contest operations. The latency was always all over the place
but the DSL provided by my telephone services gives me under 50ms and
provides 1.5 meg up and down every time and all the time. Just listen in
the CQ WPX and you will hear Yuri sending from NYC at 40wpm without a
drunken CW qualities that occur with the other ISP's. The remote
stations uses a Remote rig interface for a TS-2000 and a second SO2R
radio is a FT-450D from Remote rig box #2 and this hook up really works
Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
On 5/6/2014 6:34 AM, Rudy Bakalov via CQ-Contest wrote:
> There was a lengthy discussion on latency on the Yahoo! ANAN group. The latency was rather significant and unacceptable in contesting. It has been reduced, but it is still there. Point to consider.
> Rudy N2WQ
> Sent using a tiny keyboard. Please excuse brevity, typos, or inappropriate autocorrect.
>> On May 6, 2014, at 12:16 AM, Tod Olson <tod at k0to.us> wrote:
>> You may be correct ― I think the thing that I felt was coming through in
>> the email I received was the mechanics of logging entries and controlling
>> the radio. I am curious to know the call of the person in the Bay area to
>> whom you are referring - the one who chose to replace their K3.
>> You certainly are correct that successful use of any type of radio in a
>> contest requires thoughtful consideration of workflow to maximize your
>> personal effectiveness.
>> I have only briefly used a K3 at Ken Kopp's, [K0PP] in Anaconda, MT. It is
>> a nice radio with good ‘properties’ but I would expect it might take a
>> couple years for me to get everything working together well <radio,
>> switching, antennas and operator>. I would certainly expect the same if I
>> were to start using a Flex Radio.
>> Perhaps there is a difference in ‘ease of use’ that depends on logging
>> programs or maybe I just don’t understand all the details. I can imagine
>> that if one is running stations there might be one operating
>> characteristic and if one were doing ‘search and pounce’ there would be
>> another. I don’t have a feel for how quickly one can change frequencies or
>> swap radios or swap frequencies in SO2R etc. Somehow, correctly or
>> incorrectly, I would expect slight delays [command latency] between things
>> that I might not expect from the non-SDR equipment. Also, Stu, there were
>> only a few responses and only a couple from people I generally associate
>> with long term, skillful contest operation. Please note that I am not
>> focussed on the people who ‘win’ contests; there are a lot of very good
>> contest operators who will never win a contest from their current
>> It may be that the cost of the Flex Radio relative to a K3 is limiting the
>> number of persons who have elected to use them to contest ― that might
>> also reduce the number of responses to my question.
>> Several years ago I looked at SDR’s for contesting and felt at that time
>> command latency would be unacceptable. With Moore’s law working I would
>> suppose that the hardware is at least 8 times more powerful and perhaps
>> command latency is no longer an issue. Certainly the A/D conversions are
>> faster and a lot of software has been written to take advantage of that.
>> The idea that a single Flex Radio can operate as several independent
>> radios on different frequencies and modes simultaneously [ OK, time
>> multiplexed ] is interesting too. But why do you suppose that we don’t
>> hear more about SDR’s being used as contest radios? Are we at some sort of
>> ‘Spark vs. CW‘ or ‘SSB vs.AM’ technology change? I wasn’t around for the
>> Spark change but I remember well the SSB/AM transition and as an early
>> adopter  remember folks on 75 phone making us SSB guys operate from
>> 3990-4000 kHz if we wanted them to leave us alone. It only took about five
>> years and folks recognized that SSB was a much better choice than AM. The
>> same does not seem to be the case for the SDR’s. What do you suppose are
>> the considerations that seem to be slowing the adoption of the technology?
>> Tod, K0TO
>>> On 5/5/14, 8:33 PM, "Stuart Phillips" <stu at ridgelift.com> wrote:
>>> Really? Who fed you this line?
>>> This is just utterly wrong - computer control of any radio requires some
>>> consideration for workflow. Note - ANY radio.
>>> I successfully contest all modes with FlexRadio products and I¹m delighted
>>> with my 6700. At least one other serious contester here in the Bay Area
>>> sold his K3 after buying a 6700.
>>> You never responded to my email offering comments - standing offer to you
>>> or anyone else - I am a serious contester with a FlexRadio 6700 and very
>>> happy - even happier to answer questions!
>>> Sorry Tod but you didn¹t get the straight scoop.
>>> Stu K6TU
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest