[UK-CONTEST] CC April CW TX Bandwidth

[Clive Whelan]

Hi Ian

I have a much better solution to any problem which might exist with the 
FT1000MP on CW, viz sell it to an SSB operator and get a proper CW rig ;-)

Sadly it took me a little while and a lot of wasted dosh to realise this 
in the last century. Even more sadly I failed to find a suitable SSB 
operator and still own ( but don't use) the bloomin'  thing. Is that twp 
or what?

73


Clive
GW3NJW

g3wvg at btinternet.com wrote:
> Hi All ..
>
> For what it's worth I did the INRAD mod on my old FT1000MP (but not using
> their kit). I think it's a bit easier to do than the W8JI mod but with, I
> believe, similar results.  It's very well detailed in the link below.
>
> http://www.va3cr.net/Mods/Material/Inrad%20key%20click%20mod%202.pdf
>
> 73 Ian G3WVG
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Andy Cook, G4PIQ
> Sent: 14 April 2009 19:47
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] CC April CW TX Bandwidth
>
> Sorry to come late to this discussion - was tied up over the weekend. I
> think the other reason that Clive might well have got away without a key
> click mod in the circumstances of operating +/- 10 kHz is that key clicks
> are probably not the dominant problem here - phase noise, broadband Tx noise
> and blocking dynamic range, are and the MP is pretty good in those respects.
>
>
> Key clicks become a real problem at much closer spacings like 500 Hz or 1
> kHz spacing but from moderate signals rather than just really huge ones. In
> theory in CW you can make decent use of really narrow filters and this
> should make CW contesting much less congested and more pleasant than SSB
> contesting. Well - that's only half true right now. Some signals are very
> clean and you can operate say 300 Hz away from them with no issues, but
> that's not the case if the other operator is using an un-modified FT1000MP.
> The clicks from these stations in CW contests cause just as much frustration
> as QRM from adjacent SSB QSOs in SSB contests. 
>
> I've only modified the MPs I use in contests in the last 3 years or so. It
> took me getting really irritated at the number of QSOs that other people's
> clicks were busting for me to realise that anyone operating CW with an MP
> and a moderate station really must do the mods. They are simple to do and
> make a huge difference.
>
> There are those folks who say - I don't want to do that because it means
> that others can operate much closer to me. I don't buy that as an acceptable
> answer - it's like the use of 6 kHz filters on SSB transmit, or
> intentionally over-driving your amplifier or pushing it out of class AB,
> using the grid current warning LED in a grid drive tetrode amp as the the
> 'on' light.... The more people that we can persuade to fix the problem by
> peer pressure the less trouble we all will have
>
> 73,
>
> Andy, G4PIQ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ian White GM3SEK
> Sent: 11 April 2009 19:42
> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] CC April CW TX Bandwidth
>
>
> Clive Whelan wrote:
>
>   
>>> There does seem to be some variability between individual rigs, but 
>>> even the best of them are clicky and the worst are downright 
>>> horrible.
>>>       
>> Well myself and GW3RIH must have been very lucky in getting a couple of
>> good 1000MPs then, because we lived 500 yards apart and both ran 400w, 
>> me using an Alpha 78 and Wes using a TL922, and we could operate within 
>> 10kHz of each other on 14Mhz , without insurmountable problems 
>> problems. You don't suppose that could have been because we didn't 
>> overdrive the amplifiers do you? ;-)
>>
>>     
>
> No, the problem is definitely with the transceivers themselves.
>
> However, if you were using your amplifiers at the 400W level, the 
> transceiver output power would have been only about 20-25W. That might 
> have helped to reduce the levels of key clicks, though it wouldn't have 
> been directly due to the reduction in power - more likely the effect it 
> might have had on the ALC dynamics.
>
> Nobody has really got to the bottom of why it happens... least of all 
> Yaesu.
>
>
>