K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
19 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Elecraft mailing list
Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
73. Eric WD6DBM

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Tox
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Tox
K4hd (is a k4(d?) With additional filters)

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:52 PM eric norris via Elecraft <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking
> of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a
> K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future
> station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
> 73. Eric WD6DBM
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Nr4c
Read the FAQ. The K4HD is a K4D with a superheat front end with roofing filters added in front of the ADCs. Like adding a K3 in front of the SDR.

Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill


> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:12 PM, Tox <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> K4hd (is a k4(d?) With additional filters)
>
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:52 PM eric norris via Elecraft <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking
>> of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a
>> K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future
>> station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
>> 73. Eric WD6DBM
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Eric Norris-2
This doesn't answer my question.  Is the K4HD required to provide nearby
signal  blocking equal to or better than the K3s?  There is no statement
like this in the FAQ, nor any technical specs.  I'm sure Elecraft has run
these tests, and I hope they'll share them, or at least give us some idea
of the relative performance of the various K4 models compared to the K3S as
regards to nearby signal rejection.

73 Eric WD6DBM

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 3:47 PM Nr4c <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Read the FAQ. The K4HD is a K4D with a superheat front end with roofing
> filters added in front of the ADCs. Like adding a K3 in front of the SDR.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> ...nr4c. bill
>
>
> > On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:12 PM, Tox <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > K4hd (is a k4(d?) With additional filters)
> >
> >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:52 PM eric norris via Elecraft <
> >> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking
> >> of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a
> >> K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future
> >> station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
> >> 73. Eric WD6DBM
> >>
> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Bill Breeden-2

I asked a similar question at the Elecraft K4 Forum at the Huntsville
Hamfest this year and came away with the impression that the K4HD would
be required to meet or exceed the performance of the K3/K3s in this regard.

Since Eric, Wa6HHQ presented the forum and answered my question, he can
correct me if I came away with the wrong impression.

73,

Bill - NA5DX


On 10/31/2019 9:58 PM, Eric Norris wrote:

> This doesn't answer my question.  Is the K4HD required to provide nearby
> signal  blocking equal to or better than the K3s?  There is no statement
> like this in the FAQ, nor any technical specs.  I'm sure Elecraft has run
> these tests, and I hope they'll share them, or at least give us some idea
> of the relative performance of the various K4 models compared to the K3S as
> regards to nearby signal rejection.
>
> 73 Eric WD6DBM
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 3:47 PM Nr4c <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Read the FAQ. The K4HD is a K4D with a superheat front end with roofing
>> filters added in front of the ADCs. Like adding a K3 in front of the SDR.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> ...nr4c. bill
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:12 PM, Tox <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> K4hd (is a k4(d?) With additional filters)
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:52 PM eric norris via Elecraft <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking
>>>> of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a
>>>> K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future
>>>> station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
>>>> 73. Eric WD6DBM
>>>>
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Drew AF2Z
That is what the K4 FAQ says: K4HD is equivalent to a K3S.

73,
Drew
AF2Z



On 11/01/19 00:34, Bill Breeden wrote:

>
> I asked a similar question at the Elecraft K4 Forum at the Huntsville
> Hamfest this year and came away with the impression that the K4HD would
> be required to meet or exceed the performance of the K3/K3s in this regard.
>
> Since Eric, Wa6HHQ presented the forum and answered my question, he can
> correct me if I came away with the wrong impression.
>
> 73,
>
> Bill - NA5DX
>
>
> On 10/31/2019 9:58 PM, Eric Norris wrote:
>> This doesn't answer my question.  Is the K4HD required to provide nearby
>> signal  blocking equal to or better than the K3s?  There is no statement
>> like this in the FAQ, nor any technical specs.  I'm sure Elecraft has run
>> these tests, and I hope they'll share them, or at least give us some idea
>> of the relative performance of the various K4 models compared to the
>> K3S as
>> regards to nearby signal rejection.
>>
>> 73 Eric WD6DBM
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 3:47 PM Nr4c <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Read the FAQ. The K4HD is a K4D with a superheat front end with roofing
>>> filters added in front of the ADCs. Like adding a K3 in front of the
>>> SDR.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> ...nr4c. bill
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 31, 2019, at 6:12 PM, Tox <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> K4hd (is a k4(d?) With additional filters)
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:52 PM eric norris via Elecraft <
>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better
>>>>> blocking
>>>>> of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals
>>>>> than a
>>>>> K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future
>>>>> station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
>>>>> 73. Eric WD6DBM
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Petr, OK1RP/M0SIS
In reply to this post by Eric Norris-2
Dear Eric,

there is no reason to expect far better results from K4HD compare to K3S as
it is quite similar FE design in that matter.
K4HD has just superhet module w/xtals roofing filters added to standard
direct sampling K4/K4D radio.
K3S has more filters slots available...

So the results should be adequate as Wayne and Eric several times expressed
already.

2c,

Petr



-----
73 - Petr, OK1RP
"Apple & Elecraft freak"
B:http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2HGPoDx
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2FmwvDt
--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
73 - Petr, OK1RP
"Apple & Elecraft freak"
B:http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2HGPoDx
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2FmwvDt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Bill W4ZV
Does anyone exactly what BW the filters are in the K4HD?  



--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

john@kk9a.com
In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list
I use most of my K3S roofing filter slots, many slots are in the K4HD?  
  I'm sorry to see that the K3S will become silent key, it has been a  
perfect radio for my portable and home contest operations.

John KK9A


Petr, OK1RP/M0SIS wrote:

Dear Eric,

there is no reason to expect far better results from K4HD compare to K3S as
it is quite similar FE design in that matter.
K4HD has just superhet module w/xtals roofing filters added to standard
direct sampling K4/K4D radio.
K3S has more filters slots available...

So the results should be adequate as Wayne and Eric several times expressed
already.

2c,

Petr

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Joe Subich, W4TV-4
In reply to this post by Bill W4ZV

Per a previous posting by Wayne ... the same filters (2.7 KHz and 500
Hz) as the K3/K3s.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2019-11-01 9:04 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:
> Does anyone exactly what BW the filters are in the K4HD?
>
>
>


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Joe Subich, W4TV-4
In reply to this post by john@kk9a.com

On 2019-11-01 9:20 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
 > I use most of my K3S roofing filter slots, many slots are in the K4HD?

I believe Wayne indicated there were three slots.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2019-11-01 9:20 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> I use most of my K3S roofing filter slots, many slots are in the K4HD?
>   I'm sorry to see that the K3S will become silent key, it has been a
> perfect radio for my portable and home contest operations.
>
> John KK9A
>


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Petr, OK1RP/M0SIS
Each K4HD superhet receive section includes two crystal filters: one SSB/data
bandwidth, one CW bandwidth.

There are 5 filter positions per K3S and per KRX3A...

73 - Petr




-----
73 - Petr, OK1RP
"Apple & Elecraft freak"
B:http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2HGPoDx
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2FmwvDt
--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
73 - Petr, OK1RP
"Apple & Elecraft freak"
B:http://ok1rp.blogspot.com
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2HGPoDx
MeWe: https://bit.ly/2FmwvDt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Bob McGraw - K4TAX
In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list
We used K3S radios at a Field Day site.  Operated 2 radios on the same
band with antennas less than 50 yards apart.  No issues. Just be sure
you use the ATTN and set the RF Gain correctly <<<Very important,  and
make sure the AGC parameters are not contributing to your issue.  Also,
don't use the NB and maybe only a little bit of NR.  The radio is really
bullet proof in these regards.

As to the K4 the K4HD model is the top end for selectivity.

Now if your ham neighbor has a radio that is producing crap, {which many
are, See the Sherwood article in Nov QST}  wide band noise, and
splatter, nothing but the power switch will cure the issue as the
objectionable signal is in the Pass Band of the receiver.   Just
remember, no amount of filtering or selectivity will eliminate a signal
in the passband.

73

Bob, K4TAX


On 10/31/2019 4:51 PM, eric norris via Elecraft wrote:
> Can somebody tell me which of the K4 models will produce better blocking of extremely strong (S9+20 to S9+40) nearby in frequency signals than a K3S?  Is this blocking gain compression?  I'm trying to plan a future station upgrade and I have ham neighbors.
> 73. Eric WD6DBM
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Bill W4ZV
In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4
Thanks Joe!  From those BWs I assume both are 5-poles.

BTW has anyone ever compared the old 5-pole 200 to the newer 6-pole?

73,  Bill  W4ZV



--
Sent from: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Joe Subich, W4TV-4


On 2019-11-01 11:56 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:
> Thanks Joe!  From those BWs I assume both are 5-poles.

I can't recall seeing any comment of 5 pole vs 6 pole vs 8 pole.
Wayne did say that any of the K3/K3s filters would work (and I
assume, be available as options).

I don't see any value in "narrow" versions of the standard bandwidths
as the ADC being used in the K4 will have several dB of dynamic range
above and beyond that of the K3/K3S.  As a SWAG - if there are indeed
three slots - I would consider 6 KHz - data modes (JT65/FT8/FT4/etc.),
AM and ESSB,  2.8 KHz - SSB and general purpose RTTY, and 500 Hz -
CW and high performance RTTY.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

K7TV
I believe that using a roofing filter that is about as narrow as the overall
receive bandwidth can have a detrimental effect on ssb voice quality as well
as on digital mode reception. Will the K4HD have a single button way to
remove the superhet part so that receive quality can be easily compared
without change of overall bandwidth and volume?

73, Erik K7TV

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> On
Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2019 12:34 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.



On 2019-11-01 11:56 AM, Bill W4ZV wrote:
> Thanks Joe!  From those BWs I assume both are 5-poles.

I can't recall seeing any comment of 5 pole vs 6 pole vs 8 pole.
Wayne did say that any of the K3/K3s filters would work (and I assume, be
available as options).

I don't see any value in "narrow" versions of the standard bandwidths as the
ADC being used in the K4 will have several dB of dynamic range above and
beyond that of the K3/K3S.  As a SWAG - if there are indeed three slots - I
would consider 6 KHz - data modes (JT65/FT8/FT4/etc.), AM and ESSB,  2.8 KHz
- SSB and general purpose RTTY, and 500 Hz - CW and high performance RTTY.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message
delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Grant Youngman-2
The way it has been described, you only need to turn it on when you need it … so you can run the radio as a straight SDR or a hybrid SDR, switchable on the fly.

Whether or not doing so changes the volume … ???  The bandwidth (and audio levels) is set by the SDR processes in both cases, so it would be a reasonable assumption that it wouldn’t change, and the hybrid module would switch in the appropriate roofing filter automatically.

Wild guesses, of course.  But not unreasonable  :-)

Grant NQ5T



> On Nov 1, 2019, at 4:09 PM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I believe that using a roofing filter that is about as narrow as the overall
> receive bandwidth can have a detrimental effect on ssb voice quality as well
> as on digital mode reception. Will the K4HD have a single button way to
> remove the superhet part so that receive quality can be easily compared
> without change of overall bandwidth and volume?
>
> 7
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

K9ZTV
In reply to this post by Bob McGraw - K4TAX
Notice he said 50 YARDS, not feet.

73,

Kent  K9ZTV

> On Nov 1, 2019, at 10:48 AM, Bob McGraw K4TAX <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> We used K3S radios at a Field Day site.  Operated 2 radios on the same band with antennas less than 50 yards apart.

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: K4 model v. K3S for strong nearby signal rejection.

Jim Brown-10
We run two stations, both K3, P3, KPA500, KAT500, with antennas two FEET
apart for county expeditions. See
k9yc.com/7QP.pdf and
http://k9yc.com/Multi-Station.pdf

73, Jim K9YC

On 11/1/2019 6:16 PM, K9ZTV wrote:

> Notice he said 50 YARDS, not feet.
>
> 73,
>
> Kent  K9ZTV
>
>> On Nov 1, 2019, at 10:48 AM, Bob McGraw K4TAX <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> We used K3S radios at a Field Day site.  Operated 2 radios on the same band with antennas less than 50 yards apart.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]