John,
I suspect that the list reply behavior just bit you. Since
your question was public I'll provide a public description of
my VHF+ lineup.
The station consists of a small herd of Pegasi transceivers
as IF's for Down East Microwave transverters for the 50-432
MHz bands. The Pegasus radios are controlled with 4
simultaneous sessions of N4PY's software all running on a
single PC with 3 monitors. I run two N4PY sessions each on
two of the monitors and then WriteLog on the 3rd. For 50 and
144 MHz the N4PY sessions are running in dual Pegasus mode,
222 and 432 MHz are singles. When not in contesting mode I
rant on ham radio discussion boards about radio/PC
interfacing on one monitor while monitoring the bands
visually on the other two monitors. So who says PC/Internet
time needs to interfere with radio operating :).
I run separate RX/TX IF lines from the Pegs, for the RX side
I made the mod that Carl describes for using his software and
a Pegasus with the RX-320 as a sub RX. The TX IF side is fed
from the antenna outputs of the Pegs through homebrew 20dB
(or so) attenuators. I then set the max VHF band TX power in
Carl's program to provide approximately 20W of 10M TX output.
Through the attenuators it provides me with the ~50-100mW
drive that the transverters require.
Why 20W drive through attenuators?
1. Provides a level of safety for "if" (actually "when") I
accidentally hit the TX with 100w output, the transverters
will only see 6-7dB of overdrive, should be survivable. An
ALC and/or IF TX lower power setting alone approach without
attenuation could allow several watts or more of power to
reach the transverter TX side (usually releases smoke).
2. Increases the S/N ratio of the TX signal feeding the
transverter. With a ALC or lowest possible TX power setting
approach the broadband noise of the Pegasus PA would be
several dB closer to the desired TX IF signal. It seems to be
working because I frequently get unsolicited audio
compliments, especially on 6M.
3. Minimizes the amount of modifying I need to do with the IF
radios for transverter use. I can easily swap out an IF radio
for another without having to dig into them for low level TX
signals. I just need a separate RX input.
All PTT is done via hard keying with the Pegasus keying the
transverters (via an isolation relay) which in turn key the
100-160W SS brick amplifiers (closure to ground PTTs).
I hope that gives you a pretty clear idea of what I'm now
doing. Lately I've been playing around with the Flex-Radio
SDR-1000 and some other boards from Expanded Spectrum Systems
with various degrees of encouraging results that point to
some very intriguing possibilities for future radios that
don't seem to be very far off into the future. Because if I
can't buy what I really want I just may have to build it
myself.
Duane
N9DG
--- John L Merrill <jmerrill1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Duane:
> What are you using for VHF/UHF radios and software?
>
> John N1JM
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Duane -
> N9DG
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 9:37 PM
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Advantages of computer control for s
> DX'er
>
>
> I disagree, I think that all new generation radios should
> have even more computer control, much of it in place of the
> tired and inhibiting traditional controls. The key to it
> all
> is to get beyond the idea of just emulating traditional
> radios controls and panels in software and on the computer
> screen, there is so much more that can be done in that area
> for radio control using computers. Carl's program provides
> just a small glimpse of what is possible without the
> constraints imposed by regular knobs and buttons. It just
> takes a little open mindedness to get there. But it also
> takes radio hardware that allows it to be done, - something
> that doesn't exist yet in ham radioland. And that is my
> main
> disappointment of the Orion's design and is the single
> biggest reason why I don't have one here now.
>
> I'm a pretty serious VHF+ contester and do plenty of DXing
> on the VHF+ bands. I for one would not go into a VHF
> contest
> like the ARRL VHFSS this last weekend anymore without 100%
> computer control of my radios. I was continuously watching
> 150 kHz segments on 4 separate bands (50, 144, 222, and 432
> MHz) all at the same time. I could easily and quickly tune
> in
> on the signals as I saw them pop up. Whether they were 5,
> 25,
> 50, or 100 kHz away, or even on a different band, it simply
> didn't matter, they were all equally easy to get to without
> ever lifting my hand off of the mouse. So I could easily
> tune
> in and identify 3 separate signals within 10-15 seconds
> that
> may have been 5-100+ kHz apart from each other, - or even
> on
> different bands. Knobs and buttons radios would have had me
> fumbling about reaching for VFO knobs continually between
> the
> 4 separate radios (been there, done that, - don't ever want
> to do that again). And never mind the fact without spectrum
> sweeps I wouldn't have even known that 50% of those signals
> were even there to begin with. This is because signals on
> the
> VHF+ bands during contests are often only present for
> seconds
> at a time, without a spectrum sweep display and point and
> click tuning I would have missed them completely. So no I'm
> not just playing with a computer; on the contrary it is
> modern radio at its best because I'm now pouncing on
> signals
> that computer software now makes possible for me to know
> the
> existence of. You simply can't spin VFO knobs fast enough
> to
> even begin to have that same level of capability.
>
> No doubt HF contesting and DX'ing is a different game with
> plenty of signals always present and more persistent so
> they
> are inherently easier to find. On VHF+ that's simply not
> the
> case, you often get just one chance to find, tune in, and
> get
> the attention of a DX signal within just 30 seconds or
> less.
> If you miss that window of opportunity you often never get
> another chance to work them again (because either they
> turned
> their antenna further away and/or the brief propagation
> event
> went away). So yes I do want my computer control front and
> center, and the VFO knob is just a novel accessory that I
> can
> buy to take up tabletop space.
>
> Duane
> N9DG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|