AmateurRadio.com

Happy New Year to all! I’m back after a week’s vacation for the holidays and feeling very rested. Tyler, N7TFP on the other hand, has been busy, busy, busy. I don’t know about the holidays, but the videos he’s been cranking out are great! Here’s another one for you!I have been saying this with the last couple videos that getting back to basics are great for the veterans on the air, and these are great tutorials for those just joining or recently joined the hobby. In this one, Tyler shows how to set the proper mic gain on your SSB tranceiver. Without any more fanfare, heeeeeeeere’s TYLER!

73.

 [adrotate group=”2″]

Rich Gattie, KB2MOB, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from New York, USA. Contact him at [email protected].

In my last post I promised to write about the minimum-loss matching pad that I’m using to couple my signal generator to the device I’m testing. The source impedance of the generator is 600 ohms and the output is intended to be terminated in a 600 ohm load, but the device I’m testing is only 228 ohms. The way to match this with the lowest loss is with a transformer, but it is inconvenient and unnecessary to come up with a transformer for every mismatch this piece of test-equipment will face.

Thanks to advice from the ham who is guiding me in this project, I’m using a minimum-loss matching pad, also known as an “L-pad,” to match these two impedances. (I’d tell you who this fine fellow is, but to keep you in suspense about my project I’ll wait until my final write-up. If I name him now, the cat will be out of the bag!) This quick, cheap, and easy match requires only two resistors:

To calculate the value of the resistors and to calculate the loss of the matching pad, use these formulas (A spreadsheet that uses these formulas is available through this webpage.):

In my case R₁=472, R₂=290, and the loss is -9.25 dB. That loss is pretty significant, but it is acceptable for this application. Remember this is a minimum-loss matching pad, not a no-loss matching pad. Using what resistors I had on hand to come as close as I could to the required values, I soldered this pad on a generic PC board from Radio Shack that I cut in half using my Dremel tool with a cutting wheel:

For more on this topic, I commend to you this webpage on “Impedance and Impedance Matching.”

Todd Mitchell, NØIP, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from Minnesota, USA. He can be contacted at [email protected].

VE1BA's shack

Well on Tuesday it's back to work and one of my 2012 ambitions....don't like the word resolution with me it is linked to a list of "non-goals". So for 2012 the buzz word is "ambitions". Well as I was saying the new ambition is to get on the rig more. This afternoon I did just that and had some two way QRP contacts. The first was with John VE1BA down in Nova Scotia. He was running 2 watts into an FT-817. At the time I thought I was running 500mW's but the K3 was set at 5 watts. So that gave me only 153 miles per watt. We had a short but nice chat on 20 meters. I had a chance on the K3 to use the APF filtering as John's RST was 229. The APF worked great as he jumped out from the noise floor.

I then called CQ on 14.060 and Mike N0ZH came back to me with a 559 signal. He gave the the same signal report. It was not long before Mike started to fade in and out and very hard to read. So my QSO to Missouri came to a fast end. For this QSO the K3 was at 1 watt with a better miles per watt at 694 miles. I did hear KF5HGL calling CQ I started returning his CQ at 500mW's and climbed all the way up to 5 watts and he was not able to copying me. So either conditions were changing or it was not time for me to make a QSO into New Mexico.

N0ZH's shack

Mike Weir, VE9KK, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from New Brunswick, Canada. Contact him at [email protected].

I recently wrote about the Summits On The Air (SOTA) program gaining traction here in Colorado. Catching up on some of my podcast listening, I came across Jerry KD0BIK’s Practical Amateur Radio Podcast (PARP) on the topic of SOTA. It turns out that Jerry has gotten hooked on the SOTA program and has been out activating some of the Colorado peaks in December.

Operating a ham radio on top of a mountain during winter may seem like the act of a person with only one oar in the water (or shall we say one half of a dipole in the air?). But actually, we’ve had quite a few days of favorable weather that have been begging us to get outdoors in December. Still, I am on guard for an activation by Jerry in the middle of a blizzard, as he seems a bit smitten by this SOTA thing.

Episode 49 of PARP introduces the SOTA concept near the end of the episode, which is followed by a deeper SOTA discussion in Episode 50. These two episodes run about 25 minutes each, so take some time out to give them a listen.

73, Bob K0NR

Bob Witte, KØNR, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from Colorado, USA. Contact him at [email protected].

So how was 2011 here at VE3WDM,

I have always been a QRP operator but for the first time I decided to drop my output power to less than 5 watts. By the end of 2011 the output had dropped to 500mW's or less with great success as well.

I took some time to look around the shack to notice how much "stuff" I had that was just taking up space. I then put up for sale items I was not using and made enough for some new toys.

I discovered WSPR and all that you can do with it. 


 I was able to upgrade the shack. The Elecraft K3 was upgraded with a second receiver and matching filters. Along with some added treats.

My main contest antenna was the Sidekick from High Sierra antennas. It was a great antenna that gave me coverage from 10m to 80m. The problem was it could only be outdoors when I was on the radio due to antenna restrictions. I tried the Sidekick in the attic along with my 20m dipole but it just did not work.

I sold the Sidekick and ordered the Alpha Delta DX-33 and installed it in the attic. I am now able to work 10m to 40m anytime I want and not worry about an outdoor antenna.

I found time to get some kits done and added to the shack. 

I also had some Plasma TV interference so I purchased an  MFJ-1026 and that fixed the problem it's a great unit.

I did more portable op's this year with my Elecraft KX1 and had a great time.

There was my trip of a life time to the UK and ham radio came along for the ride as well. 

There was some wall paper added  WAS awards, 1,000 miles per watt at 8,325 miles per watt. I then topped that record with 16,737 miles per watt.

Much more went on but these were the highlights here at VE3WDM!
Mike Weir, VE9KK, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from New Brunswick, Canada. Contact him at [email protected].

Mike Weir, VE9KK, is a regular contributor to AmateurRadio.com and writes from New Brunswick, Canada. Contact him at [email protected].

Yaesu has been in the news recently for the digital salvo they fired over the bow of the D-STAR ship.  In theory I think this is a great move, and others are praising Yaesu’s announcement.  My concerns with D-STAR’s proprietary AMBE vocoder algorithm and hardware, the essentially one vendor market for D-STAR equipment (Icom), and the relatively dated and unscalable D-STAR protocol are no secret to anyone who reads this blog regularly.  But looking at the Yaesu digital voice whitepaper, it’s somewhat a half-baked initiative, in my opinion, where Yaesu has a new hammer and everything looks like a nail.

Most of the paper focuses on the modulation technique of D-STAR, GMSK, and pits it against Yaesu’s (errr….. Motorola’s)  C4FM.  While better RF and data throughput performance can be had with better modulation techniques, the big issue with D-STAR isn’t its modulation technique, it’s the layer two protocol.  Yaesu doesn’t even mention its layer two protocol and network that would presumably be used, Wires II.

Yaesu’s case for C4FM superiority beyond it being used in commercial networks falls flat.  In the paper there are specifications of selected D-STAR and C4FM radios compared, with some highlighted parameters.  There’s also a graph comparing various modulation techinques, but the big takeaway is D-STAR has a rate of 4800 baud versus 9600 baud for C4FM.  I’ve used the somewhat archiac term of baud rather than kpbs intentionally to illustrate just how lame the comparison is.  Furthermore, while D-STAR is clearly in the crosshairs of Yaesu, there is no mention of D-STAR’s 128kbs data mode or how Yaesu’s solution beats that data rate.

All in all this whitepaper and initiative which some are praising appears to me to be a rather sophomoric effort, and one more concerned with selling retreaded commercial rigs in amateur radio.  Aligning amateur standards with commercial ones isn’t a bad thing especially when secondhand commercial gear can be re-purposed for amateur use, but there needs to be other compelling reasons to adopt a commercial modulation technique. Even with the best layer one modulation technique, if the layer two protocol and the supporting network is badly designed the digital voice standard is doomed for failure.  Yaesu needs to be making a case for its system by explaining the entire network, how it is open and non-proprietary, and how it will scale in the future.  I hope Yaesu does successfully launch a competing digital voice solution, and I hope organizations like ARRL and RSGB get involved and insure that the standard is consistent with the spirit of amateur radio.  Unfortunately to me this new initiative looks like another D-STAR in the making.

(D-STAR is a registered trademark of Icom Incorporated.)