[Elecraft] ECO for SPOT Control

[Tom, N5GE]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 23:41:36 -0800, you wrote:

Once you fellows start using split, you won't see a need for this
addition.

In the old days before XCVRS one would call CQ on the desired
frequency and tune the RX to the answering station.  Other than
placing your TX frequency where a DX station is listening, using split
to avoid the situation you describe is the common method.

The reason for RIT and split in the beginning was to help eliminate
the cost of, and desk top space taken by the RX.

Tom, N5GE
http://www.n5ge.com
http://www.swotrc.net 


>Hi Michael,
>That is a meaningful and outstanding suggestion.  I would really like to see 
>Elecraft add it to the "List".
>
>Frank - W6NEK
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: The Smiths
>To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 8:54 PM
>Subject: [Elecraft] ECO for SPOT Control
>
>
>I would like to suggest an "upgrade" for the SPOT control function.  As you 
>know, the SPOT function changes the Main VFO's frequency to "Beat Frequency" 
>a CW signal.  This function is wonderful when used to tune in a received 
>signal within the CWT area.  However, if after sending a CQ, and having 
>someone answer you, you hit the SPOT control, you once again move your Main 
>VFO off frequency. This risks the other party answering your CQ from being 
>able to find you once again.
>My suggestion would be to allow for the SPOT button to function as a RIT 
>only control when the RIT button is engaged.  If the RIT button is NOT 
>engaged, then the Main VFO would move as normal.  OR if the XIT button is 
>engaged, then the SPOT function would also work as it does currently.
>Having the SPOT work as a RIT control when the RIT button is engaged, would 
>make it MUCH easier for a user (contester etc..) to send a CQ, wait for an 
>answer, then align the K3 to the answering parties BFO frequency, without 
>moving the Main VFO frequency. Thus, Making the RIT knob a secondary tool 
>for finding people too "off center" to capture in the CWT area.
>I would love to see some feedback on this new feature, and ask that it gets 
>implemented in the software if enough people agree with me.  If you don't 
>understand, or need further explanation please let me know.
>Michael Aretsky
>N6MQL

[snip]