[Elecraft] Any Consideration of a Receive Only K3?

[Alan Bloom]

On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 13:06 -0800, Rick Tavan N6XI wrote:
> I doubt that a receive-only K3 would cost significantly less than a K3/10.

Looking at the schematics, it looks to me like it would save the 12W
power amplifier, some $2 relays, the T/R switching circuitry, and
several connectors.  I doubt if the savings in parts would be enough to
pay for the re-engineering involved when amortized over the number of
units sold.

> Unless there are licensing issues in a particular country, an SWL could buy
> a K3/10 with a sub-receiver and enjoy full diversity reception today. Just
> be careful not to transmit.

I agree.  A QRP K3 with suitable options makes a pretty cost-effective
high-performance SWL receiver just as it is.

Al N1AL



> /Rick N6XI
> 
> On 3/9/10, Dave Rickmers <ricketzz at dslextreme.com> wrote:
> >
> > A version minus the 12 Watt exciter would be very easy to implement,
> > would it not?  The SWL BCBDXer community is interested.  The DSP
> > synchronous detector will be a major attraction for shortwave listeners.
> >
> >