[Elecraft] comparisons of K3 control software

[Tom Blahovici]

Hi Chester, 
The k3 and kx3 have the ability to use their built in keyer which  responds to a KY programming command. The KY command has characters that you want sent as a parameter. Therefore KY CQ; sends CQ with the keyer speed defined in the radio. So the characters entered in the terminal are sent with the KY command. The characters that are sent to the radio,  are sent at a slightly higher rate than what the radio sends so that the keyer is not waiting for a character. 
Decoding really depends on the quality of the sender. Machine generated code is decoded quite well. Human generated code, can be poor!
Of course none of this replaces a knowledge of cw. Where it is useful is for the built in messages, and for remote operation using a keyboard and your tablet or even a phone. 
I have a confession though, I do not know cw but I have used this along with cw skimmer to make 50 new dxcc during the last CQ contest. Was a lot of fun. 
Tom
va2fsq.com

On Apr 11, 2015 5:25 PM, Chester Alderman <aldermant at windstream.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Ken, 
>
> Well I didn't ask my question properly, so I got back info about how well it 
> decoded CW! Anyway I got a nice response from Tom, the author, responded to 
> him but got no response from him again yet. 
>
> I also have no interest in a CW decoder as I used to operate QRQ over 60 
> wpm, thus have no need for a decoder. And like you, I also have no interest 
> in controlling my K3 with a mouse. Tom seems to have a nice program 
> otherwise. 
>
> 73, 
> Tom - W4BQF 
>
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Elecraft [mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of WA8JXM 
> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 11:29 AM 
> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net 
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] comparisons of K3 control software 
>
> Chester, I have wondered the same thing.   I see some functions that an 
> on screen button can speed up, such as changing power levels. but most of 
> the time I prefer using the rig rather than the mouse. That's one reason I 
> prefer operating the K3 vs. the FlexRadio.  The main thing I want a computer 
> involved for is logging, digital modes, and multi unit synchoronization 
> (such as the KAT500 with either the K3 or the Flex 
> 6300.)   But for routine operating, changing frequency or channels, 
> changing CW speed, etc. I much prefer the rig vs the computer. 
>
> Ken WA8JXM 
>
> On 11/04/2015 09:58, Chester Alderman wrote: 
> > And how well does it produce CW?  Also can you explain the advantage 
> > of using a computer to operate a radio verses using the radio manually? 
> > 
> > Thanks and 73, 
> > Tom - W4BQF 
>
> ______________________________________________________________ 
> Elecraft mailing list 
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft 
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net 
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message 
> delivered to aldermant at windstream.net 
>
> ______________________________________________________________ 
> Elecraft mailing list 
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft 
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net 
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
> Message delivered to tomb18 at videotron.ca