[Elecraft] A way to show both "SPLIT" and "NON-SPLIT" warnings

[Mike Reublin NF4L]

If I forget to put on a belt or suspenders, maybe there could be a sensor at the door that would staple my pants to my waist. I'm just not a fan of trying to make up for someones lack of attention to the job at hand. A car ad I saw on TV recently concluded with the statement that by virtue of all the safety devices on board, it wasn't necessary to devote as much attention to driving. I find that kind of thinking truly frightening.

Have I transmitted on the wrong VFO? Of course, and I take full blame for that. It's not the radio's fault.

It is of course your company, and your decision. I'm not going to stop vigorously supporting Elecraft.

> On Feb 18, 2015, at 11:26 AM, Wayne Burdick <n6kr at elecraft.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Mike Reublin NF4L <nf4l at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> If it's an option, OK, but I am convinced that if an op misses the existing two indicators on the LCD display, and the Δf yellow LED, then more indicators aren't gonna help. And I am unanimous in my opinion.
> 
> :)
> 
> Well, I'm not sure I agree. Yes, there are three indicators, but they're all quite small, and the delta-F LED is off to the side. These methods of indicating split all seemed like a great idea at the time, but even I miss them sometimes, so I'm interested in trying something else. 
> 
> My proposed "split" and "non-split" text indications might solve the "didn't see the indicators" problem, because they occupy so much more area of the front panel (about 20 times more). That seems to be the crux of the issue: a lot of operators want something *BIG* to change stage when they transmit, and that something has to indicate whether they're in split or not. 
> 
> This method also works whether you're doing "real" split (RX on VFO A, TX on VFO B) or "sub-RX implied split" (TX on VFO A, RX with sub on VFO B).
> 
> Wayne
> N6KR
>