[Elecraft] K3 Programmable Split?

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

Not sure where this thread has wandered but I program M3 and M4 as 
"quick splits"  M3 will split up 1 on cw and M4 will split up 5.  You 
can insert filter combinations and other options if you wish.  This is 
easily done with the programming.

I am not sure if this helps.

Mike W0MU

On 2/18/2015 9:33 PM, Ian White wrote:
> We lost power for a few hours. Looks like I missed a load of fun...
>
>
> W4TV wrote:
>>> The bedrock point of principle is this: users should *never* be
>>> forced to resort to macros for simple industry-standard features that
>>> ought to be part of the firmware.
>> Since *when* is a programmable split an "industry standard feature"?
>> In 40 years, I have *never* owned a transceiver that included a
>> programmable split feature.  Admittedly some of the newer rigs may
>> offer that function - but it was not not present in any transceiver I
>> owned or used from the TS-520/FT-101B in the 70's through the FT-1000MP
>> MKV including transceivers by all major manufacturers.
>>
> RTFM!
>
> My 1000MP MK1 had programmable Quick Split from 1995, so your later MkV
> had it too (I'm looking at a downloaded manual right now). Turning to
> Icom, the IC-746 had Quick Split in 1997 and their top-of-the-line
> models probably had it even earlier.
>
> Proof enough, if proof were needed, that the two largest transceiver
> manufacturers have had Quick Split as part of their feature-set for at
> least 20 years. From their early top-of-the-line models, Quick Split has
> trickled down to become an expected feature in any modern CPU-controlled
> HF transceiver that is targeted at DX operators.
>
> Why? Because Quick Split is helpful to users - it *guarantees* to shift
> the TX VFO away from the frequency of the DX station in a pileup - and
> also because it isn't a difficult feature for manufacturers to include.
>
> (But radios like the TS-520/FT-101B from the 1970s have no part in this
> discussion. You can't have programmed Split in a radio that has a
> hand-cranked VFO... and no CPU!)
>
>
>> What you are really asking for - based on the "hold split" behavior
>> in other recent rigs is getting back to a *THIRD STATE* on a switch.
>> It would need to be a two second hold of A-> B, one second for normal
>> split, two for "quick split" ... another UI cluster.
>   
> No... what I am "really asking for" is WHAT I REALLY WROTE.
>
> If you had read the whole posting before jumping to the wrong
> conclusions, it was completely clear that my suggestion was to offer
> Quick Split as an option that could only be selected through a new item
> in the Configuration menu, as an alternative behavior for the existing
> [SPLIT] button.
>
> That proposal does NOT require a third switch state, so I wasn't asking
> for one. That and everything else you wrote about "other recent rigs",
> "a third state" and "a two second hold" was the product of your own
> incorrectly imagined scenario. You made it up and you got it wrong.
>
> This is by no means an isolated case. Please try much harder to read
> what people ACTUALLY DID WRITE.
>   
>
> 73 from Ian GM3SEK
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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 w0mu at w0mu.com