[Elecraft] SideKar vs PX3

[steve]

Brian,
Thank you for the comments.
I do use fldigi.
Yes, PSK31 is difficult to tune and partly because of the lack of AFC in 
the kX3, as you reminded me (why... KX3 tuning is difficult).
The PX3 does make it easier to tune provided the sending station isn't 
drifting.
RTTY seems easier to tune - I guess because of its wider bandwidth.
I think because I want portable PSK31/RTTY to be fun (not frustrating), 
I need to think about using Fldigi portable with a small/mini laptop 
(solid state "disk").
I guess I will also think more about how I am going to "do" the little 
bit of CW as the decoder works well (not great).  I am going to give CW 
via KX3 decoder a try this weekend with the NAQP.
Yes, I think even with the HCT/SideKar you need to save the call.   It 
does have a memory location to allow the call to be sent as part of a macro.
I don't see anything in the manual about logging using the memory 
location to fill the log callsign...  I'll ask/look.

thank you for your thought provoking input.  73, steve WB3LGC


On 29-Jul-15 6:10 PM, Brian Waterworth wrote:
> Warning - long response
>
> One thing I have found on my quest to have a portable station is a portable
> computer, screen, and keyboard.  My premise is that the kx3 may not be
> ready for a complete psk31 solution with either the px3 or the sidekar.
> I'll come back to this quest in a moment.
>
> At present, it doesn't seem that the kx3 applies afc to incoming digital
> transmissions, like psk31.  ...  My premise is that unless the kx3 has afc, using the
> internal psk decoder is for emergency purposes and having some fun.  ...

> ...  Search and pounce is
> much harder to do when you have to take the time to remember a call sign
> and type it into another field while the receive window is scrolling.
> Fldigi and dm780 will allow a quick click of the mouse and the call sign is
> ready to be used in any macro that references this field.
>
> Now let's turn to the question about the USB port on the px3 and the
> connection of a keyboard.  I contend that unless the kx3 adds more psk
> features like those of the mainstream programs found on various platforms,
> the addition of a keyboard for psk qso's as decoded by the kx3 may not be
> useful.  I actually don't like my premise as I was excited too about the
> possibility of a keyboard attached to thw px3.  But what would I use it
> for?  The aforementioned usability concerns and lack of afc in the kx3
> doesn't provide me with the utility I thought I was going to get from the
> kx3/px3 combo.  If there is another use for a keyboard that I have missed,
> I would love to hear it.
>
> ...
...

> *I think even the sidekar may not meet your digital needs. I am sure 
> the sidekar does more and my apologies to the designers if I have 
> under represented it's capabilites. I saw the sidekar at Dayton in 
> 2014 and wondered why I would need it over a px3, especially with the 
> px3 firmware upgrade that provided two lines of decode text on the px3 
> screen. The sidekar is not a general purpose computer and therefore is 
> limited in its usability. How would you capture a call sign from the 
> receive window to respond to a cq? Where would you store this call 
> sign in either the kx3 or the sidekar? Usability and adaptability 
> during digital qsos is necessary in order to keep up with those hams 
> that are working in a much more productive environment.*
>
> I am sure there are others who have different setups and experiences to
> mine.  I am interested to hear about them as is Steve.
>
> Regards
> Brian
> VE3IBW
>