Most base-type radios, especially HF radios, have keyer circuitry
built in. On those radios where it has been optional (Icom 970, e.g.),
it has been a fairly expensive option. Can anyone estimate the amount
that it adds to the price of an HF radio? What would we save if it were
left off? Considering the ever shrinking role of Morse, does it really
make sense to insist that all HF radios include it? It almost seems as
if the various manufacturers are afraid to go first in making it an
option. It seems like it is more of an ideological issue than a
practical one.

--
Klystron

"Klystron" wrote in message

: Most base-type radios, especially HF radios, have
: keyer circuitry built in. On those radios where it has
: been optional (Icom 970, e.g.), it has been a fairly
: expensive option. Can anyone estimate the amount that it
: adds to the price of an HF radio? What would we save if
: it were left off? Considering the ever shrinking role of
: Morse, does it really make sense to insist that all HF
: radios include it? It almost seems as if the various
: manufacturers are afraid to go first in making it an
: option. It seems like it is more of an ideological issue
: than a practical one.

I'm not so sure. It's probably more cost effective in the long run to
include it rather than not, if you make it an addon option then it
complicates matters. Look at the myriad options you get when buying a new
car - do you want aircon, electric windows, spotlights, etc. etc.

I remember 10 years or so ago when Icom here in the UK sold off a load of
unsold commercial UHF transceivers onto the amateur market (the IC-U101 if
anyone remembers it, still have one somewhere, it made a great packet
radio rig..!) - as a commercial radio, it came with built in CTCSS (PL)
tone encode/decode but for some reason best known to themselves Icom
physically removed the tone boards from the radios before selling them to
amateurs.

I suppose they thought they could make extra money selling the tone boards
as "optional extras" (or am I being an old cynic..?!)

73 Ivor G6URP

(Klystron) wrote in
:

Most base-type radios, especially HF radios, have keyer circuitry
built in. On those radios where it has been optional (Icom 970,
e.g.), it has been a fairly expensive option. Can anyone estimate
the amount that it adds to the price of an HF radio? What would we
save if it were left off? Considering the ever shrinking role of
Morse, does it really make sense to insist that all HF radios
include it? It almost seems as if the various manufacturers are
afraid to go first in making it an option. It seems like it is more
of an ideological issue than a practical one.

First, the IC-970 wasn't an HF rig, so far as I remember. Also, Icom
accessories have always been terribly over-priced (priced a CT-17
lately?), so what they charged for a keyer module is no reflection on
its actual cost. Further, designing and packaging a keyer as an
optional plug-in module, and designing a radio so that it can accept
such a plug-in, probably increases the cost of both more the cost of
a standard built-in keyer.

These days, the cost of the few additional parts needed to implement a
keyer (or the few additional lines of code in the firmware) is lost in
the noise of a retail price of $2000 for a full-featured HF rig. The
cost of the key jack probably equals the cost of the keyer.

And, I question your assertion of the "shrinking role of Morse"
anyway; I think you're the one with an ideological issue.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |

Most base-type radios, especially HF radios, have keyer circuitry
built in. On those radios where it has been optional (Icom 970, e.g.),
it has been a fairly expensive option. Can anyone estimate the amount
that it adds to the price of an HF radio? What would we save if it were
left off? Considering the ever shrinking role of Morse, does it really
make sense to insist that all HF radios include it? It almost seems as
if the various manufacturers are afraid to go first in making it an
option. It seems like it is more of an ideological issue than a
practical one.

My guess is that the actual bill-of-materials needed to include a
basic keyer into the design of a new transceiver design is no more
than $5, and quite possibly less.

Assuming that the transceiver has a jack for a straight key, you can
add a basic iambic keyer with nothing more than a second jack, a very
small microcontroller (e.g. a PIC costing a dollar at most) and some
wiring.

In transceivers that are already microprocessor-controlled (which is
most of the new ones, I think) the iambic-keyer and memory functions
can be rolled into the code of the existing micro... so all you really
need to add is a jack, wiring, and the additional programming logic.

So, the incremental cost of adding one should be quite small.

Keyers with a much larger memory, beaconing functions, etc. might
require more hardware... but these days you can pack a *lot* of code
and memory into a tiny little 6- or 8-pin surface-mount microcontroller.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

On Mar 21, 12:41 pm, Klystron wrote:
Most base-type radios, especially HF radios, have keyer circuitry
built in. On those radios where it has been optional (Icom 970, e.g.),
it has been a fairly expensive option.

That's because hardware is involved when it's made an option. The
basic logic
of a keyer, even the fancy iambic ones, is pretty simple.

Can anyone estimate the amount
that it adds to the price of an HF radio?
What would we save if it were
left off?

In most rigs with built-in keyers, the keyer circuitry is nothing more
than the paddle inputs. The actual implementation is in software,
and the savings (if any) would be small, if any. Couple of dollars at
most.

Considering the ever shrinking role of Morse, does it really
make sense to insist that all HF radios include it?

I disagree that the role of Morse is "ever shrinking" on the amateur
HF bands.
Judging by the use of the mode in contests, DXpeditions, QRP, homebrew
projects and the sale of paddles and Morse-only HF rigs, the mode's
role
in amateur radio hasn't really changed.

It almost seems as
if the various manufacturers are afraid to go first in making it an
option.

Why should they make it an option, given that it costs almost
nothing to include? Leaving it out would probably hurt sales to the
point
of negative return.

It seems like it is more of an ideological issue than a
practical one.

Not at all.

The "ideology" of most current HF amateur rig designs is to include as
many features as
possible, particularly if those features can be implemented in
software. So we have rigs
with lots of memories, multiple VFOs, lots of selectivity/AGC/NB
choices, lots of computer-control features, real-time clocks, data
mode encoding and decoding, and much more - all in software, not
hardware. They add very little to the
cost of the rig, and nothing to its basic-radio performance numbers,
but hams seem to like them.

From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it would not be practical to
remove a feature most customers have come to expect, whether they use
it much or not.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it would not be practical to
remove a feature most customers have come to expect, whether they use
it much or not.

The negative impact on sales from a comment in a review like, "Great
rig, but missing an internal keyer" would offset the tiny cost of
including the keyer.

73, Steve KB9X

Steve Bonine wrote:
wrote:

From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it would not be practical to
remove a feature most customers have come to expect, whether they use
it much or not.

The negative impact on sales from a comment in a review like, "Great
rig, but missing an internal keyer" would offset the tiny cost of
including the keyer.


Radios are built with features that people expect, and most hams do
indeed expect a keyer these days. to not have one would indeed cost sales.

Even among those who do not use the keyers to send Morse, the keyer
function can be used to reduce the duty cycle when tuning an amplifier,
which will stress the tubes less in the event of a bad initial setting.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Steve Bonine wrote:
wrote:

From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it would not be practical to
remove a feature most customers have come to expect, whether they use
it much or not.

The negative impact on sales from a comment in a review like, "Great
rig, but missing an internal keyer" would offset the tiny cost of
including the keyer.

73, Steve KB9X

Steve,

I'll let you in on a secret: I think manufacturers put keyers in their
rigs because every ham who has forgotten the code wants to think that
he'll hook up an iambic key someday and win the CW SS.

Like the lottery, they're selling a dream: if the chip were omitted
without telling anyone, I doubt 99% of hams would notice. ;-)

73,

Bill W1AC

Bill Horne wrote:

I'll let you in on a secret: I think manufacturers put keyers in their
rigs because every ham who has forgotten the code wants to think that
he'll hook up an iambic key someday and win the CW SS.

I'm afraid that the majority of today's hams simply don't care. But if
you mentioned any one aspect of ham radio -- DX, contesting, public
service -- you could say the same thing. The _majority_ of hams don't care.

I wonder if there is any one aspect of the hobby that the majority do
care about. What's the single most popular activity in ham radio?
Based on our local group, I'd have to say "drinking coffee with the gang."

Like the lottery, they're selling a dream: if the chip were omitted
without telling anyone, I doubt 99% of hams would notice. ;-)

You mean put the jack on the back for the key, but don't connect it to
anything? Yeah, I think you're probably right. Problem is, someone
from that 1% would hook up a paddle, find that it didn't work, and
inform the 99%. Then there would be an excuse to rant, and people who
don't even own a paddle would be vociferously roasting the manufacturer.

:-) -- Apply this smiley as necessary above if you take these comments
too seriously.

73, Steve KB9X

Steve Bonine wrote:
Bill Horne wrote:

I'll let you in on a secret: I think manufacturers put keyers in their
rigs because every ham who has forgotten the code wants to think that
he'll hook up an iambic key someday and win the CW SS.

I'm afraid that the majority of today's hams simply don't care. But if
you mentioned any one aspect of ham radio -- DX, contesting, public
service -- you could say the same thing. The _majority_ of hams don't
care.

I wonder if there is any one aspect of the hobby that the majority do
care about.

It is a interesting question, Steve. I suspect not. There are so many
different aspects and unfortunately some of them are at odds. If I had
to perform only one aspect of the hobby it would be homebrewing. But my
favorite activities are Homebrewing, PSK31, and contesting in that
order. Most everyone else would answer differently.

But to coin a phrase "Its all good!"


What's the single most popular activity in ham radio? Based
on our local group, I'd have to say "drinking coffee with the gang."

Hehe, we've nicknamed our local repeater the "Food Repeater". It is
pretty busy, but we do spend a lot of time talking about where to get
together for breakfast, lunch, dinner, dessert, coffee, snacks..... well
you get the idea.

Like the lottery, they're selling a dream: if the chip were omitted
without telling anyone, I doubt 99% of hams would notice. ;-)

You mean put the jack on the back for the key, but don't connect it to
anything? Yeah, I think you're probably right. Problem is, someone
from that 1% would hook up a paddle, find that it didn't work, and
inform the 99%. Then there would be an excuse to rant, and people who
don't even own a paddle would be vociferously roasting the manufacturer.

Minor quibble... Do you really think it is that high a number? Keeping
in mind that that roughly half of all hams are Technicians that probably
wouldn't be expected to know. But of General and above, I would think
that most would notice.

At any rate, it isn't that expensive or space hogging an addition, and
it has uses beyond transmitting CW Morse - tuning and Morse practice.

The rigs are meant to be versatile, I mean I have USB capability on 40
meters and below, and LSB above that. There are other things that are
likely used much less than a keyer.

On a related subject, There was a new Ham trying to sell a Icom IC-7000
(I Want, I Want!)on QRZ Because he said it didn't perform well and he
was tired of it. Several other Hams tried to get him to say exactly what
wasn't working with it, and it ended up that he just didn't understand
how to work an HF radio. The thing with HF rigs is that they are
definitely NOT plug and play. That's what I love about them, but new
guys and gals coming from the HT world of repeaters need a lot of
Elmering. And we should be doing it.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -