![]() |
Cost of internal keyer
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 |
Cost of internal keyer
"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 |
Cost of internal keyer
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! |
Cost of internal keyer
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 |
Cost of internal keyer
"Klystron" wrote in message ... 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 Certainly makes more sense than including AM, FM and RTTY. A lot less money involved, too, well maybe RTTY is about the same as a keyer. But AM and FM require additional filters, additional circuitry, etc., and their following is probably a lot smaller than CW. (obviously, on HF. VHF FM is clearly heavy hitter but not so much on HF, especially at this time of the cycle.) ... |
Cost of internal keyer
|
Cost of internal keyer
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 - |
Cost of internal keyer
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 |
Cost of internal keyer
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 |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com