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
 

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

Cost of internal keyer
 

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

Instead of a chip, wouldn't it make more sense
just to use a small subroutine in the CPU?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cost of internal keyer
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Instead of a chip, wouldn't it make more sense
just to use a small subroutine in the CPU?

That's what most radios do these days. Some with
less-than-perfect priorities: The internal keyer
of one particular YAECOMWOD flagship transceiver
I recently had the pleasure to operate generated
broken CW if the processor had other tasks, like
starting the internal fan, to do...

About the topic in general: The cost of adding a
keyer is negligible, and no serious manufacturer
will even consider to omit it from their radios.

It *is* a selling point, no matter if people use
it or not...

73,
--
Fabian Kurz, DJ1YFK * Dresden, Germany * http://fkurz.net/

Cost of internal keyer
 

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 -

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

"Fabian Kurz" wrote in message
...
Cecil Moore wrote:
Instead of a chip, wouldn't it make more sense
just to use a small subroutine in the CPU?

That's what most radios do these days. Some with
less-than-perfect priorities: The internal keyer
of one particular YAECOMWOD flagship transceiver
I recently had the pleasure to operate generated
broken CW if the processor had other tasks, like
starting the internal fan, to do...

About the topic in general: The cost of adding a
keyer is negligible, and no serious manufacturer
will even consider to omit it from their radios.

It *is* a selling point, no matter if people use
it or not...

73,
--
Fabian Kurz, DJ1YFK * Dresden, Germany * http://fkurz.net/

I recently bought a high end HF rig and would not have considered it
if it had been the same rig with no keyer built in.
My code skills have been lost from years of not using them, but now
that I don't have to gain a certain word speed to "upgrade" I have a
paddle and will be starting CW again. Ashame that a hobby that is
suppose to promote experimentation and communication had blocked
of so many frequencies for "elitist" use.
****************** Oh by the way straight from the
current ARRL QST April issue Page 12 "This Just In" "U.S. hams
who wish to operate with full privileges in European countries covered by
the
European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations
(CEPT) must now hold an Extra class licensee."******************
I was studying for my Extra, but if all it is to be, is another elitist" use
of
rules and reg's to validate the "high standing" of VEC's and 'higher ups'
then
maybe I should skip the Extra Class. I have heard OT's and many in the
Extra portions of the bands using as poor practices / illegal power / rude
and
foul language as in any other portions of the bands. If someone new or at
a
lower class licensee want so misbehave, restricting them to operate outside
Extra band plans will not create good manors and legal behavior. Didn't
anyone learn a thing from prohibition nearly a century ago. Same
philosophy.
73 Have a Nice Day

Cost of internal keyer
 

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message


[snip]

: 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.

Another minor quibble - I take it by that you mean all *US* amateurs..?

73 Ivor G6URP

Cost of internal keyer
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote

Instead of a chip, wouldn't it make more sense
just to use a small subroutine in the CPU?

How would YOU know? ;-)

Cecil, are you ready to get on the air? I'm waitin'....

Howard

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

"Mr Fed UP" wrote

****************** Oh by the way straight from the
current ARRL QST April issue Page 12 "This Just In" "U.S. hams
who wish to operate with full privileges in European countries covered by
the
European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations
(CEPT) must now hold an Extra class licensee."******************

Your concern misses the whole point. It is a *privilege* to hold an extra
class licensee... especially if she's cute!

Howard N7SO

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

On Mar 25, 2:28�pm, "Mr Fed UP" wrote:
My code skills have been lost from years of not
using them, but now
that I don't have to gain a certain word speed to
"upgrade" I have a
paddle and will be starting CW again. �

I don't see the connection. btw, all US amateur licenses that
required code tests were available for just a 5 wpm code
test and a doctor's note since 1990 (18 years) and for just
a 5 wpm code test since 2000 (8 years).

Ashame that a hobby that is
suppose to promote experimentation and communication
had blocked
of so many frequencies for "elitist" use.

What frequencies were those?

The only CW/data spectrum reserved for Extras is the bottom
25 kHz of 80, 40, 20 and 15 meters.

Oh by the way straight from the
current ARRL QST April issue Page 12 "This Just In" �"U.S. hams
who wish to operate with full privileges in European countries
covered by the
European Conference of Postal and
Telecommunications Administrations
(CEPT) must now hold an Extra �class licensee"

Extra or Advanced.

I was studying for my Extra, but if all it is to be,
is another elitist" use of rules and reg's to validate the
"high standing" of VEC's and 'higher ups'
then maybe I should skip the Extra Class.

The change has nothing to do with the VECs. It is the result of CEPT's
Radio Regulatory Working Group re-evaluating the equivalence between
CEPT country license requirements and US license requirements.

IOW, the CEPT folks decided that having a General or Technician class
license does not qualify the licensee to have full operating
privileges in CEPT countries. Since Techs and Generals don't have full
US operating privileges, why should they have full privs in CEPT
countries?

�I have heard OT's and many in the
Extra portions of the bands using as poor practices / illegal
power / rude and
foul language as in any other portions of the bands.

Have you heard those goings-on from hams using non-voice modes?

73 de Jim, N2EY�

Cost of internal keyer
 

Ivor Jones wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message


[snip]

: 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.

Another minor quibble - I take it by that you mean all *US* amateurs..?


That would be correct. Sometimes I/we forget that this is an
international group. Sorry about that.


Anyhow, the point is that there are a lot of Amateurs who might not be
expected to know that there is a Keyer or even a Key jack on an HF radio
because they wouldn't be expected to


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

Michael Coslo wrote:
I would not at all object to new license classes that were just
based on knowledge, and didn't confer any particular privileges.

That was essentially the case in 1954 when the Extra
Class license didn't confer any particular frequency
privileges. With a lowly mail-order Conditional Class
license obtained by a lowly high school junior, I earned
access to all amateur radio frequencies. ex-WN5DXP
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cost of internal keyer
 

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message

: Ivor Jones wrote:
: "Michael Coslo" wrote in message
:
:
: [snip]
:
: : 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.
:
: Another minor quibble - I take it by that you mean all
: *US* amateurs..?
:
:
: That would be correct. Sometimes I/we forget that this is
: an international group. Sorry about that.

No problem :-)

: Anyhow, the point is that there are a lot of Amateurs who
: might not be expected to know that there is a Keyer or
: even a Key jack on an HF radio because they wouldn't be
: expected to.

But I rather think those who do expect it would be rather annoyed if it
wasn't there. The question is what percentage of amateurs is that overall
in the market for HF radios..?

Personally I've never been interested in CW but it would be rather nice if
a radio I bought had the facility, just in case. Particularly if the
additional cost was negligible.


73 Ivor G6URP

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

Thanks contributors.... even when all dont agree it is nice to have some
reasonable idears to
ponder,


Cheers 73

Cost of internal keyer * nothing to do with cost!
 

Michael Coslo writes:

wrote:
I've heard a little - not much. But by and large, most people who use
non-voice modes such as PSK31 and OOK Morse are going to be less
likely to engage in shenanigans because the very nature of the modes
slows things down a little, and the Op is more likely to give a little
more thought about what they type or key.

Heard on the 9X0R listening frequency on 40m last night, in excellent
CW:

CQ DX CQ DX CQ DX de QRM QRM

On top of all the malicious tuning and jamming.

73

LA4RT Jon, Trondheim, Norway