630m Transverter

A reminder that there was a 4 page article in Sept QST on the design of my simple transverter for 630m. This is also on my main website at www.g3xbm.co.uk. I use it with my FT817, but other rigs could be used.

630m is a good band and the transverter puts out 10-15W into 50 ohms. Even with my earth-electrode "antenna" it has spanned most of western Europe on TX with a measured ERP of about 5mW on WSPR.

QST - thank you Rupert

Rupert G4XRV very kindly sent me a copy of September QST. Rupert reads my blog from time to time and saw that I had not seen the magazine in which my recent article appeared. This was very kind and much appreciated. Thank you Rupert.

QST article

A couple of people who see QST magazine have told me that my article on a 472kHz transverter appeared in the September 2016 edition. I have not seen this as I don't get QST. Although I was sent a draft for corrections, I've not seen the final version. There was some doubt about it appearing as the ARRL were waiting and waiting for the band to be allocated in the USA.

The article was written years ago (2013?) before I was ill with my stroke. Anyway, I hope those who get QST will be inspired to have a go on this fascinating band. Although the transverter puts out 10-15W, my ERP on the band was in the low milliwatts. Despite this, I have been copied over 1000km on WSPR with just an earth-electrode antenna. With a "proper" antenna for the band and a decent ground it should be easily possible to exceed 2000km.

472kHz transverter article in QST

At long last it looks like my article for QST in the USA will be published soon. They were waiting for the band to be released, but I wrote this a very long time ago, before my stroke. The stroke was Sept 2013!!

By the way, QST do not pay much. I think we do these things more for love!

Using the KX3 portable?

As I prepare for my West Country holiday with my brother next week, I'm amused to see the QST advert for the Elecraft KX3 in use in very rocky terrain. Why am I amused? Well, there is no way that I'd take a "fully loaded" KX3 costing close to £1200 (in UK prices) up a mountain as shown in the photo!

It is OK taking a 12 year old FT817 or a 6 year old VX2 handheld: if these get damaged it's not be a disaster as I've already had huge value from them.  But an investment of close on £1200 is another matter.

Perhaps I am not typical, but if I was to spend this sort of money I would not want to throw it in a backpack, risk dropping it on rocks or in a bog and getting battered and scratched. Also, being a very SMD intensive unit, repair is far from easy or low cost.

A better bet for a really portable transceiver to use in SOTA or other portable operations would be a rugged little direct conversion CW or DSB transceiver built into a strong die-cast case, probably for just a single band. It need not look pretty, just functional. Such a unit could be built to give good performance for under £20 buying EVERYTHING new. If dropped, one could easily fix it when back home. If it even got dropped in a bog and irrevocably damaged it wouldn't matter: just build another one!

No, something is wrong if anyone thinks they have to spend £1200 to climb a hill and enjoy amateur radio. I have no doubt the KX3 is a very excellent radio, but it is too expensive (for me) to use in backpack mode.

Writing for radio magazines

In recent years I've written articles on a wide range of subjects, from VLF to optical, for several different radio magazines around the world. Now I don't do it for the money as I have a pension that covers my needs adequately, but I am surprised how poorly radio magazines do pay authors. This may be one reason why they find it hard to find new authors.  I won't quote figures here as I don't want to embarrass anyone, but you have to write articles for the pleasure of doing so and not for the financial rewards, especially when tax is deducted.

One of the lowest payers appears to be the ARRL, which I find particularly surprising considering that QST must have one of the largest circulations in the world. Considering how long it takes to put a decent article together  with illustrations and schematics (very many hours), the rewards are probably better if one stacked shelves at a local supermarket or worked on the local dustcart.  It doesn't exactly encourage budding authors.

Times are hard and revenues in amateur radio magazines from adverts is probably falling, but reading QST, Practical Wireless and RadCom I see pages and pages of adverts that must bring in a decent amount. Maybe they'd get, and keep, more readers if they encouraged people to write interesting articles by paying a little more?

Digital QST

Although not (yet) an ARRL member I am tempted join to get the new digital version of QST magazine. A sample of this new digital version is available from the ARRL website.

QST has been a very useful source of data going back to around 1916. I well remember thumbing through the copy in Plymouth library when attending  RAE lessons at Plymouth Tech way back in 1966.