Why not poll faster during the times you can tell that the operator is sending CW? ? There is really no reason to receive while transmitting in a unit that can’t quite do full break-in, is there? ?speed up the polling to maybe 30 times per second. ?While polling faster, don’t try to initiate FFT receive ;?
When you observe no straight key closures for a time equal to or greater than CW delay * n , change the polling back to slow polling.
Try a different values of n until it works right
That still gives you relay-free ?transmit/receive, switching, probably between words?
Gordon?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sep 28, 2024, at 13:51, VE6LX via groups.io <dclarke2@...> wrote:
?
I am going to ask the question then. how do the Elecraft and Flex transceivers get around this problem by using external keyers as their users suggest this solves their high speed CW issues. As a processor the Raspberry Pi is no slouch when it comes to sped of processing. or is the issue the means of translating the man written computer written code into machine derived code (Compiling). Remember even the original Mac had to write some parts in binary to make it fit the available memory and the required speed of processing. I for one do not believe CW requires more clock cycles than the Radio. A Software Defined Transmitter (encoder) does require more clock cycles than a pure CW transmitter. These are the times when having a pure CW transmitter and a pure CW Receiver have advantages (frequency spotting is one) the lack of wasted power in the side bands is another, just because the carrier is suppressed does not mean the Power Amp is not amplifying the upper and lower carriers. There has been many papers written on this subject as to the destructive waste of power these sidebands create or burn up in the form of excess Heat and excess RF Noise. With a Software Defined Radio why not create a pure CW Transmitter and pure CW Receiver. Has anyone even considered going back a step.
As Ashhar has stated the SBitX is a Hybrid SDR for a reason. There are RF components at the Front and Back end for a reason. Perhaps a second look at the process in light of the users wanting a CW Transceiver.?
Look at the Simple CW only Devices on the market for the POTA and SOTA Crowd. While a SSB Transceiver does enable all the digital modes with ease. In the basic design is it possible to configure the software to enable a Pure CW Transmitter and a Pure CW Receiver. Is the required hardware for this physically present or is this an unrealistic dream or just an oversight due to expediency of simplistic design, if one assumes an SSB Transceiver is good enough. It may well be it is good enough for the average Amateur Radio operator and the CW purists should really look elsewhere or to different technology to satisfy their addiction to high speed Morse via radio.
Thanks for Listening to an old (83) grump. VE6LX
