¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

  1. BITX20
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages Polls
Date
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

The uBITX come in a plastic parts box, itself very sturdy, and in turn that is packed in a cardboard box, Hans. I suspect nobody is commenting on this aspect because the great majority of us have seen how well the item is packed, hence see no need to focus on that aspect.

Bill, VK7MX


On 21/06/2018 5:55 PM, Hans Summers wrote:

> Blame your own country postal or package delivery service.??

Just a pedantic observation, because I read a lot of comments and so far it seems that everyone is saying the same thing, "blame the post office". There is a missing piece of information here, that nobody has mentioned. If a package arrives damaged, there are TWO possible causes:?

1) Someone somewhere in the international postal systems handled it roughly. Played football with it. Gave it to their pet elephant for trampling practice. Whatever... It happens, sometimes (not often).?

- OR -?

2) The package wasn't adequately packed. If the contents are packed in bubble wrap and then put in a reasonably robust cardboard box, that could be considered a reasonable degree of packing on the part of the shipper. At an extreme if there was just a plastic bag with a label on it, and no other soft materials, that would clearly be asking for trouble.?

So it seems to me that almost nobody is considering this second point, without which, consideration of the first point has no relevance.

Finally I would say that one-off issues with missing items, damaged items, lost items etc should be handled in emails to the company not to the technical discussion list. But if there is some problem with the company not being contactable then that could change the situation.?

73 Hans G0UPL
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

The carrier seems to be way off from where it should be. A re-setting of the BFO should fix this easily. You have to turn on the setup from the menu, then select the BFO settings. Tune away from any station, and tune for properly passband. Here is Peter showing how it is done:


- f

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:18 AM, Andy V. Borisenko via Groups.Io <rw9rn@...> wrote:
I made a video for those who do not believe that in uBitx v4 is a bad sound.


Enjoy!


Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

> Blame your own country postal or package delivery service.??

Just a pedantic observation, because I read a lot of comments and so far it seems that everyone is saying the same thing, "blame the post office". There is a missing piece of information here, that nobody has mentioned. If a package arrives damaged, there are TWO possible causes:?

1) Someone somewhere in the international postal systems handled it roughly. Played football with it. Gave it to their pet elephant for trampling practice. Whatever... It happens, sometimes (not often).?

- OR -?

2) The package wasn't adequately packed. If the contents are packed in bubble wrap and then put in a reasonably robust cardboard box, that could be considered a reasonable degree of packing on the part of the shipper. At an extreme if there was just a plastic bag with a label on it, and no other soft materials, that would clearly be asking for trouble.?

So it seems to me that almost nobody is considering this second point, without which, consideration of the first point has no relevance.

Finally I would say that one-off issues with missing items, damaged items, lost items etc should be handled in emails to the company not to the technical discussion list. But if there is some problem with the company not being contactable then that could change the situation.?

73 Hans G0UPL
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

Andy V. Borisenko
 

but where does the money?
140 or 1400 dollars, in any case, the radio should work!
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I would be curious as to how many folks received a damaged radio. I have bought 5 and none were damaged. I am of the opinion that many buy on price and don¡¯t understand that folks ¡°modding¡± them is the major reason for buying. Every single one will work out of the shipping box if wired correctly and put on the air with no modifications. (excepting? the few with the bad batch of audio chips, even that easily fixed). My first contact with my original Bitx was a ZS followed by a VE from my QTH in South Carolina, it was my third contact before I worked a US station (Grin!). Mine does not use any of the original software as I have a GPS guided Arduino and a 4 X 20 display with grid square (thanks Jack on the programming help) and other items I wanted.

To see some of the negative nellys whining because they thought a $140 should give them the equivalent of a Kenwood with manual, support and warranty. They see folks making changes they don¡¯t understand then use it as excuse to attack a guy producing a radio cheaper than they can buy the parts and providing employment for women in his community. The attitudes sicken me! /RANTOFF

?

v/r

Fred W4JLE

Happy with all my purchases from Faran

?

?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jack Purdum via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 11:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BITX20] uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

?

"...that it will be required by the builder to almost replace every component to make the rig work."

?

Bullcrap, and you know it!

?

"No one can expect a builder to rip out components and bodge the pcb to get it to work. This is not a user friendly board as it is all surface mounted and if you dont have good eye sight and the correct equipment then it will end up as a bin job!!"

?

More bullcrap. First, all 5 of mine worked "out of the box" and, add about three or four thousand more buyers who also have it working without mods, and I'm pretty sure you screwed something up. Second, I'm 75 with a sad excuse for eyesight, yet with a headset of magnifying lens, I've found that I can solder a 10-pin Si5351 chip the size of a match head onto a PCB. Have you even tried working with SMD parts? You knew before you bought the two rigs that they contained SMD parts and that many mods have been made. Sounds to me like you ignored your own research. Whose fault is that?

?

"I paid good money for a Bitx 40 and a Ubitx V3 and both were received damaged, a replacement Bitx was sent and that was also received damaged."

?

Evidently you didn't learn your lesson on the first one and should have paid the DHL fee on the second. I've purchase 5 units and everyone of them arrived in good shape, and the US is farther away the the UK. As someone once said: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results". Seems to me to be sort of a "fool-me-once" situation on your part.

?

Jack, W8TEE

?

On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 9:57:33 AM EDT, Ray Koster via Groups.Io <raykoster@...> wrote:

?

?

I think that Andy is correct in thinking why he should have to do all these mods to this kit!! I also have purchased and built several kits in the past and have never had to do the scale of modifications that are now required to get this kit to work correctly. It was never disclosed on the HF signals website that it will be required by the builder to almost replace every component to make the rig work and be legal on the air.

Why are you Guy's sticking up for Farhan, when he does not come forward and hold his hands up and say that the kit should have never gone to market.If this was UK produced ,then Trading Standards would have closed HF Signals down long ago!!!

No one can expect a builder to rip out components and bodge the pcb to get it to work. This is not a user friendly board as it is all surface mounted and if you dont have good eye sight and the correct equipment then it will end up as a bin job!!

Also most builders do not have the correct test equipment to make tests to insure that after all these mod's, they are legal when on the air with this kit

My biggest beef about all this is that HF Signals cannot deliver a kit to me that is not damaged in the post and please dont tell me I have pissed of the postman, My postman is a nice guy and so are the staff at the sorting office and India to the UK is a very long way

I paid good money for a Bitx 40 and a Ubitx V3 and both were received damaged, a replacement Bitx was sent and that was also received damaged.

When I pay good money, I expect to receive the goods in a usable state and then I do not expect to have to then remove and replace most of the components at my expense, and?probably?have to wait weeks for these new components to come in, just to get it to work correctly

Firmware updates are acceptable as the nature of the code can led to bugs creeping in and this is a very easy thing to do and does not require butchery of the pcb

Ray Koster G7BHQ

Re: Enclosure #parts

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I look forward to what he comes up with!!!

Bill
K0WHW





On Jun 20, 2018, at 19:42, bdevries52@... wrote:

Bill;
The Ubtix takes a 8x8x3 box the fold down DRO is very interesting I have a Engineer/designer son in law I will fwd this to him and see what he comes up with, I want to take mine camping and this would work great.
Bob KA9CMH

Re: smd Capacitor #bitx40

 

it is a through hole 0.1uf. It when across the analog tuning pot. That's just in case you wanted to use the analog tuning AND you have issues of RFI being picked up by your chassis.
- f

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:25 AM, <jah12@...> wrote:
Just finished assembling my BitX40.
On the parts list showing what is in the box, there is item 16 (obviously added on) which is an smd 0.1mfd capacitor. The capacitor is included in the parts supplied, but where where does it go?
There is nothing in the "Wiring up the BitX40" notes that mentions this capacitor.
Any one help out where to place this cap?
73
?
--
John VK6JAH


smd Capacitor #bitx40

 

Just finished assembling my BitX40.
On the parts list showing what is in the box, there is item 16 (obviously added on) which is an smd 0.1mfd capacitor. The capacitor is included in the parts supplied, but where where does it go?
There is nothing in the "Wiring up the BitX40" notes that mentions this capacitor.
Any one help out where to place this cap?
73
?
--
John VK6JAH
Re: Thoughts on a Ham Bus

Rahul Srivastava
 

Ron ,

?Atlas bus has its own share of problems with the clk flowing thru bus. Secondly with the new gigabit protocol situation would become worse, decent synchronisation of Mercury cards was very tough. Signal integrity is much better on single board radios compared to the modular HPSDR unit.

73

Rahul VU3WJM?
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

Andy V. Borisenko
 

I made a video for those who do not believe that in uBitx v4 is a bad sound.


Enjoy!
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

Even if the price is say, double, Perhaps it would be impracticable to manage the expectations. Even under is09001:xxxx, the concept was to draw up a specification on behalf of would be customers, and? realize it with all sincerity.

To my humble thinking,? Ashar Farhan and/or the firm founded by him that made these units has done? possible best.? May be I want a gold lining, I may have to hack and realize my dreams or wish list.
?Now the hope is on his next project-- might be somet T&M design.

regards
?sarma
vu3zmv

Regards
MVS Sarma
?

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 7:26 PM, sridhar <vu3pen@...> wrote:
Farhan cannot manage your expectations nor is he required to do so.?
?
Agreed...especially at a $140 pricepoint.

yes

de?
vu3pen
sridhar??
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

The ubitx meets the FCC specs, so does bitx40.?
- f

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Kunjani Ol <loot@...> wrote:
And what are OFCOMS specs? Link please.


Re: TDA 28222

 

The new boards have a discrete amp. No TDA2822, no smoke.

- f

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 7:42 AM, JOHN CRONHELM <johncronhelm@...> wrote:
I have a new tested uBitX transceiver of the pre built type. Will it have a voltage protection for this IC included or do I have to add one?
Many thanks,
John vo1jcc.


Re: Thoughts on a Ham Bus

w7hd.rh
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I like the Atlas bus because it is intended for RF connections.? It has terminations, it has adequate pins for most potential applications, AND is off-the-shelf technology.? The test sweeps reveal a well thought out design.? Kudos to them!

Ron W7HD

On 06/20/2018 07:50 PM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:
Arv:
All tough questions, but worth answering. Think of the possibilities. Personally, I think this should be of the free-to-use license, mainly because I don't want to see extensions to the bus that aren't under someone's control. Otherwise, the standard slowly dissolves into chaos.

Every time an organization question comes up, I think of a sign I had on my desk when I was the department chairman:

??? For God so loved the world, he didn't send a committee.
Still, there has to be a small knot of knowledgeable people who know the EE and software side of this. It needs to be small because it needs to be nimble, yet with enough technical depth to make things work. I've seen the agony of trying to define a standard (i.e., the X3J11 committee to write the first standard for the C language)...it is a formidable task, and the difficult increases with the size of the committee. There are all kinds of technical details to think about and the Atlas bus would at least be a thoughtful starting point.

I think this could be a rewarding endeavor.

Jack, W8TEE



On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 8:36:53 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


If hams were to design and standardize a ham-bus-system approach to modular equipment,
should the design be placed in public domain, or under one of the free-to-use licenses???
Should a group be formed specifically for the purpose of bus design, documentation, and
publication?
How would upgrades, modifications, and alternative bus designs be handled?

Seems there are lots of questions, lots of possible opinions, and lots of work to do.

Arv

-- 
Ron W7HD - NAQCC#7587 OMISS#9898 KX3#6966 LinuxUser#415320
Editor OVARC newsletter
Re: uBITX Version 4 first attempt #ubitx-help #ubitx

 

And what are OFCOMS specs? Link please.
Re: Thoughts on a Ham Bus

 

I took part in the IETF committee on voice over IP (now RFC3261) and the Unicode standardization, it was getting teeth pulled out. That said, we have a few standards that already know of in the analog world. We have the BNC and the SMA connectors with 50 ohms interconnections. We have the 12, 5 and 3.3v supply. We don't have a control bus, but there is always the I2C. We don't have a standard software API but we do have hamlib, two or three SDR standards for sample formats.?
The good thing about standards, said Rciahrd Stevens, is that there are so many to choose from. That's the trouble!! Any attempt at protocol for radios will emerge as either cripplingly illogical like the CAT protocol or extensively overdone like the SIP protocol. What to include and what to leave out often results in such massively systems that implementing that in itself becomes a very challenging process, leave along hacking it.
The cubesat world has a physical standard, the PC104E boards. Each board is 90 mm by 95 mm with four mounting holes that are not symmetric at all (so smart, einstien!). The pinout is not defined either.?
In my lab, everything is BNC, everything is 50 ohms, everything has on-board regulators to bring things down from 12v to the required voltages. I have 10-12 of BNC pigtails, each about 6 inches. That, a pair of RF attenuators, two VOMs, a specan and the occasional Rigol DS1052E is my 'bus'. The trouble with physically standardization, it might not suit the RF layouts. For instance, an race ring mixer needs the LO, RF, IF at specific locations. They can't be moved. Instead, I have standardized on tack soldering BNC connectors exactly where I need them on the ground plane.?
- f?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 8:20 AM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io <jjpurdum@...> wrote:
Arv:

All tough questions, but worth answering. Think of the possibilities. Personally, I think this should be of the free-to-use license, mainly because I don't want to see extensions to the bus that aren't under someone's control. Otherwise, the standard slowly dissolves into chaos.

Every time an organization question comes up, I think of a sign I had on my desk when I was the department chairman:

??? For God so loved the world, he didn't send a committee.

Still, there has to be a small knot of knowledgeable people who know the EE and software side of this. It needs to be small because it needs to be nimble, yet with enough technical depth to make things work. I've seen the agony of trying to define a standard (i.e., the X3J11 committee to write the first standard for the C language)...it is a formidable task, and the difficult increases with the size of the committee. There are all kinds of technical details to think about and the Atlas bus would at least be a thoughtful starting point.

I think this could be a rewarding endeavor.

Jack, W8TEE



On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 8:36:53 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


If hams were to design and standardize a ham-bus-system approach to modular equipment,
should the design be placed in public domain, or under one of the free-to-use licenses???
Should a group be formed specifically for the purpose of bus design, documentation, and
publication?
How would upgrades, modifications, and alternative bus designs be handled?

Seems there are lots of questions, lots of possible opinions, and lots of work to do.

Arv
Re: Thoughts on a Ham Bus

Steve Black
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

A camel is a horse designed by committee. Steve kb1chu


On 06/20/2018 10:50 PM, Jack Purdum via Groups.Io wrote:

Arv:
All tough questions, but worth answering. Think of the possibilities. Personally, I think this should be of the free-to-use license, mainly because I don't want to see extensions to the bus that aren't under someone's control. Otherwise, the standard slowly dissolves into chaos.

Every time an organization question comes up, I think of a sign I had on my desk when I was the department chairman:

??? For God so loved the world, he didn't send a committee.
Still, there has to be a small knot of knowledgeable people who know the EE and software side of this. It needs to be small because it needs to be nimble, yet with enough technical depth to make things work. I've seen the agony of trying to define a standard (i.e., the X3J11 committee to write the first standard for the C language)...it is a formidable task, and the difficult increases with the size of the committee. There are all kinds of technical details to think about and the Atlas bus would at least be a thoughtful starting point.

I think this could be a rewarding endeavor.

Jack, W8TEE



On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 8:36:53 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


If hams were to design and standardize a ham-bus-system approach to modular equipment,
should the design be placed in public domain, or under one of the free-to-use licenses???
Should a group be formed specifically for the purpose of bus design, documentation, and
publication?
How would upgrades, modifications, and alternative bus designs be handled?

Seems there are lots of questions, lots of possible opinions, and lots of work to do.

Arv
Re: Enclosure #parts

 

Hi Bob,

The box I put mine in is 6.5 X 7 X 2.75. If I put my heart into it I might make it slightly smaller. Is 8X8X3 a standard, off-the-shelf size?

73,

Bill KU8H

On 06/20/2018 08:42 PM, bdevries52@... wrote:
Bill;
The Ubtix takes a 8x8x3 box the fold down DRO is very interesting I have
a Engineer/designer son in law I will fwd this to him and see what he
comes up with, I want to take mine camping and this would work great.
Bob KA9CMH
--
bark less - wag more
Thoughts on a Ham Bus

Jack Purdum
 

Arv:

All tough questions, but worth answering. Think of the possibilities. Personally, I think this should be of the free-to-use license, mainly because I don't want to see extensions to the bus that aren't under someone's control. Otherwise, the standard slowly dissolves into chaos.

Every time an organization question comes up, I think of a sign I had on my desk when I was the department chairman:

??? For God so loved the world, he didn't send a committee.

Still, there has to be a small knot of knowledgeable people who know the EE and software side of this. It needs to be small because it needs to be nimble, yet with enough technical depth to make things work. I've seen the agony of trying to define a standard (i.e., the X3J11 committee to write the first standard for the C language)...it is a formidable task, and the difficult increases with the size of the committee. There are all kinds of technical details to think about and the Atlas bus would at least be a thoughtful starting point.

I think this could be a rewarding endeavor.

Jack, W8TEE



On Wednesday, June 20, 2018, 8:36:53 PM EDT, Arv Evans <arvid.evans@...> wrote:


If hams were to design and standardize a ham-bus-system approach to modular equipment,
should the design be placed in public domain, or under one of the free-to-use licenses???
Should a group be formed specifically for the purpose of bus design, documentation, and
publication?
How would upgrades, modifications, and alternative bus designs be handled?

Seems there are lots of questions, lots of possible opinions, and lots of work to do.

Arv
Re: Homebrew from scratch #ubitx

 

My dad is an EE and worked for fm and am broadcast stations around Tampa Florida.?

I recall him working on a fm exciter one of the djs were using as a pirate transmitter. The boards all plugged in as described here and had rails built in to the side of the chase. From what I have read that seems to be what you guys are talking about.

kf4ftr
64041 - 64060 of 116480