Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
George,
Would you mind sharing the info for the 140$ PC you bought?
73! de Bekir TA2RX
10 Nis 2025 Per 18:36 tarihinde George Korper via <georgekorper= [email protected]> ?unu yazd?:
I purchased an amazing $140 mini PC and use a USB cable. QMX + doesn't need a hardware change.?
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
I purchased an amazing $140 mini PC and use a USB cable. QMX + doesn't need a hardware change.?
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
I have to smile when I keep seeing requests for more power, surely the answer is in the name, “QRP Labs”.
Notwithstanding the 10W and 50W add on amplifiers, surely the radios themselves should remain true to QRP concept.
?
Unless we are going to see a new “QRO Labs” division…
Just imagine the amount of smoke likely to be generated then?
?
Best wishes to you all wherever you all live and whatever your views…
?
?
?
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
I've had some discussions with Hans about what it would take to produce a very useful user-friendly digital communications "appliance" based on the QMX. I think that one way to implement this would be to use a combination of a QMX and a Raspberry Pi Zero 2W running something similar to DigiPi (). DigiPi uses a Pi connected to a transceiver, and allows several digital communications programs to then be run using a web browser (including the web browser on your smartphone) for the user interface. My idea is to create something similar configured specifically for the QMX. That would make it even simpler to use since it would be mostly preconfigured and it would only include programs compatible with the QMX. It could also take advantage of features (like access to the console menus) that are specific to this radio. Like the DigiPi, this could be distributed as custom image for the Pi that you just need to write to a micro SD card and stick into a Pi. Unlike DigiPi, I hope that this would be freely distributed so that anyone could download a copy of it from a link at qrp-labs.com. DigiPi is currently only available to people who support KM6LYW on Patreon. I suppose that another version could be created that would include only the programs compatible with the QDX.
I plan to explore this possibility further. However, I'm currently staying busy with my work on ardopcf (), so it might be a while. So, if somebody else wants to work on this idea, that would be even better. In that case, I'd be happy to offer further opinions about how I think that this might be implemented.
Peter LaRue
AI7YN
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
?
This reminds me of what I did with my QCX.? If I had a top case with correct size hole for the display it would look professional, as is I have to remove the cover to see the display.
?
The touch screen part communicates with the radio via CAT, so there were no changes to the QCX source code.? The same could be done with the QMX I suspect.?? I processed audio separate from the QCX with an option to mux in the QCX audio or the SDR audio, that wouldn't even be needed with the QMX.
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
Hi Jack et al
Thanks OM, encouraging comments :-)? I wouldn't be too concerned about Hans workload. Think about it. He has over 10,000 QCX-and-family radios out there and they all work "right out of the box". This includes the "standard" QCX, the "mini" QCX, and now the QMX.?
Gross underestimate :-)? ?To be strictly accurate: ? 21,343 QCX-series (QCX, QCX+, QCX-mini), debut August 2017 9,347 QDX-series (QDX, QDX-M), debut October 2021 8,922 QMX-series (QMX, QMX+), debut May 2023
So yeah, don't worry too much, I am used to a high workload... but rest assured: whatever new thing I develop, if and when, I will do so very quietly to avoid any pressure and stress; so you guys speculate all you like, but don't?expect any hints from me!
|
Hello Marek,
?
please read my post from a different thread.
?
Maybe there is a medium value resistance between neighbour pins. If you put voltage at this place the value may change after a while. And maybe, the value changed during some months since building slightly to the worse.
?
73 Ludwig
|
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 04:44 PM, @Ludwig_DH8WN wrote:
pin 3 up to pin 15 (2 - 4, 4 - 5, ..., 14 - 15).
Sorry, typo!!!
Correct is 2 - 3, 3 - 4, ..., 14 - 15.
|
On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 04:57 AM, james jones wrote:
Touched up all display board connections and now I get two lines on the right side of the display.
Jim, so something was wrong in this area. Maybe you fixed not all. A missing connection is bad and also some unwanted connection between pins. Such an unwanted connection between neighbour pins may produce what you see.
Please check resistance between neighbour pins starting from LCD pin 3 up to pin 15 (2 - 4, 4 - 5, ..., 14 - 15). The value should be very high. Check the display board alone and connected to the mainboard.
Not only a short but also a higher resistance could bring problems. (And if you will find a problem I guess it's around pin 7 ... pin 14).
?
73 Ludwig
|
Re: #qmx #SSB Firmware beta 1_01_003 release
#qmx
#ssb
Maybe the reason he blew up the BS170s during calibration is because Q507 was dead already.
?
Tony
AD0VC
|
Re: #qmx #SSB Firmware beta 1_01_003 release
#qmx
#ssb
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 01:36 AM, Steve M wrote:
Given that I fried one of the BS170s in the PA doing the SSB calibration, It is possible that Q507 was also damaged.
Steve, I'm not sure about the BS170 but 99% sure Q507 is dead (only some silicon wire).
Yes, a broken BS170 could affect Q507. There is a small possibility some parts to drive Q507 are broken but every time I saw a situation similar to yours Q507 was dead. (I repaired some QMX for other users.)
?
73 Ludwig
|
I’m fairly certain all the pins are soldered on both sides. ?My question is why the display is “corrupted”. ?Processor must be working to some extent. ?
Thanks for the response.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 10, 2025, at 6:45?AM, Daniel Walter via groups.io <nm3a@...> wrote:
?
Jim,
?It can be done before mounting the display board to the front panel. That's what I did. Doing so requires a little thought and a couple of extra assembly/ disassembly to make sure everything will fit once you go to mount it to the front panel.?
--
73, Dan? NM3A
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
I wouldn't be too concerned about Hans workload. Think about it. He has over 10,000 QCX-and-family radios out there and they all work "right out of the box". This includes the "standard" QCX, the "mini" QCX, and now the QMX. The father of the QMX was at the YOTA conference in Africa in 2018. Why the 7-year lag? Because Hans doesn't release a product until he's convinced it's bullet proof. He front-loads the hardware/software work before he releases it, which means he doesn't need to do much in the way of support/debugging after the sale. Is he working on a QMX version with a touch display? Personally, I doubt it because it would be such a large departure from his low-power consumption transceivers. He is the King of the QRP-CW pond with a price-point that's damn near impossible to beat. The QMX might be his only foray into the SSB end of things. I don't see him jumping into the G90, FX-CR4, ?SDR, and sBITX pond.
As Mel Brooks said once: "It's good to be king."
Jack, W8TEE
On Thursday, April 10, 2025 at 09:34:17 AM EDT, va3rr via groups.io <va3rr@...> wrote:
zBitx current on receive is 300mA, so I tend to agree with you, Jerry.
OTOH, the QMX is my preference for portable work due to it's smaller form factor compared to the QMX+.? I'd be concerned about Hans workload if he had to support coding for 2 different styles of display, and all the change requests that would follow...
72 de Russ, va3rr
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:18 AM, Jerry Gaffke wrote:
> For portable use, doing everything through the front panel and and the small
> display there keeps power requirements low.
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
With appropriate STM32F firmware, Hans need no further involvement in developing that RPi-Zero+Display.
Something interested forum members could do.
Hans could concentrate on making the QMX bullet-proof, maybe a bit more power, some stand-alone digital modes would be nice.
?
Jerry
?
?
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 06:34 AM, va3rr wrote:
OTOH, the QMX is my preference for portable work due to it's smaller form factor compared to the QMX+. I'd be concerned about Hans workload if he had to support coding for 2 different styles of display, and all the change requests that would follow...
|
If you're trying to get the under 5 W bonus in a contest and you know you're running 6 W that's at least an ethical problem.
?
I solved the "12 V" LiFePO problem with an adjustable regulator. My QMX was putting out over 5 W even with 12 V in, so I just ramp it down to 11 V now.
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
zBitx current on receive is 300mA, so I tend to agree with you, Jerry.
OTOH, the QMX is my preference for portable work due to it's smaller form factor compared to the QMX+. I'd be concerned about Hans workload if he had to support coding for 2 different styles of display, and all the change requests that would follow...
72 de Russ, va3rr
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:18 AM, Jerry Gaffke wrote: For portable use, doing everything through the front panel and and the small
display there keeps power requirements low.
|
Re: Here's hoping for QMX+ v2
Samantha,
?
For portable use, doing everything through the front panel and and the small display there keeps power requirements low.
?
> ?Wouldn't it be loverly if the next version of the QMX had a display like the zBitx.?
?
May be possible to do all you want by adding an RPi-Zero and a screen of your choice into the top half of the QMX+ clamshell.
Hans plans to add more firmware features to the QMX, allowing more control via UART and USB.
?
Jerry, KE7ER
|
Bruce, my QMX arrived a few months ago into Connecticut via DHL without any brokerage fee.? I wonder if this falls under De Minimis (no tariff) which may mean no brokerage required either.? From online:?
What is the de minimis rule in the US?
?
The United States is eliminating de minimis for China and Hong Kong starting May 2, 2025. The de minimis exemption provided by 19 U.S. C. § 1321(a)(2)(C) (aka Section 321 shipments) allows one shipment of goods (per person, per day) valued at or under $800 to enter the U.S. free from duty and import taxes
|
I am in the USA and ordered a QMX+ last week thinking it would come from MO.? It was shipped from turkey.? Now I am really worried as I have heard Fedex charges really outrageous (like $75) brokerage fees.? ?? i will post back once I receive
|
|
|
jjpurdum
va3rr