K IO is slow, K POP doesn't work on V1 G2

WildOne

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
12
Location
MD
I just received my new V1G2. I have used many versions of the V1G1 since the 90s. The old Escort before that....

I have seen the posts about the latency of K on the new V1G2. I can confirm that it is a full second with or without K verifier in all modes- A, I, L. This is with a almost full signal(not over driven) from an HP/Agilent signal generator. For lower level signals , it actually speeds up to about .5 second, but it is still nothing like the V1G1 or even the Old, OLD escort before V1 existed. They were both instantaneous.
It also will not detect any Radar signal that is shorter than 1 sec. ie one of these new short turn on time radars.

Ka is instantaneous on both V1G1 and V1G2. And it detects any short pulse down to about 20ms on Ka.

The other bad thing is that K POP doesn't work- At all in any mode or K verifier state. This is VERY bad. This was tested with an on time between 10ms up to 1 sec. When the on time gets to be about 1 sec, then it will sometimes pick up a strong signal very weakly. V1G1 picks it up just fine.

Ka POP works OK. It does have trouble sometimes at less than 20ms on time. Standard POP I believe is 67ms. I think there is a new version that goes down to 16ms. This is marginally detected. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Overall, not impressed with V1G1 for IO or POP. It is great for filtering out lane radars. The range/sensitivity on Ka is impressive. Much better than V1G1. K & X for standard signals seem to be about the same detection.

Valentine of course seems to know about the delay, but they didn't know about the POP. It may be going back until they get this fixed. I don't know that I can trust it. I trust the V1G1.... I just hate driving the beltway with it......
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
Before we go telling VR what they do and don't know, let's play this out a bit more!

Were you testing in real world conditions with LEO equipment?

Lab setting tests have shown some inconsistent results. Especially with modern detectors which are able to see much more detail on a signal. Not to mention the actual setting (where at?) the signal is transmitted in and where the RD is when receiving it!

Especially if it's a simulated signal, that's potentially a whole nother deal.

Here's an example of real-world testing that contradicts the picture you're painting. It's not a knock against you, but it further calls for people to get out and about to verify results!
 

Attachments

  • MWTG V1G2 K Band Performance.pdf
    40.7 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
12
Location
MD
Well, if you're listening for the LEO radar, you have to understand that the radar gun won't display a speed until it has verified multiple readings. This takes about a second. If it sees the speed change enough in this time frame it won't display a speed. This is how you can get out of talking to the LEO....if you can react quick enough, brake hard enough and yes get the alert form your RD as quick as possible, he won't display a speed.

Take note that the Ka band was instantaneous. For anything but POP and IO, K band behaved the same between Gen1 and Gen2. Of course Gen2 is much quieter on the street than Gen1 even without the K verifier on. I can make my signal generator look like a lane radar. Gen1 blasts away. Gen 2 is quite when K filter is enabled. Ka was much more sensitive in Gen2 compared to Gen1. This has also been proven in the field.

Lab testing if done correctly, will show the theoretical performance of the unit. It will only degrade in the field.

Just FYI, I design EW systems for the military. I know what I am doing in the lab.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
Well, if you're listening for the LEO radar, you have to understand that the radar gun won't display a speed until it has verified multiple readings. This takes about a second. If it sees the speed change enough in this time frame it won't display a speed. This is how you can get out of talking to the LEO....if you can react quick enough, brake hard enough and yes get the alert form your RD as quick as possible, he won't display a speed.

Take note that the Ka band was instantaneous. For anything but POP and IO, K band behaved the same between Gen1 and Gen2. Of course Gen2 is much quieter on the street than Gen1 even without the K verifier on. I can make my signal generator look like a lane radar. Gen1 blasts away. Gen 2 is quite when K filter is enabled. Ka was much more sensitive in Gen2 compared to Gen1. This has also been proven in the field.

Lab testing if done correctly, will show the theoretical performance of the unit. It will only degrade in the field.

Just FYI, I design EW systems for the military. I know what I am doing in the lab.
Let's keep it simple? Based on you not answering some of my Q's I'm guessing some of the answers are a no. NO ain't a bad thing, I'm just asking to understand.

**Well, what do you do when results contradict? You've read the paper I can assume?**

I don't appeal to authority, but it's cool you work in the MI sector; that would be a bit fallacious if I did and would disregard other testing results!

Just a FYI, please don't be offended it's the truth ☝️

Either way, more results is more data which will help others understand what they're using! Thanks for the testing!!!

What you said about the radar gun acquiring speed makes a lot of sense, gives people some hope and more tools (anything counts) in tricky situations.
 
Last edited:

TurboDriver

One foot on the brake, one on the gas...
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
3,128
Location
Michigan
What you said about the radar gun acquiring speed makes a lot of sense, gives people some hope and more tools (anything counts) in tricky situations.
Ahhh... I wouldn't say that... clearly there is a lack of experience with LEO grade guns if that is truly believed...
 
Last edited:

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
Ahhh... I wouldn't say that... clearly there is a lack of experience with LEO grade guns if that is truly believed...
Well that's a good thing to know... assuming you're right!?

I was being polite to the new guy (?), because I don't know myself. I'm a real world tester only, mostly because of where I live. I gain my experience through real world interactions and a lot of ass time.

Not being familiar, I could understand if there was certain logic for acquiring/printing speed. Doesn't mean it exists like your implying?

Well OP, we've got conflicting results and opinions. That's what makes forums interesting! Your FYI just became dangerous!
 

TurboDriver

One foot on the brake, one on the gas...
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
3,128
Location
Michigan
Well that's a good thing to know... assuming you're right!?

I was being polite to the new guy (?), because I don't know myself. I'm a real world tester only, mostly because of where I live. I gain my experience through real world interactions and a lot of ass time.

Not being familiar, I could understand if there was certain logic for acquiring/printing speed. Doesn't mean it exists like your implying?

Well OP, we've got conflicting results and opinions. That's what makes forums interesting! Your FYI just became dangerous!
I mean no disrespect to the OP but without getting too advanced, any LEO knows how their radar works and time to acquisition of speed etc. So certain information or assumptions make us look silly to them if they read this stuff... and I am sure many read the public stuff for entertainment and knowledge learning just like us.

It doesn't do any of us any good to believe things that even the generalist of LEOs know is wrong.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
I mean no disrespect to the OP but without getting too advanced, any LEO knows how their radar works and time to acquisition of speed etc. So certain information or assumptions make us look silly to them if they read this stuff... and I am sure many read the public stuff for entertainment and knowledge learning just like us.

It doesn't do any of us any good to believe things that even the generalist of LEOs know is wrong.
Lesson learned myself! I do not speak on LEO tech nor pretend to be an expert.

I'm glad you said something, and no offense to the OP... but this kinda gets to my point a bit. I feel like some need to get out and test real world, with actual LEO equipment, with realistic kill zones! Otherwise we ain't getting the full picture. This lab stuff or quasi in-home lab stuff with these newer complex & sensitive RDs gets tricky I feel. Just me though.

Shame on me for politely agreeing to what is apparently an incorrect statement which led myself and potentially others in the wrong direction!

We gotta be careful 🇺🇲
 
Last edited:

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
6,910
Reaction score
19,791
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
Time to the acquisition of speed depends on the Radar gun and the distance. That's all I'll say on that below intermediate. Whether an LEO plays it by the book and actually attempts to get 5 seconds of tracking and whether or not he's quick enough on the lock button if his department/locality actually even requires him to have a lock are a completely different matter.
 

DC Fluid

RDF Addicts Anonymous Member
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Jun 7, 2019
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
7,428
Age
54
Location
Prince George, B.C. Canada
No rules up here about how long LEO needs.
A reading is a reading, within factory specifications you could challenge in court.
Falcon HR scares the sheets off of me and I won't mention here how fast I can acquire vehicle speeds with it.
Just what @OBeerWANKenobi hints at, with a lot more fear in my tone....
 

WildOne

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
12
Location
MD
To answer some of these questions, The LEO is supposed to identify a potential speeder visually. Then verify with the radar gun to get a track history over many seconds. This is the ideal. Practically, they shoot you with the least possible warning both visually and radar, as quick as they can. Practically they can get a "reading" in only a second or so if it is a steady speed.

One time, I had a LEO pull me over after IO, I braked hard to below the PSL, then coasted. He of course knew what I did when he pulled me over. He asked if I knew how fast I was going. I said no, I didn't. He then said that he only registered my speed at the PSL. He knew I was faster, but had no evidence. "Slow down and have a nice day!"

Another time, I was at best going 5 over the PSL in a heavily patrolled area. I suddenly had a LEO pull out behind me and pulled me over for 20 over PSL. I asked how he determined this. He said radar. I asked was it still on. He said of course. I told him, no it wasn't. I have a radar detector concealed above the mirror and it isn't going off with the LEO 10 ft behind me. I asked if I could see it. Almost 40 years ago, he was more than happy to let me see it. When I started writing down the serial number of the unit and explained to him that I was doing the PSL and because I wasn't detecting his radar, then it must be tuned out of the radar band and therefor the speed registered was completely wrong. Back then they had to tune the radar with a real tuning fork that vibrated at a given speed. You had to adjust the radar to that cal speed at least once a day if not more.( not the case with any radar made in the last 20 years I believe.) Adjust it in the right direction and you suddenly increased your $$ revenue by a lot.

Well, he was very pissed off and told me to get the blankety blank out of there right now! No warning, ticket or anything.

I also agree with the real world testing. Not many people understand how radar works, when they fail or when they work well. Highway radar are really pretty simple if you have a good understanding of radar phenomenology. Mike Valentine has a good description of the basic concepts on his site. The real world is more complicated, but does follow basic physical principles that can be easily predicted from good lab testing and practical knowledge.

I have tested many RDs in the lab. While some detectors appear on certain lab tests to be better than the V1, in practice they aren't. (very few do test better and only in specific tests) If you understand the limitations or application of the lab tests, you can predict real world performance.

Take my concern with detecting IO. It's not only the standard IO encounter. Put a LEO around the curve shining a a particular angle for oncoming. If one detector can alert on a 0.1 sec pulse, while another takes 1 sec, then the faster detector will pick up the glint off of a car going by the LEO that is around the corner in front of you (not in the actual turn, where both RDs would pick it up, but right at LEO, out of your line of sight). Or the road sign that happens to be blowing in the wind reflecting in your direction only a short period of time. Contrived? Yes. Could it be true? also yes.

Don't get me wrong. I love the V1. I think it is the best detector on the market in real world settings. Do others test better? Yes, sometimes in the lab and in the field. But I do agree with Mike's assessments of the "real world testing". Take all tests with a grain of salt. He has valid points, not just marketing BS.

The V1G2 appears to be the same or better than Gen1 in 90% of real world encounters. It is that 10% that I need to have fixed to fully trust it. Right now, I have the choice of incessant chatter from Gen1 or possible loss of alert or slow alert with Gen2.
Post automatically merged:

@WildOne I believe Valentine radar are aware of the issues you have brought up and are working on a fix.
Yes, but I'm not sure of the extent of their awareness of IO. They call it a slow ramp. There is no ramp to it. It is a straight delay. The ramp I have seen once, but it isn't a big issue to me. They also seem to think it goes away when you disable the filter. The delay doesn't change with any setting.

They also didn't know about K POP. I just got the Ka test capability today and verified that it is only K. Ka is fine. I will talk to them next week about the POP again. It might be my unit, it might be the latest firmware 4.1019 I have vs 4.1018 that was tested with POP.
 
Last edited:

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
To answer some of these questions, The LEO is supposed to identify a potential speeder visually. Then verify with the radar gun to get a track history over many seconds. This is the ideal. Practically, they shoot you with the least possible warning both visually and radar, as quick as they can. Practically they can get a "reading" in only a second or so if it is a steady speed.

One time, I had a LEO pull me over after IO, I braked hard to below the PSL, then coasted. He of course knew what I did when he pulled me over. He asked if I knew how fast I was going. I said no, I didn't. He then said that he only registered my speed at the PSL. He knew I was faster, but had no evidence. "Slow down and have a nice day!"

Another time, I was at best going 5 over the PSL in a heavily patrolled area. I suddenly had a LEO pull out behind me and pulled me over for 20 over PSL. I asked how he determined this. He said radar. I asked was it still on. He said of course. I told him, no it wasn't. I have a radar detector concealed above the mirror and it isn't going off with the LEO 10 ft behind me. I asked if I could see it. Almost 40 years ago, he was more than happy to let me see it. When I started writing down the serial number of the unit and explained to him that I was doing the PSL and because I wasn't detecting his radar, then it must be tuned out of the radar band and therefor the speed registered was completely wrong. Back then they had to tune the radar with a real tuning fork that vibrated at a given speed. You had to adjust the radar to that cal speed at least once a day if not more.( not the case with any radar made in the last 20 years I believe.) Adjust it in the right direction and you suddenly increased your $$ revenue by a lot.

Well, he was very pissed off and told me to get the blankety blank out of there right now! No warning, ticket or anything.

I also agree with the real world testing. Not many people understand how radar works, when they fail or when they work well. Highway radar are really pretty simple if you have a good understanding of radar phenomenology. Mike Valentine has a good description of the basic concepts on his site. The real world is more complicated, but does follow basic physical principles that can be easily predicted from good lab testing and practical knowledge.

I have tested many RDs in the lab. While some detectors appear on certain lab tests to be better than the V1, in practice they aren't. (very few do test better and only in specific tests) If you understand the limitations or application of the lab tests, you can predict real world performance.

Take my concern with detecting IO. It's not only the standard IO encounter. Put a LEO around the curve shining a a particular angle for oncoming. If one detector can alert on a 0.1 sec pulse, while another takes 1 sec, then the faster detector will pick up the glint off of a car going by the LEO that is around the corner in front of you (not in the actual turn, where both RDs would pick it up, but right at LEO, out of your line of sight). Or the road sign that happens to be blowing in the wind reflecting in your direction only a short period of time. Contrived? Yes. Could it be true? also yes.

Don't get me wrong. I love the V1. I think it is the best detector on the market in real world settings. Do others test better? Yes, sometimes in the lab and in the field. But I do agree with Mike's assessments of the "real world testing". Take all tests with a grain of salt. He has valid points, not just marketing BS.

The V1G2 appears to be the same or better than Gen1 in 90% of real world encounters. It is that 10% that I need to have fixed to fully trust it. Right now, I have the choice of incessant chatter from Gen1 or possible loss of alert or slow alert with Gen2.
Post automatically merged:


Yes, but I'm not sure of the extent of their awareness of IO. They call it a slow ramp. There is no ramp to it. It is a straight delay. The ramp I have seen once, but it isn't a big issue to me. They also seem to think it goes away when you disable the filter. The delay doesn't change with any setting.

They also didn't know about K POP. I just got the Ka test capability today and verified that it is only K. Ka is fine. I will talk to them next week about the POP again. It might be my unit, it might be the latest firmware 4.1019 I have vs 4.1018 that was tested with POP.
Your route is a little confusing as we navigate through the convo here.

You now are saying the V1 is better that the competition in real world, despite what the lab results say?

Either way I'm just for real world testing, it's easy for us regular people!
 

WildOne

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
12
Location
MD
Your route is a little confusing as we navigate through the convo here.

You now are saying the V1 is better that the competition in real world, despite what the lab results say?

Either way I'm just for real world testing, it's easy for us regular people!
Yes, in general. I was referring to over the past 20+ years of V1 testing(lab and field) and usage on the road. As an example, the V1 has always been the fastest or maybe other units have tied it. Once your below ~0.1sec delay, it really doesn't matter much. As for sensitivity, there have been times other detectors have a few dB more sensitivity in lab tests. The V1 has either had wider beamwidth or a faster detector that more than mitigated the few dB of sensitivity difference in the lab test when actually tested in the field.

I could make an RD that had 6dB more sensitivity by narrowing the beamwidth of the antenna. 6dB can double the detection range. Looks good in the lab or may be on a straight 20 mile Nevada road. Practically, I would rather have a wider beamwidth to pick up the bounced signals from the building or tree next to the road which the narrow beamwidth may never even see.

My goal here is not to berate V1, but just to serve as a warning to people using the V1G2 as to where to be careful in it's use until this gets fixed. Other than the Ka detection range, the V1 is safer to use. That is if you can put up with the lane changers constant chatter.

My newest V1G1 is right before the Gen1 K filter, so I don't know Gen1's K filter response speed. I made the conscious decision not to upgrade years ago, because I suspected the way they did the filter had to delay the response. I would just turn it off. Why upgrade?

When I saw the SAW filter, FPGA and the increased scan speed of the Gen2, I knew that it could be faster now. I was told by VR that there was no significant delay. I took a gamble, as my wife's older Gen1 was issuing errors. Repair it or upgrade it.

I know they can fix it. There are a lot of conflicting requirements to get a good fix, it is not easy, but the performance is in there somewhere.....
 
Last edited:

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
6,910
Reaction score
19,791
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
Yes, but I'm not sure of the extent of their awareness of IO. They call it a slow ramp. There is no ramp to it. It is a straight delay. The ramp I have seen once, but it isn't a big issue to me. They also seem to think it goes away when you disable the filter. The delay doesn't change with any setting.

They also didn't know about K POP. I just got the Ka test capability today and verified that it is only K. Ka is fine. I will talk to them next week about the POP again. It might be my unit, it might be the latest firmware 4.1019 I have vs 4.1018 that was tested with POP.
Many of us here own radar guns, even multiple radar guns and Lidar guns, myself included. We have a pretty good idea of how they work and experience actually using them.

Also, you may have noticed that some of us have tags next to our names like beginner intermediate and advanced. That's not just for post count but for different areas of the forum.

As far as the issues with the V1G2, there are two basic issues that are affecting what you see. One is the delay on K band as it's filtering. The second is the lazy ramp. They compound each other on K but if you've noticed, even though Ka band alerts immediately the lazy ramp is actually worse on Ka band than on K band.

The lazy ramp issue is that it takes a while to ramp up to a full alert urgency when presented with a strong signal. It's a problem against I/O and if you do some searching around here you should find mention of it.

VR is aware of both issues and is working on them.
 

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
6,910
Reaction score
19,791
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
@WildOne in rereading my post I realize it might have came off a little differently than I intended. I only wanted to point out that what you're seeing of the forum now is the tip of the iceberg and we have a lot of knowledgeable folks around here. Your warning about the k band delay is well taken and I agree that it's important that people know about that so they can judge for themselves how that might increase their risk and what's acceptable to them as far as that goes.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
Yes, in general. I was referring to over the past 20+ years of V1 testing(lab and field) and usage on the road. As an example, the V1 has always been the fastest or maybe other units have tied it. Once your below ~0.1sec delay, it really doesn't matter much. As for sensitivity, there have been times other detectors have a few dB more sensitivity in lab tests. The V1 has either had wider beamwidth or a faster detector that more than mitigated the few dB of sensitivity difference in the lab test when actually tested in the field.

I could make an RD that had 6dB more sensitivity by narrowing the beamwidth of the antenna. 6dB can double the detection range. Looks good in the lab or may be on a straight 20 mile Nevada road. Practically, I would rather have a wider beamwidth to pick up the bounced signals from the building or tree next to the road which the narrow beamwidth may never even see.

My goal here is not to berate V1, but just to serve as a warning to people using the V1G2 as to where to be careful in it's use until this gets fixed. Other than the Ka detection range, the V1 is safer to use. That is if you can put up with the lane changers constant chatter.

My newest V1G1 is right before the Gen1 K filter, so I don't know Gen1's K filter response speed. I made the conscious decision not to upgrade years ago, because I suspected the way they did the filter had to delay the response. I would just turn it off. Why upgrade?

When I saw the SAW filter, FPGA and the increased scan speed of the Gen2, I knew that it could be faster now. I was told by VR that there was no significant delay. I took a gamble, as my wife's older Gen1 was issuing errors. Repair it or upgrade it.

I know they can fix it. There are a lot of conflicting requirements to get a good fix, it is not easy, but the performance is in there somewhere.....
It's not about berating, and I love the technical bits! But this is a very simple matter to me.

It's that there are conflicting testing results. That's not s trigger for a warning or this is how it is, rather a call for more testing!

You're a knowledgeable person, do you have any thoughts as to why there are conflicting testing results with lab vs. real world?

Not in a manner to defend the V1G2, but to learn about such things! that is unless you disagree with the results I posted. There could be very legitimate reasons for why you see one thing versus another!

it seemed that you personally drew heavy conclusions from your testing results, and so could others. I'm not trying to be rude, but I am saying that maybe there's more info out there to also consider!
 
Last edited:

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
6,910
Reaction score
19,791
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
@cihkal the results you posted above are anecdotal and there was no actual data documented nor were there any videos taken of the testing. You have access to testing that is not anecdotal and has videos and documented data.

Furthermore, the issues have been acknowledged by VR so I think that qualifies as pretty good evidence for their existence. I know you might not want to take my word for it but you can ask any of the V1 guys around here and they will corroborate or you can even email VR yourself like I did and get the answer. There's really no need to speculate on the issues at all.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,086
Reaction score
7,719
@cihkal the results you posted above are anecdotal and there was no actual data documented nor were there any videos taken of the testing. You have access to testing that is not anecdotal and has videos and documented data.

Furthermore, the issues have been acknowledged by VR so I think that qualifies as pretty good evidence for their existence. I know you might not want to take my word for it but you can ask any of the V1 guys around here and they will corroborate or even email VR yourself like I did and get the answer. There's really no need to speculate at all.
Read the OP and explain to me how that doesn't apply to him as well?

It's interesting to disregard those results which are posted here by the testers. I am simply referencing it.
 
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
12
Location
MD
@WildOne in rereading my post I realize it might have came off a little differently than I intended. I only wanted to point out that what you're seeing of the forum now is the tip of the iceberg and we have a lot of knowledgeable folks around here. Your warning about the k band delay is well taken and I agree that it's important that people know about that so they can judge for themselves how that might increase their risk and what's acceptable to them as far as that goes.
No problem, I didn't take it the wrong way.
When I talked to the tech, it seemed that he only knew of the ramp. He thought the delay was the ramp. The POP did concern me though as I have not seen it mentioned anywhere else. Do you or someone else have a K POP? I'm only simulating what I understand their waveform does. I may be wrong, but probably not, as the V1G1 responds and the Ka on both Gen1 & 2 respond.

As for the ramp, I have only seen it on what I suspect was a Ka IO in the field. I haven't seen it on the bench, but I may not have driven it high enough to see it. I only drove it to just solid tone.
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
89,958
Messages
1,368,130
Members
22,627
Latest member
jeffapproves
Top