On Electronics.SE there is a facility, using CircuitLab, to add editable schematics to posts. This is enabled in the post editing toolbar, as well as via special markup:

<!-- Begin schematic: In order to preserve an editable schematic, please
     don't edit this section directly.
     Click the "edit" link below the image in the preview instead. -->


<!-- End schematic -->

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

Can this easily be added to Ham.SE as well?

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Echoing the discussion we had before getting MathJax enabled, the best way is probably to list example questions that would be improved by having such support available. My immediate feeling is that there would be such questions, but it's always better to have a list to point to. $\endgroup$
    – user
    Mar 12, 2014 at 8:59
  • $\begingroup$ Adam I see a clear use for this, but I have to be able to justify it, and I'm having a bit of a time picking out examples. Is this something you feel strongly about having implemented? 8 or 9 would do it. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Post
    Apr 3, 2014 at 13:36
  • $\begingroup$ @TimPost I've done some digging, and added an answer with a list of questions that could profit from schematics in either the question or its answers. Let me know what you think. $\endgroup$
    – Adam Davis
    Apr 3, 2014 at 15:01

3 Answers 3


Thanks for getting the examples together, this has been enabled on the main and meta site (for informational / explanatory / debugging posts). I don't mean to ask folks to do extra leg work, I just have to be able to justify the request overhead to a dev if they wonder why I turned it on.



Here are two answers I've given that would benefit from a schematic. For one I created the schematic on Electronics.SE then simply stole the image, so it does have a schematic. The other was done before I figured out that workaround:

What is the expected microphone input voltage level of a handheld transceiver?

Kenwood TS-590S VGS-1: Voice keyer does not transmit unless VOX is enabled

Tooling around the site, I see a number of other questions that could use a schematic, or that could be better answered with a schematic:

How can I protect equipment against a lightning strike?

How can I add amplitude modulation to this transmitter?

What is a linear RF amplifier?

What is meant by "poles" when discussing filters?

How does a switching mixer multiply the two signals?

Using a Morse code key with a computer?

Simple cheap foxhunting?

Why do today's transceivers use LC filters rather than crystal filters?

How can I calibrate a SWR meter?

This is after going through 120 of the questions posted to the site, highest voted first. Out of 120 questions, there are 11 that, in my estimation, could be improved with a schematic in either the question or answer, leading me to believe that 10% of the questions on the site might profitably use a schematic.

I doubt that people will actually use them that much, but it is a clear benefit.


On this site in particular, the fraction of questions that need schematics is not what it is on electronics.SE. The thing about schematics though is that when you need them, you really need them. Electronics is certainly part of ham radio. As proof, I reference the question pool. Each level of test (technician, general, extra) contains at least some schematics, with 20 in total. If it's important enough to be in the FCC exam, which tests for a very basic understanding necessary to be licensed, then certainly it's important enough to have here, where hopefully we explore above and beyond the level of understanding necessary for licensing.

Looking for example questions, I'm not finding many. Most are of the "I can haz codez?" variety, such as Simple DIY AM receiver for 25/28 MHz. The most legit need for a schematic I've found is Using a Morse code key with a computer?, but that's well served by including some images.

Still, I would want the ability to include schematics, because I think people should be asking questions that would require them, even if they aren't. Perhaps this is a case where a desired (at least by me) behavior (more technical questions) would be encouraged if the tools were more available. Or, this may be a case of my wanting the site to be something it's not.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .