Whatever happenet to a simple to operate 100watt HF rig that transmits and
recieves??... something in the way of an inexpensive, baseline, HAM band
*only* rig... maybe along the lines of the re-production of the TS-130S.

-n6ojn

"Hamguy" wrote in message
...
It's going to be a model that has 'D-Star' capability, like some of the
Icoms do.


"ml" wrote in message
...
i heard there might be a new kenwood rig out soon prob unv at dayton

anyone have any skuttlebut on it or any links ?

tnx

Whatever happenet to a simple to operate 100watt HF rig that transmits and
recieves??... something in the way of an inexpensive, baseline, HAM band
*only* rig... maybe along the lines of the re-production of the TS-130S.

-n6ojn

With the advent of microprocessor based Ham rigs- many more features and
wide band (HF, 6M, 2M, 440 and SWL) coverage is easily obtainable at about
the same price as a new TS-130S (about $700 new 1980's). See ICOM 706 Mark
II G. The "G" is an all-mode transceiver provides 100 watts on HF and 6
meters and 50 watts on 2 meters plus 20 watts on 440 MHz. It receives from
30 kHz to 199 MHz and from 400 to 470 MHz. For $899

In the 1980's you would have paid twice that for separate radios to cover
those bands all mode

Lots bang for the buck

As far as complexity -- most have a menu presets -- choose your options and
will operate much the same way as a TS-130S



CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:8xFPf.2411$Uc2.454@fed1read04...

Whatever happenet to a simple to operate 100watt HF rig that transmits
and
recieves??... something in the way of an inexpensive, baseline, HAM band
*only* rig... maybe along the lines of the re-production of the TS-130S.

-n6ojn

With the advent of microprocessor based Ham rigs- many more features and
wide band (HF, 6M, 2M, 440 and SWL) coverage is easily obtainable at
about the same price as a new TS-130S (about $700 new 1980's). See ICOM
706 Mark II G. The "G" is an all-mode transceiver provides 100 watts on HF
and 6 meters and 50 watts on 2 meters plus 20 watts on 440 MHz. It
receives from 30 kHz to 199 MHz and from 400 to 470 MHz. For $899

In the 1980's you would have paid twice that for separate radios to cover
those bands all mode

Lots bang for the buck

As far as complexity -- most have a menu presets -- choose your options
and will operate much the same way as a TS-130S

You completely missed the point..... A *simple to operate* 100 watt HF rig,
NOT microprocessor based, HAM BANDS ONLY...
What was $700 over 25 years ago, should be able to be produced today for
just a hundred bucks or so. When the latest electronic toys come out, they
command a premium price, and after a couple of years, the price goes down to
where a working stiff can afford them.

In article ,
Noon-Air wrote:

You completely missed the point..... A *simple to operate* 100 watt HF rig,
NOT microprocessor based, HAM BANDS ONLY...
What was $700 over 25 years ago, should be able to be produced today for
just a hundred bucks or so. When the latest electronic toys come out, they
command a premium price, and after a couple of years, the price goes down to
where a working stiff can afford them.

Frankly, I'd be astonished if anyone could build a radio to those
specific design goals (non-microprocessor-based, ham-band, 100 watt,
roughly $100 retail price). I don't think that the combination of
technologies, market size, and price can be achieved. It'd be a very
interesting challenge to design, to say the very least!

That's not to say that somebody shouldn't try.

My reasoning is roughly as follows:

- Ham-band operation requires stable frequency operation and
tunability. This either requires a very stable VCO, or a
synthesizer/PLL system of some sort.

- Mass-production consumer electronics, most commercial comms
electronics, and military electronics have long been moving away
from the classic sorts of finely-tuned-and-temperature-
compensated analog oscillators used in a lot of the sort of classic
ham gear you're referring to. These days, decent air-variable
capacitors with good bearings are either special-production builds
(and horribly expensive) or are used or "new old stock" surplus
and thus not suitable for mass commercial use. The same thing
seems to be true for a lot of the other "classic ham" electronic
components... they're being end-of-lifed and we're lucky to be able
to stock up our junk drawers before they're entirely gone!

- Today's low-cost radios are almost all based on synthesizer
technology of some sort, with a microcontroller driving the
synthesizer. I wouldn't want to try driving/commanding a
synthesizer of this sort without a micro - they aren't set up for it.

- Multiple-HF-band operation requires band-specific low-pass
filters... certainly after the amp, and perhaps before. You could
probably get away with a filter system using less filters than
bands (e.g. one filter for 10/12/15, one for 17/20, etc.) but
you're still going to need some LPF switching and some fairly hefty
inductors.

- Restricting to ham-band-only probably doesn't buy you all that
much in savings or performance, these days, due to the large
number of bands. In order to gain big savings, I suspect you'd
have to limit yourself to a monoband radio.

Now, the idea of doing a simple-to-operate, straightforward HF rig
with decent performance isn't a bad one at all. I do suspect that in
order to make it manufacturable at a reasonable price you're going to
have to accept _some_ degree of LSI integration and microprocessor
control. That doesn't mean that it needs to have a massive set of
features, lots of bells and whistles and gawldernblinkinlights, etc.
It could be a nice, clean front panel.

The closest I currently see to what you're looking for is probably the
Ten-Tec Argonaut. However, it's not a full-power barefoot rig... 20
watts... and it's at least five time your cost goal.

I won't say it's impossible to get the retail price of a 100-watt
multiband ham-HF rig down to under $200. However, I suspect that it'd
require a very great deal of optimization and integration, a lot of
use of modern technology (i.e. spinoffs from today's commercially-
available RF and DSP chips), and a development effort which would
require a potential marketplace of hundreds of thousands of units (or
perhaps millions) sold in order to justify.

It'd be interesting to see sorts of HF rigs might be build around a
modulator based on some of today's cellphone chip cores and IP...
direct conversion, high-performance I/Q phasing modulators, and so
forth. More work up front, but (potentially) a lot lower per-unit
incremental cost once you get into volume production.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the size of the market would justify
the investment, needed to create the sort of radio which you feel
could help maintain and increase the size of the amateur-radio market
in the way that you'd like :-(

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

In article , says...
- Restricting to ham-band-only probably doesn't buy you all that
much in savings or performance, these days, due to the large
number of bands. In order to gain big savings, I suspect you'd
have to limit yourself to a monoband radio.

Restricting to ham bands only buys a HUGE difference
in performance. Check out the Elecraft K2 and see
what kind of strong signal handling performance you
can get from an inexpensive radio if you have single
conversion right to the high-selectivity crystal
filter.

Third order IMD performance at 2 kHz is more than 10 dB
better than many of the expensive radios with general
coverage receivers, such as the FT-1000D and FT-1000MP
series, and is approximately equal to the 10 kilobuck
IC-7800! All because of the ham-band-only design and
some careful attention to design.

73,
Bob
K3PH

--
+----------------------------------------------+
| Bob Schreibmaier K3PH | E-mail: |
| Kresgeville, PA 18333 | http://www.dxis.org |
+----------------------------------------------+

In article ,
Bob Schreibmaier wrote:

In article , says...
- Restricting to ham-band-only probably doesn't buy you all that
much in savings or performance, these days, due to the large
number of bands. In order to gain big savings, I suspect you'd
have to limit yourself to a monoband radio.

Restricting to ham bands only buys a HUGE difference
in performance. Check out the Elecraft K2 and see
what kind of strong signal handling performance you
can get from an inexpensive radio if you have single
conversion right to the high-selectivity crystal
filter.

Third order IMD performance at 2 kHz is more than 10 dB
better than many of the expensive radios with general
coverage receivers, such as the FT-1000D and FT-1000MP
series, and is approximately equal to the 10 kilobuck
IC-7800! All because of the ham-band-only design and
some careful attention to design.

You're quite right, of course. I overstated my argument.

I think it's probably fair to say, though, that the sort of advantages
that the K2 family (and similar radios) gain in performance by
eschewing general coverage, might be very difficult or impossible to
achieve at the price-point that the original poster was hoping for. A
lot of the K2's improved IMD performance appears to come from having
band-specific double-tuned bandpass filters in the front end, switched
in via relays. This seems to be a technically excellent approach, but
I can't believe that it "comes cheap". Reed relays seem to run a
dollar or more each, in large quantities.

PIN diode switching of bandpass filters is another possible approach,
but I don't think you'd get the same sort of performance out of it.

At a sub-$200 retail price (which probably works out to under $50
bill-of-materials cost) the designer is going to have to make some
pretty hard decisions about where the money is to be spent. The
additional performance available from a band-optimized design (e.g.
the K2) might not be "in the budget" at the lower price point.

Consider that the K2 is between three and six times the price that the
OP was looking for... and it's a kit, has only 15 watts of output,
doesn't include a power supply, and I don't think it includes a
microphone either.

There would be some very, very interesting tradeoffs and design
decisions to be made, in any project to develop a sub-$200
mass-market-acceptable SSB HF rig. Possibilities:

- Run the finals on 24 volts, so that acceptably-linear operation could
be achieved from cheap power MOSFET parts?

- Use some of the new hybrid FPGA/DSP/microcontroller chips, to put
all of the control logic, audio filtering, etc. on a single chip?

- Limited duty cycle, to reduce the need for heavy/expensive heatsinks
and fan cooling?

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Schreibmaier wrote:

In article ,
says...
- Restricting to ham-band-only probably doesn't buy you all that
much in savings or performance, these days, due to the large
number of bands. In order to gain big savings, I suspect you'd
have to limit yourself to a monoband radio.

Restricting to ham bands only buys a HUGE difference
in performance. Check out the Elecraft K2 and see
what kind of strong signal handling performance you
can get from an inexpensive radio if you have single
conversion right to the high-selectivity crystal
filter.

Third order IMD performance at 2 kHz is more than 10 dB
better than many of the expensive radios with general
coverage receivers, such as the FT-1000D and FT-1000MP
series, and is approximately equal to the 10 kilobuck
IC-7800! All because of the ham-band-only design and
some careful attention to design.

You're quite right, of course. I overstated my argument.

I think it's probably fair to say, though, that the sort of advantages
that the K2 family (and similar radios) gain in performance by
eschewing general coverage, might be very difficult or impossible to
achieve at the price-point that the original poster was hoping for. A
lot of the K2's improved IMD performance appears to come from having
band-specific double-tuned bandpass filters in the front end, switched
in via relays. This seems to be a technically excellent approach, but
I can't believe that it "comes cheap". Reed relays seem to run a
dollar or more each, in large quantities.

PIN diode switching of bandpass filters is another possible approach,
but I don't think you'd get the same sort of performance out of it.

At a sub-$200 retail price (which probably works out to under $50
bill-of-materials cost) the designer is going to have to make some
pretty hard decisions about where the money is to be spent. The
additional performance available from a band-optimized design (e.g.
the K2) might not be "in the budget" at the lower price point.

Consider that the K2 is between three and six times the price that the
OP was looking for... and it's a kit, has only 15 watts of output,
doesn't include a power supply, and I don't think it includes a
microphone either.

There would be some very, very interesting tradeoffs and design
decisions to be made, in any project to develop a sub-$200
mass-market-acceptable SSB HF rig. Possibilities:

- Run the finals on 24 volts, so that acceptably-linear operation could
be achieved from cheap power MOSFET parts?

- Use some of the new hybrid FPGA/DSP/microcontroller chips, to put
all of the control logic, audio filtering, etc. on a single chip?

- Limited duty cycle, to reduce the need for heavy/expensive heatsinks
and fan cooling?

Even if its sub-$500, that would still be a blessing for a young ham thats
trying to raise a family. e-bay is ok if you don't mind taking the chance
that the radio will be DOA when you get it, and not all clubs have the
resources to be able to set up a new ham with a "loaner rig" to get them on
the air. Something basic that will get them on the air without breaking the
bank would go a long way in being able to promote the hobby with young
people.

Dave Platt wrote:

It'd be interesting to see sorts of HF rigs might be build around a
modulator based on some of today's cellphone chip cores and IP...
direct conversion, high-performance I/Q phasing modulators, and so
forth. More work up front, but (potentially) a lot lower per-unit
incremental cost once you get into volume production.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the size of the market would justify
the investment, needed to create the sort of radio which you feel
could help maintain and increase the size of the amateur-radio market
in the way that you'd like :-(


Bingo! If I want a basic radio, I can go to a flea market and pick up
some nice simple stuff. When I buy a new radio, I want features and good
ergonomics to go along with them. That is what the market has turned into.

At Dayton last year, I picked up a 80 and 40 meter version of the
Single Sidebanders for 20 bucks for one, and 25 for the other. Both
worked fine. Just about any kid would have the money for that. Wasn't
State of the art, but 200 watts on SSB, and a cheap wire antenna can get
a person on the air CHEAP!

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Don't think I missed the point at all
Labor rates UP
Factory space cost UP
Parts UP
Advertising cost Up
Taxes UP
Convention Rates, Travel, Hotels, UP

And at an inflation rate of 4% per year -- the $700 1986 radio would be
$1533 today (sound familiar)

I doubt any mfg can produce your $100 radio (with a 40% margin u wud have to
build it for $60 !!!)
Maybe in China Huh ?

Even the Elecraft basic radio -- (u build it) is $359
And it is CW only -- 4 bands 40, 30, 20 and 17 or 15M
But they are selling a lot of them - folks still love to build


--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !






"Noon-Air" wrote in message
...

"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:8xFPf.2411$Uc2.454@fed1read04...

Whatever happenet to a simple to operate 100watt HF rig that transmits
and
recieves??... something in the way of an inexpensive, baseline, HAM band
*only* rig... maybe along the lines of the re-production of the TS-130S.

-n6ojn

With the advent of microprocessor based Ham rigs- many more features and
wide band (HF, 6M, 2M, 440 and SWL) coverage is easily obtainable at
about the same price as a new TS-130S (about $700 new 1980's). See ICOM
706 Mark II G. The "G" is an all-mode transceiver provides 100 watts on
HF and 6 meters and 50 watts on 2 meters plus 20 watts on 440 MHz. It
receives from 30 kHz to 199 MHz and from 400 to 470 MHz. For $899

In the 1980's you would have paid twice that for separate radios to cover
those bands all mode

Lots bang for the buck

As far as complexity -- most have a menu presets -- choose your options
and will operate much the same way as a TS-130S

You completely missed the point..... A *simple to operate* 100 watt HF
rig, NOT microprocessor based, HAM BANDS ONLY...
What was $700 over 25 years ago, should be able to be produced today for
just a hundred bucks or so. When the latest electronic toys come out, they
command a premium price, and after a couple of years, the price goes down
to where a working stiff can afford them.

Noon-Air wrote:
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
news:8xFPf.2411$Uc2.454@fed1read04...

Whatever happenet to a simple to operate 100watt HF rig that transmits
and
recieves??... something in the way of an inexpensive, baseline, HAM band
*only* rig... maybe along the lines of the re-production of the TS-130S.

-n6ojn


With the advent of microprocessor based Ham rigs- many more features and
wide band (HF, 6M, 2M, 440 and SWL) coverage is easily obtainable at
about the same price as a new TS-130S (about $700 new 1980's). See ICOM
706 Mark II G. The "G" is an all-mode transceiver provides 100 watts on HF
and 6 meters and 50 watts on 2 meters plus 20 watts on 440 MHz. It
receives from 30 kHz to 199 MHz and from 400 to 470 MHz. For $899

In the 1980's you would have paid twice that for separate radios to cover
those bands all mode

Lots bang for the buck

As far as complexity -- most have a menu presets -- choose your options
and will operate much the same way as a TS-130S


You completely missed the point..... A *simple to operate* 100 watt HF rig,
NOT microprocessor based, HAM BANDS ONLY...
What was $700 over 25 years ago, should be able to be produced today for
just a hundred bucks or so. When the latest electronic toys come out, they
command a premium price, and after a couple of years, the price goes down to
where a working stiff can afford them.


"I feel your pain." Seriously, you have a great point. I am now
studying to re-acquire my General license (I'm 50). Yes, things have
changed quite a bit since my days with a reasonably priced HW-101.

But, I think QRP is where some neat high quality stuff is available,
especially in kit form. It's also a great way to start into ham radio.

Regarding CW as a barrier to many new hams, I don't know. The "old
school" approach is part of what I like about amateur radio. Nostalgia
is not worthless. I hope we don't lose CW.

Nostalgia is attractive in other areas. Audiophiles have returned to
tube amps for many years now. Some of the units are set up so the owner
can enjoy the tubes' cool purple-blue glow varying with the music.
Baseball is largely nostalgic. I'm sure there are other examples.

I guess my point is that amateur radio shouldn't try to compete with
internet, or whatever. It has a sort of historical niche...it can be
pretty cutting edge and nostalgic at the same time.

I would recommend QRP as the best entry into ham radio.

john