|
new kenwood?
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 |
new kenwood?
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 |
new kenwood?
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 |
new kenwood?
"rocky" wrote in message ... In article , "Noon-Air" wrote: 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 too many want,,,,no demand they be able to hook up their computer. The days of simple are far in the past. I was thinking more along the lines of inexpensive, entry level equipment... the ranks of licensed operators is rapidly dwindling as all of us old farts are dying off. The only time that there seems to be any push to increase ranks is after a disaster, when the infrastructure is wiped out and all that is left are the HAM radio operators. I believe that a lot of prospective HAMs are put off because of 2 things.... 1) The expen$e of buying new equipment, antennas, towers, etc. Most prospects don't know that you gan get a workable station on the air for just a couple of hundred dollars. All they *see* are the tower systems, and high dollar radios where the HAM has been licensed for 20+ years and has built/accumulated a top drawer station over the years. 2) The equipment is getting to where you have to be an EE just to figure out what everything does. Newbies need to have a simple to operate station so they can learn the basics, then after they get a handle on it, they can start building a station with some of the latest and greatest, state of the art, toys. I don't know about you, but my first station was nothing more than a used TS-520S, and a wire antenna(40/15M dipole), a borrowed MFJ antenna tuner, and a straight key(no voice privileges for novices then)...That was all I could afford at the time, and that almost broke the bank. I was a little overwhelmed with the 520 when I first got it and it took me a while to really feel comfortable with the rig. Imagine the new HAM today with something like a TS-2000.....if they can afford it. Even tho I have been an active HAM since 1984, I have had my TS-480HX since July, and I *still* don't know and haven't figured out all it will do...and thats running it mobile!! No tellin what it would do in the shack. Would I recommend the 480 for a newbie?? not hardly... but for an experienced HAM, its a great rig that will do everything you ever dreamed of. There still needs to be an inexpensive, easy to operate, entry level, HF rig, made available to the new Novice. What kinds of rigs/stations did the rest of you *start* with?? What do you think that *most* young prospective HAMs would be able to handle to get into the hobby?? -n6ojn -- Steve @ Noon-Air Heating & A/C Life is what happens while you were making other plans |
new kenwood?
Noon-Air wrote:
SNIPPED a lot What kinds of rigs/stations did the rest of you *start* with?? What do you think that *most* young prospective HAMs would be able to handle to get into the hobby?? -n6ojn A Heathkit AT-1, 15 watts, crystal controlled on 80/40/20/10, used on 80 and 40 CW Novice band in the early 1950s. Receiver was a National SW-54. Antenna was 120 feet of TV twin lead using a small home made tuner [made by my Elmer]. [Total cost $65]. On my first weekend I earned the WATV award :-) On my second weekend I earned the MLL Award :-) On the third weekend I earned the OTA award. On the fourth weekend my Elmer responded to my awards with corrective action. Praise the Lord for Elmer [Ralph Tedford, [W1GID ?] SK] Subsequently, been on the air for 50+ years. |
new kenwood?
Noon-Air wrote:
What kinds of rigs/stations did the rest of you *start* with?? What do you think that *most* young prospective HAMs would be able to handle to get into the hobby?? The problem is the competition. You can buy a NEW computer for $200, hook it up to broadband and be able to talk around the world, download video in almost real time, get the news, sports and things that you will never see or hear on the radio. No tests, NO MORSE CODE, no controls. The days of electronics experiemnters going to the "radio shop" and buying some wire, tubes and spare parts and hearing people from around the world are long gone. The mystery is gone, the parts stores are gone and it seems that the desire to work to get an education is all lost in the rush. Cheap rigs are simply not going to do it. There are so many used rigs on the market these days that go for $300-$400 that even mainland China with their factories that pay so little can compete. As for new rigs, everyone wants a simple voice rig with a digital VFO, a gazillion memories and an AUTOMATIC antenna tuner. You might as well not even include CW, most prospective hams can't be bothered to learn it. Education and outreach is the only thing that will. Apple computer started the concept of "product evangelism", preaching how good the Macintosh was to the "great uncomputered". Their head evangelist, Guy Kawasaki wrote several books on the subject. If ham radio is to continue, you need to "product evangelize" ham radio. Go out and give demos to schools, scout troups, youth groups. If there are any kids in your family or neighbors that are interested in computers, take them to hamfests, they'll go for the computers, but the radios may catch their interest. It's also about time to change the license tests. Drop morse code. Add more good operating practice. Here in Israel I hear mostly European hams. They are polite and careful operators. When the "skip rolls in" to use a term from another service, it seems like CB. Gone are the polite carefull guys, the U.S. phone bands sound like "lid city". And the CW is not much better, most of it is sent by computer and the same old garbage you hear on SSB, sent by people who can type and have a computer program to copy Morse. Another pet peeve of mine is sstv. It was "neat" seeing it live from the Mercury space capsules. Fourty years later it has no technological relevance. Why do we have to give up 20-30kHz of the 20 meter band 24/7 for it? Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ |
new kenwood?
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 $899 In the 1980's you would have paid twice that for separate radios to cover those bands all mode Lots bang for the buck As far as complexity -- most have a menu presets -- choose your options and will operate much the same way as a TS-130S CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! |
new kenwood?
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message news:8xFPf.2411$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. |
new kenwood?
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! |
new kenwood?
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. |
new kenwood?
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! |
new kenwood?
"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. |
new kenwood?
Well few of us start off with a new car
So for the dollar impaired how about TS-520 - $180 with shipping has power supply E-Bay completed Another TS-520 with MC-50 mic -- $275 E-Bay Buy It now Lots of old rigs for under $500 I think the things that holds up youth from becoming Hams or getting on HF is really 1. The code (weak excuse) 2, The internet (talk anywhere) 3. The magic of radio was 20 - 30+ years ago - not today 4. The test as compared to CB, FRS -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! "Noon-Air" wrote in message ... "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-$500, that would still be a blessing for a young ham thats trying to raise a family. e-bay is ok if you don't mind taking the chance that the radio will be DOA when you get it, and not all clubs have the resources to be able to set up a new ham with a "loaner rig" to get them on the air. Something basic that will get them on the air without breaking the bank would go a long way in being able to promote the hobby with young people. |
new kenwood?
Noon-Air wrote:
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message news:8xFPf.2411$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 |
new kenwood?
John wrote
"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. john In 1980 the HW-101 sold, in kit form, for $399.95 in the fall 1980 Heathkit catalog, with the optional CW filter adding another $44.95. See URL: http://www.elinkusa.com/hw-101/HISTORY.htm Using an inflation rate of 3.5 %; $400 in 1980 is $978 today -- the cost of a IC 706 MK 2 And the ICOM is Factory assembled, all mode, and covers HF and 6 meters (100Watts) and 50 watts on 2 meters plus 20 watts on 440 MHz. It receives from 30 kHz to 199 MHz and from 400 to 470 MHz. -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! |
new kenwood?
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message news:8%9Qf.42390$V27.10284@fed1read06... John wrote "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. john In 1980 the HW-101 sold, in kit form, for $399.95 in the fall 1980 Heathkit catalog, with the optional CW filter adding another $44.95. See URL: http://www.elinkusa.com/hw-101/HISTORY.htm Using an inflation rate of 3.5 %; $400 in 1980 is $978 today -- the cost of a IC 706 MK 2 And the ICOM is Factory assembled, all mode, and covers HF and 6 meters (100Watts) 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. So what rig did you start out with?? How many years have you been licensed?? |
new kenwood?
Golly John straining the old brain cells.
First rig was a used (15 year old) Hallicrafters SR-160 - paid $100 for it in 1977 when I first got licensed Needed repair and new finals. Power supply needed recapped. But my very first "rig" was a homebrew crystal set - 1947 (Oatmeal Box and all (;-)) Then a Knight kit OceanHopper - 1948 Next was a Hallicrafters S-40B Then a Halli S-38 And the US Navy let me use (;-) an ART-13 and ARR-15 (Collins Gear) to send and receive Morse code on Pacific flights Next was a Knight R-100 Heathkits I built were a Heath Linear SB-230, SA-2060A Antenna Tuner, Heath Color TV set (took months to build), as well as the usual VTVM, Oscilloscope, Signal generator, etc Should have kept them all (;-) -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! "Noon-Air" wrote in message ... "Caveat Lector" wrote in message news:8%9Qf.42390$V27.10284@fed1read06... John wrote "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. john In 1980 the HW-101 sold, in kit form, for $399.95 in the fall 1980 Heathkit catalog, with the optional CW filter adding another $44.95. See URL: http://www.elinkusa.com/hw-101/HISTORY.htm Using an inflation rate of 3.5 %; $400 in 1980 is $978 today -- the cost of a IC 706 MK 2 And the ICOM is Factory assembled, all mode, and covers HF and 6 meters (100Watts) 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. So what rig did you start out with?? How many years have you been licensed?? |
new kenwood?
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 22:03:51 -0600, "Noon-Air"
wrote: 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 There's the Yaesu 840 and the Icom 718, about $600, and the starter Alinco, forget it's model #, about $700. Even the yahoo-whistles Yeasu 857d is only $689 nowadays. bob k5qwg "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 |
new kenwood?
On 03/07/06 11:03 pm Noon-Air wrote:
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. Maybe there's not enough demand for such a thing. Moreover, the threshold gets raised for so many varieties of technogadget. If we take a possible parallel from the world of computers, a 6MHz PC-AT clone with 1MB of RAM and a 20MB hd should now cost perhaps US$25 and might well suit the computing needs of a lot of people (as long as they didn't insist on trying to run any version of Windozzzze on it). But, as somebody wrote a few years back, "The computer I want always costs $2000": the bar keeps rising. "Perce" (aka Alan NV8A) |
new kenwood?
Noon-Air wrote:
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. The Icom IC718 can be bought new from AES for $549. It's a pretty basic radio with not very many buttons. The Alinco DX77T is about $150.00 more. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
new kenwood?
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 - |
new kenwood?hijacked
my original therad was totally hi jacked
a topic of , how to get a simple /cheep hf rig is completely different and should be a completely new topic it's interesting topic but needs a new thread thanks to the single person who offered a heads up saying that kenwood was going to perhaps a d star i wonder if anyone has any links to any preview shots of it or spec page?? tnx In article , rocky wrote: In article , "Noon-Air" wrote: |
new kenwood?
"Noon-Air" wrote in message ... 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 In a nutshell it boils down to demand. Do you still drive a non-air conditioned, stickshift, non power steering, non power brake car? Right. Few other people do, either! If you had a choice for driving a 100 mile trip which would you choose, a 2006 Impala or a 1931 Model A Ford? Not trying to be a smart aleck, but it answers the question! :) People just don't want that anymore. Same applies to ham radios. I MUCH prefer my IC-706 MKIIG's to the old 85 lb transmitters and receivers of yore! Best 74 Jerry K4KWH "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 |
new kenwood?
Wow that hit the mark Jerry
I might add if you want a TS-130S kind radio -- buy a used one, have it restored if need be. My experience with Hams is the young ones (computer savvy) have no problem with programming and menus, but lots of old timers seem to. -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! "Jerry" wrote in message ... "Noon-Air" wrote in message ... 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 In a nutshell it boils down to demand. Do you still drive a non-air conditioned, stickshift, non power steering, non power brake car? Right. Few other people do, either! If you had a choice for driving a 100 mile trip which would you choose, a 2006 Impala or a 1931 Model A Ford? Not trying to be a smart aleck, but it answers the question! :) People just don't want that anymore. Same applies to ham radios. I MUCH prefer my IC-706 MKIIG's to the old 85 lb transmitters and receivers of yore! Best 74 Jerry K4KWH "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 |
new kenwood?
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:15:29 -0500, "Jerry"
wrote: "Noon-Air" wrote in message ... 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 In a nutshell it boils down to demand. Do you still drive a non-air conditioned, stickshift, non power steering, non power brake car? Right. Few other people do, either! If you had a choice for driving a 100 mile trip which would you choose, a 2006 Impala or a 1931 Model A Ford? Not trying to be a smart aleck, but it answers the question! :) People just don't want that anymore. Same applies to ham radios. I MUCH prefer my IC-706 MKIIG's to the old 85 lb transmitters and receivers of yore! Best 74 Jerry K4KWH Yes, but he has a point. Our cars have had those features since the fifties. Ham radio on the other hand, has gone crazy with the bells and whistles since that time. Just look at radios like the Icom 7800 and the Yaesu FT DX 9000MP ($12,000 for crying out loud.) I'll bet people who owns these things don't use half the knobs and buttons. The owner of a new Impala would probably use everything on the car. Dick - W6CCD |
new kenwood?
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:57:13 -0700, Dick LeadWinger wrote:
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:15:29 -0500, "Jerry" wrote: "Noon-Air" wrote in message ... 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 In a nutshell it boils down to demand. Do you still drive a non-air conditioned, stickshift, non power steering, non power brake car? Right. Few other people do, either! If you had a choice for driving a 100 mile trip which would you choose, a 2006 Impala or a 1931 Model A Ford? Not trying to be a smart aleck, but it answers the question! :) People just don't want that anymore. Same applies to ham radios. I MUCH prefer my IC-706 MKIIG's to the old 85 lb transmitters and receivers of yore! Best 74 Jerry K4KWH Yes, but he has a point. Our cars have had those features since the fifties. Ham radio on the other hand, has gone crazy with the bells and whistles since that time. Just look at radios like the Icom 7800 and the Yaesu FT DX 9000MP ($12,000 for crying out loud.) I'll bet people who owns these things don't use half the knobs and buttons. The owner of a new Impala would probably use everything on the car. Dick - W6CCD I was sitting on the phone at Icom when the original 706 did not receive the weather channel very well. I can tell you the hams would not have it that way. I can remember hearing over and over an amateur transceiver that works in the 2 meter VHF range just has to be able to reveice the weather channel otherwise it was useless. Take the W32A, receives the weather channel like gang busters on the supplied rubber duck, it was done by design. Someone came up with a as I remember the " Yellow " wire mod for the original 706. That mod actually enabled the 2 meter bandpass filter when tuning above 148 MHz where it was turned off stock form the factory. Seems today's amateurs want a amateur transceiver and one that has a wide receive too. I have often wondered how many rigs would be sold if one could not alter the transmit range. Both seem to be pretty standard on the check lists when purchasing a new rig. I purchased a brand new IC-730 in 1982 at Dayton. Then I longed for shortwave coverage and 10 FM. I did find an aftermarket FM board for it from a person at Dayton the next year or two It worked great. So with a quadruple conversion receiver I was not real happy as I could not tune the shortwave bands. I now have an IC-718 and hardly ever tune outside of the ham bands now that I can. :) I agree if the companies could build a nice helical filtered ham band only front ends the overload and adjcent channel complaints would go away mostly. Its an interesting hobby and also to listen what users seem to want in a radio. Thanks for the memories. Gary K8IZ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com