| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 01.11.19 23:08l 762 Lines 29441 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB14396
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V14 396
Path: IW8PGT<IR2UBX<IW2OHX<IR1UAW<I0OJJ<I0OJJ<GB7CIP<N3HYM<CX2SA
Sent: 191101/2106Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:17386 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB14396
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet? (Charles Reiche)
2. Re: IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet? (Kevin)
3. Re: IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet? (Cathryn Mataga)
4. Re: Secondary mission ideas (Wendy and Terry Osborne)
5. Re: Secondary mission ideas (Leffke, Zachary)
6. IARU Update on Week 1 of WRC-19 (M5AKA)
7. VUCC Awards-Endorsements for October 2019 (Ronald G. Parsons)
8. radio question (RG)
9. Re: radio question (John Geiger)
10. Re: radio question (Roy Dean)
11. Re: radio question (Burns Fisher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 19:13:50 -0400
From: Charles Reiche <charlieray@?????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <Amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet?
Message-ID:
<CAMkCmDoSYDsRFmXexQ1bh8+7C6uZ=a77GSyKVLOi9rWB5rNtwg@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Even if we use an external modem into the ACC port? Is it a signal width
limit problem?
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 6:01 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Cathryn,
> If someone wrote the software to use it you could receive 9600 packet
> from the IF output but you have no way of sending the reply as a ic-9700
> will not transmit 9600.
> Talking to Icom (many times) they feel that 9600 is a dead mode but
> somehow RTTY on VHF/UHF is not...
>
> 73
> Kevin WA7FWF
>
>
> On 10/31/2019 13:37, Cathryn Mataga via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > I think I missed something here? With all the comments about FoxTelem,
> > I'm not sure. Does this mean with the I/Q output, the IC-9700 can do
> > 9600 baud packet/telemetry? (Curious because this was kind of a deal
> > killer for me.)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> > Opinions expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
> > of AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> > program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 16:28:40 -0700
From: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>
To: Charles Reiche <charlieray@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <Amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet?
Message-ID: <8a1faeb1-8986-4cc7-64fd-1ff52d170277@?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Charles,
?? A bunch of us spent a long time trying to get this to work, I tried
with my kantronics 9612.
?? Icom was asked many times where the bottleneck is, hardware?
firmware? and they
refuse to say one way or the other. Their only answer has been that "we"
should have seen
them removing 9600 packet support from the mobile market so it should
have been no big
surprise that they removed it from the 9700.
?? 73 Kevin WA7FWF
On 10/31/2019 16:13, Charles Reiche wrote:
> Even if we use an external modem into the ACC port? Is it a signal
> width limit problem?
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 6:01 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???
> <mailto:amsat-bb@?????.???>> wrote:
>
> Cathryn,
> ?? If someone wrote the software to use it you could receive 9600
> packet
> from the IF output but you have no way of sending the reply as a
> ic-9700
> will not transmit 9600.
> Talking to Icom (many times) they feel that 9600 is a dead mode but
> somehow RTTY on VHF/UHF is not...
>
> 73
> Kevin WA7FWF
>
>
> On 10/31/2019 13:37, Cathryn Mataga via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> > I think I missed something here? With all the comments about
> FoxTelem,
> > I'm not sure. Does this mean with the I/Q output, the IC-9700
> can do
> > 9600 baud packet/telemetry? (Curious because this was kind of a
> deal
> > killer for me.)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.??? <mailto:AMSAT-BB@?????.???>.
> AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> > Opinions expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
> views
> > of AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> > program!
> > Subscription settings:
> https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.??? <mailto:AMSAT-BB@?????.???>. AMSAT-NA
> makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
> views of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:59:41 -0700
From: Cathryn Mataga <cathryn@????????????.???>
To: Kevin <wa7fwf@?????.???>, amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] IC-9700 + 9600 baud packet?
Message-ID: <5806a8ae-630c-0686-9751-94a521e8daae@????????????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Oh well, honestly, saves me $2000, not being tempted to buy 'another
radio I don't absolutely need.'? Think I'll just be extra gentle with my
TS2000x, and maybe put the money towards an HF radio with a scope.
On 10/31/2019 2:55 PM, Kevin via AMSAT-BB wrote:
> Cathryn,
> ? If someone wrote the software to use it you could receive 9600
> packet from the IF output but you have no way of sending the reply as
> a ic-9700 will not transmit 9600.
> Talking to Icom (many times) they feel that 9600 is a dead mode but
> somehow RTTY on VHF/UHF is not...
>
> 73
> Kevin WA7FWF
>
>
> On 10/31/2019 13:37, Cathryn Mataga via AMSAT-BB wrote:
>> I think I missed something here? With all the comments about
>> FoxTelem, I'm not sure. Does this mean with the I/Q output, the
>> IC-9700 can do 9600 baud packet/telemetry? (Curious because this was
>> kind of a deal killer for me.)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
>> of AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
> of AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:37:46 +1300
From: "Wendy and Terry Osborne" <wandtosborne@?????.???>
To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@??????????.???>,
<amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Secondary mission ideas
Message-ID: <E86B5E8F96654D6092A5C78E98D452B9@??????????>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Here are a couple of ideas.
1) A Funcube type transponder but with an L-Band Uplink.
This would give an easily decoded telemetry downlink for STEM demos etc.
This combined with an L-Band uplink would give a linear transponder to
complement the
FM transponder on AO-92.
2) An on board camera that could be aimed at the earth and store the
resulting picture.
The camera could be triggered by a command station(s) and downloaded (in jpg
format?)
when the transponder was in high power telemetry mode.
This would be a great educational tool.
73,
Terry Osborne ZL2BAC
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Glasbrenner via AMSAT-BB
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 7:00 AM
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] Secondary mission ideas
I just had a super call with a university program flying a mission using
SDRs. We talked about licensing and coordination issues, and discussed ideas
for a secondary two-way mission that they want to do.
What would you like to see, repeater, transponder, BBS, digital voice,
digipeater? Downlink would be on 2m, and would probably be limited to
20-25khz wide. Other ideas? Something new and different? Let's have a
civilized discussion about what they could try, as they seem to be an eager
and capable bunch.
73, Drew KO4MA
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:00:45 +0000
From: "Leffke, Zachary" <zleffke@??.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Secondary mission ideas
Message-ID:
<BN8PR05MB60686DB28EE8DE210B6D754BDF620@?????????????.????????.????.???????.??
?>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I also like this idea a lot.
One 'desirement' after having AO-92 up for a bit with our Camera was I wish
we had built in a way to time when the shots were taken. Right now its take
a shot, downlink, rinse and repeat (about as simple as it gets). No onboard
storage and it immediately starts taking pictures when kicked into that mode.
So for your #2, if you add in the ability for the uplink command to control
when to take a picture (or delay X number of seconds from command receipt)
that could be really cool so that the images are not always the same
'regions' of Earth near command stations (especially considering it might
only be a single command station if it's a University controlling the bird).
I would also say do something like take 5 pictures, spaced X number of
seconds apart, store them, and then downlink them over and over when in high
speed/power mode. All of that control could probably be fit into a single
camera uplink command.......in X seconds (or at X time if they have absolute
timekeeping), take Y number of pictures (maybe Y in the range of 1-10 or
so), spaced Z number of seconds apart......
-Zach, KJ4QLP
--
Research Associate
Aerospace & Ocean Systems Lab
Ted & Karyn Hume Center for National Security & Technology
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Work Phone: 540-231-4174
Cell Phone: 540-808-6305
-----Original Message-----
From: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb-bounces@?????.???> On Behalf Of Wendy and Terry
Osborne via AMSAT-BB
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 10:38 PM
To: Andrew Glasbrenner <glasbrenner@??????????.???>; amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Secondary mission ideas
Here are a couple of ideas.
1) A Funcube type transponder but with an L-Band Uplink.
This would give an easily decoded telemetry downlink for STEM demos etc.
This combined with an L-Band uplink would give a linear transponder to
complement the
FM transponder on AO-92.
2) An on board camera that could be aimed at the earth and store the
resulting picture.
The camera could be triggered by a command station(s) and downloaded (in jpg
format?)
when the transponder was in high power telemetry mode.
This would be a great educational tool.
73,
Terry Osborne ZL2BAC
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Glasbrenner via AMSAT-BB
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 7:00 AM
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] Secondary mission ideas
I just had a super call with a university program flying a mission using
SDRs. We talked about licensing and coordination issues, and discussed ideas
for a secondary two-way mission that they want to do.
What would you like to see, repeater, transponder, BBS, digital voice,
digipeater? Downlink would be on 2m, and would probably be limited to
20-25khz wide. Other ideas? Something new and different? Let's have a
civilized discussion about what they could try, as they seem to be an eager
and capable bunch.
73, Drew KO4MA
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:58:20 +0000 (UTC)
From: M5AKA <m5aka@?????.??.??>
To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] IARU Update on Week 1 of WRC-19
Message-ID: <2008866777.407866.1572627500480@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, November 1, 2019 ? Week 1 of the 2019 World
Radiocommunication Conference saw agreement reached on several issues on
which discussions prior to the conference had revealed consensus. Those were
the easy ones; the rest will be more difficult.? Read the IARU report at
https://amsat-uk.org/2019/11/01/early-progress-contention-on-difficult-issues-
mark-first-week-of-wrc/
The FUNcube Yahoo Group has moved to groups.io
You can join the new FUNcube group at https://groups.io/g/FUNcubeThe FUNcube
Pro+ SDR Dongle group is at https://groups.io/g/FCDProPlus/
Trevor M5AKA
----
AMSAT-UK?http://amsat-uk.org/
Twitter?https://twitter.com/AmsatUK
Facebook?https://facebook.com/AmsatUK
YouTube?https://youtube.com/AmsatUK
----
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 13:04:19 -0500
From: "Ronald G. Parsons" <w5rkn@?????.???>
To: "AMSAT-BB" <AMSAT-BB@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] VUCC Awards-Endorsements for October 2019
Message-ID: <1AA8B03D0F3343DCBC49D3A8EAB05B38@?????????>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Here are the endorsements and new VUCC Satellite Awards issued by the ARRL
for the period October 1, 2019 through November 1, 2019. Congratulations to
all those who made the list this month!
Call Sep Oct
W5RKN 675 694
N0JE 569 637
K9UO 475 500
W5TD 384 392
AC9E 352 353
HP2VX 300 351
AD0HJ 325 350
K5IX 325 350
W7JSD 309 336
G0IIQ 112 251
ND0C 200 250
WB8TGY New 210
N4DCW New 201
KC9VGG 127 200
NX2X 119 178
KC9UQR 132 172
W0NBC 137 152
VE1VOX New 126
N4QX 120 125
AA0MZ 102 112
WA9JBQ New 104
N9FN New 103
PU8MGB New 102
KI4US New 101
AB4GE New 100
N0RC New 100
S57NML New 100
W2ASC New 100
If you find errors or omissions. please contact me off-list at
<mycall>@<??????>.com and I'll revise the announcement. This list was
developed by comparing the ARRL .pdf listings for the two months. It's a
visual comparison so omissions are possible. Apologies if your call was not
mentioned. Thanks to all those who are roving to grids that are rarely on
the birds. They are doing most of the work!
Ron W5RKN
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 20:01:36 +0000 (UTC)
From: RG <marzo7088@?????.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] radio question
Message-ID: <2011325781.8252.1572638496153@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hello fellow hams!I am looking into the Kenwood TS 2000,Older version on
Ebay and the Yaesu? FT 991A.The Kenwood is nice with the satellite features
and a built in TNC perhaps for filter selectivity than the FT 991A but have
heard some problems with RX sensitivity on the TS-2000.Dont want to spend
$1600 on a new one.The Yaesu is nice because it has digital radio but I have
DMR so not a big thing though nice.Anyway opinions would be greatly
appreciated.My motive is? obvious for full duplex for satellite use but
would like a good? nice base station as I run CW 85% .also and can use my
706 for RX and portable usethanks all73Rich :)
marzo7088@?????.???
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:46:26 -0500
From: John Geiger <af5cc2@?????.???>
To: RG <marzo7088@?????.???>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] radio question
Message-ID:
<CAHC1P28o_fC+1VCmTuvEkNyJ4wya+jnG1yhTQW7o1r_xU-NSZQ@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi Rich,
I have had a couple of TS2000 radios in the past, and currently have the
Yaesu FT991 (non A). In terms of the Kenwood sensitivity, some people make
that claim because you have to turn on the radio's preamp to have great
sensitivity on 2m and 70cm. But so what? That is what the preamp is there
for. I made plenty of satellite QSOs, as well as tropo and groundwave QSOs
on the TS2000. The 100 watts on 2 meters are nice also.
I really like the FT991. The noise reduction on it works better than on
the TS2000. The noise reduction 2 (used on CW) on the TS2000 does makes
some odd background noises (as does the NR on the FT991 at certain
settings) but it does really help remove background noise and pull signals
out of the background. Noise reduction 1 (suggested for SSB) isn't near as
good, and it muffles the audio on SSB. Most of the time I just left it
off.
The FT991 has a better overall receiver with a 3khz roofing filter. Both
the QST numbers and Rob Sherwood's dynamic range table show quite a
difference in close in dynamic range between the 2 radios. The noise
blanker on the FT991 is very good at taking out noises and has 3 different
parameters you can set. The noise blanker in the early TS2000 models seem
better than the ones in the later models. I am not sure when the change
occurred.
The FT991 has a CW memory keyer than can do contest serial numbers and has
5 different memories. The CW keyer in the TS2000 has 3 memories and
doesn't do contest serial numbers. A 5 message voice keyer in standard in
the Yaesu FT991, for the TS2000 it is a $130 option and stores 3 voice
messages. The TS2000 can have a voice synthesizer installed to read off
frequency and mode. That is not an option in the FT991.
The FT991 has a USB jack on the rear of the radio and has an internal
soundard so you can do radio control and the digital modes by using nothing
more than a standard USB cable. You can also do true FSK using the USB
cable and MMTTY software. The TS2000 has a serial jack and needs some soft
of interface to do digital modes.
The FT991 is smaller, lighter and the FT991A model has a real time
bandscope. They also do Yaesu's System Fusion digital voice. I haven't
tried that yet.
Here are a couple of area where the TS2000 is better:
1. Does full duplex on satellites-You could use your Icom 706 for the 2
meter side of satellite operations
2. Has 2 antenna jacks for HF/6 meters, and separate antenna jacks for 2m
and 70cm. How important this is depends on your setup.
3. Has the subreceiver, nice for monitoring local 2m and 70cm repeaters, or
simplex channels during a VHF contest.
4. Has the 1.2GHZ option, not available on the FT991
5. Can do crossband repeat and remote operations on Sky Command, not
available on the FT991.
So for basic HF/VHF/UHF SSB/CW/Digital operating, I think the FT991 is
better overall. The TS2000 is better if you want to have full duplex in a
single box, do 23cm operations, use crossband repeat, or do Skycommand.
Good luck with your choice! We live in a great time to have many different
rigs available!
73 John W5TD
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 3:03 PM RG via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Hello fellow hams!I am looking into the Kenwood TS 2000,Older version on
> Ebay and the Yaesu FT 991A.The Kenwood is nice with the satellite features
> and a built in TNC perhaps for filter selectivity than the FT 991A but have
> heard some problems with RX sensitivity on the TS-2000.Dont want to spend
> $1600 on a new one.The Yaesu is nice because it has digital radio but I
> have DMR so not a big thing though nice.Anyway opinions would be greatly
> appreciated.My motive is obvious for full duplex for satellite use but
> would like a good nice base station as I run CW 85% .also and can use my
> 706 for RX and portable usethanks all73Rich :)
> marzo7088@?????.???
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:47:16 -0400
From: Roy Dean <royldean@?????.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] radio question
Message-ID:
<CADGPg2teKnBQu6K1i=D7c8g1yXLFhjcusoW9KndX228+kr7h2A@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Rich, I do not believe the FT991A is full duplex.
--Roy
K3RLD
> Hello fellow hams!I am looking into the Kenwood TS 2000,Older version on
> Ebay and the Yaesu FT 991A.The Kenwood is nice with the satellite features
> and a built in TNC perhaps for filter selectivity than the FT 991A but have
> heard some problems with RX sensitivity on the TS-2000.Dont want to spend
> $1600 on a new one.The Yaesu is nice because it has digital radio but I
> have DMR so not a big thing though nice.Anyway opinions would be greatly
> appreciated.My motive is obvious for full duplex for satellite use but
> would like a good nice base station as I run CW 85% .also and can use my
> 706 for RX and portable usethanks all73Rich :)
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:56:20 -0400
From: Burns Fisher <wb1fj-bb@??????.??>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] radio question
Message-ID:
<CABX7KxWYMYm688BpR6nhQW=4adUaok44D7uTHu_W0xhef8Dy3A@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I have a TS-2000. It has been fine with all the birds I have tried to
contact EXCEPT: SO-50. The TS2K has a known problem with a birdie in the
SO-50 receive band which pretty much wipes out reception there for part of
the pass (doppler takes the downlink out of the birdie toward the end of
the pass if I recall right).
73,
Burns WB1FJ
On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 4:51 PM John Geiger via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
wrote:
> Hi Rich,
>
> I have had a couple of TS2000 radios in the past, and currently have the
> Yaesu FT991 (non A). In terms of the Kenwood sensitivity, some people make
> that claim because you have to turn on the radio's preamp to have great
> sensitivity on 2m and 70cm. But so what? That is what the preamp is there
> for. I made plenty of satellite QSOs, as well as tropo and groundwave QSOs
> on the TS2000. The 100 watts on 2 meters are nice also.
>
> I really like the FT991. The noise reduction on it works better than on
> the TS2000. The noise reduction 2 (used on CW) on the TS2000 does makes
> some odd background noises (as does the NR on the FT991 at certain
> settings) but it does really help remove background noise and pull signals
> out of the background. Noise reduction 1 (suggested for SSB) isn't near as
> good, and it muffles the audio on SSB. Most of the time I just left it
> off.
>
> The FT991 has a better overall receiver with a 3khz roofing filter. Both
> the QST numbers and Rob Sherwood's dynamic range table show quite a
> difference in close in dynamic range between the 2 radios. The noise
> blanker on the FT991 is very good at taking out noises and has 3 different
> parameters you can set. The noise blanker in the early TS2000 models seem
> better than the ones in the later models. I am not sure when the change
> occurred.
>
> The FT991 has a CW memory keyer than can do contest serial numbers and has
> 5 different memories. The CW keyer in the TS2000 has 3 memories and
> doesn't do contest serial numbers. A 5 message voice keyer in standard in
> the Yaesu FT991, for the TS2000 it is a $130 option and stores 3 voice
> messages. The TS2000 can have a voice synthesizer installed to read off
> frequency and mode. That is not an option in the FT991.
>
> The FT991 has a USB jack on the rear of the radio and has an internal
> soundard so you can do radio control and the digital modes by using nothing
> more than a standard USB cable. You can also do true FSK using the USB
> cable and MMTTY software. The TS2000 has a serial jack and needs some soft
> of interface to do digital modes.
>
> The FT991 is smaller, lighter and the FT991A model has a real time
> bandscope. They also do Yaesu's System Fusion digital voice. I haven't
> tried that yet.
>
> Here are a couple of area where the TS2000 is better:
> 1. Does full duplex on satellites-You could use your Icom 706 for the 2
> meter side of satellite operations
> 2. Has 2 antenna jacks for HF/6 meters, and separate antenna jacks for 2m
> and 70cm. How important this is depends on your setup.
> 3. Has the subreceiver, nice for monitoring local 2m and 70cm repeaters, or
> simplex channels during a VHF contest.
> 4. Has the 1.2GHZ option, not available on the FT991
> 5. Can do crossband repeat and remote operations on Sky Command, not
> available on the FT991.
>
> So for basic HF/VHF/UHF SSB/CW/Digital operating, I think the FT991 is
> better overall. The TS2000 is better if you want to have full duplex in a
> single box, do 23cm operations, use crossband repeat, or do Skycommand.
>
> Good luck with your choice! We live in a great time to have many different
> rigs available!
>
> 73 John W5TD
>
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 3:03 PM RG via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
> > Hello fellow hams!I am looking into the Kenwood TS 2000,Older version on
> > Ebay and the Yaesu FT 991A.The Kenwood is nice with the satellite
> features
> > and a built in TNC perhaps for filter selectivity than the FT 991A but
> have
> > heard some problems with RX sensitivity on the TS-2000.Dont want to spend
> > $1600 on a new one.The Yaesu is nice because it has digital radio but I
> > have DMR so not a big thing though nice.Anyway opinions would be greatly
> > appreciated.My motive is obvious for full duplex for satellite use but
> > would like a good nice base station as I run CW 85% .also and can use my
> > 706 for RX and portable usethanks all73Rich :)
> > marzo7088@?????.???
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> Opinions
> > expressed
> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> > AMSAT-NA.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@?????.???.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 14, Issue 396
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
