Getting on the 1.25M isn't as easy as 2M or UHF, as the options for a rig are limited. For a full-powered rig, the TYT TH-9000D still seems to be best option, and various manufacturers make clones of this radio. The Alinco model has the DSub9 connector already installed on the back, ostensibly for packet use. Otherwise, it's the same radio. The TH-9000D is, itself, a clone of an AnyTone rig -- though AnyTone never bothered to make a model for 220 MHz.
The TH-9000D (1.25M model) is now available domestically for $150 (plus shipping), and from China for $150 (free shipping). My experience with the U.S. distributor (radio-mart.com) is that the guy takes over a week to actually ship your order, so it's not much faster than buying from China. Any problems are only resolved by shipping the radio back to China, so there's little advantage there either.
But maybe $150 is a bit too much of a gamble for a band like 1.25M, and for a monoband radio at that. Then, you have to consider an HT. Wouxun and TYT make dual-band HTs that include 1.25M, though reviews of those radios are mixed. My experience with the TYT UHF/1.25M offering is not positive, as the radio is worthless for UHF, and it's selling for over $90. The Wouxun, at $130, hardly seems worth it.
The cheapest option -- and a reasonably good one -- is the BaoFeng UV-82X. The UV-82 is, by virtually all accounts, superior to the familiar UV-5R. John at miklor.com has written up a comparison of the two. Higher output power, and better TX/RX audio are significant differences over the old UV-5R that so many roll their eyes at. The UV-82 also has two PTT buttons -- one for the "A" band, and another for "B" band. There's also a speaker mic that's compatible with this dual-button arrangement.
The UV-82X, at $50 (free shipping), seems like a pretty good option. It pushes over 5W on 2M, and the addition of an external antenna would make it an adequate home or mobile option. Certainly, this wouldn't take the place of a full-powered 50W two-metre FM mobile rig. But it would allow you to play with 220 MHz and sample the local repeater coverage, without being isolated from the activity on 2M. And it wouldn't be an expensive gamble, either.
I use an old UV-5RS in my home office. Though it has lower output power than the UV-82X, I can readably work the Columbia Heights .660 and .500 repeaters, plus the Arden Hills 223.940 machine, using nothing more than an indoor 1/4-wave whip mag-mounted to a metal paint can sitting next to the window -- from out in Plymouth. So, if you doubt that you can do anything on the band with an HT, you'd be wrong. I've also had good luck reaching these repeaters with the same 1/4-wave whip on my car driving around the west metro. If you can improve on these marginal antenna solutions, the extra power afforded by the UV-82X should allow you to do pretty well getting in to the excellent local repeater infrastructure on the band.
Locally, the repeater situation continues to improve. The 224.660- (100.0 PL) machine has excellent coverage, along with EchoLink access, and plans for cross-band linking. The 224.500- (114.8 PL) repeater isn't quite at the level of the .660, but it's now functional and is improving. The Arden Hills 223.940- (100.0 PL) remains as reliable as ever, and the link to the HandiHam network will be restored in the future. This would allow the HandiHam network to expand its coverage in the north and east, and the 1.25M band could be one of the best ways to get in for a lot of people that struggle with the VHF .450 coverage.
There are other repeaters that show potential, as well. The 223.900- (100.0 PL) still requires higher power and better antennae to access, but no one involved in that project is content with that situation. There are plans to add a 70W PA to improve range, and potential linking schemes are being considered. Likewise, the 224.940- (100.0 PL) is searching for a better site that could allow it to become one of the "big boys" on the band.
Right now, it's going to take a sustained effort to build up a core group of operators on the local 1.25M scene, and some kind of cross-band option on one of the local machines so that those who jump in on the ground floor aren't isolated from the rest of the amateur radio community.
Showing posts with label Baofeng. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Baofeng. Show all posts
Sunday, 21 December 2014
Sunday, 12 October 2014
The beefier BaoFeng is back!
As I mentioned before, BaoFeng has a new, higher-powered HT available.
Since that initial post, it was pulled off the shelves over a defect. But it's back on the market again.
On Amazon for $63, same as before.
Listed at 8W RF output, it's been tested at 7.4W on two metres and 6.0W on UHF.
Used as an HT, I'm not sure that the additional power is that big of a deal. As Dutch ham radio blogger PD0AC (Hans) notes on a different 10W HT:
When I got my licence, I had a monoband (UHF) PuXing PX-777 that put out a real 3.4W. It worked fine for me, because I didn't use it as an HT with a stock duck. Instead, I connected it to an exterior mobile antenna with a magnetic mount on my balcony. I also used it in my car with a mag-mount whip. Certainly, there were repeaters that I couldn't reach well with this arrangement, but I could reach several and I had a great time being on the air - even though I was limited to UHF. Of course, I ran into dozens of old farts telling me that I was "doing it wrong", and recommending various $200-$300 'solutions'. Fortunately, I ignored them. Prices have gone down dramatically since these wondrous 'experts' snarled their words of expensive wisdom at me.
Just two years ago, that UHF PX-777 cost me $75. All told, including the antenna, coax, and other accessories, I got on the air for under $150. Now, of course, you can get a lot more for your money. Instead of a monoband putting out 3.4W, a new ham could get the new BaoFeng and be on both bands with almost twice the power. The thing is, you have to use your imagination and a little ingenuity to make these inexpensive solutions work. That seems to be something that the 'experienced' hams have completely forgotten how to do. If the only tool in your tool box is a wallet, then you've lost sight of the thrill of improvisation.
The point here is that the BF-F8HP has potential to be used in other ways besides the traditional HT/stock duck application.
The new BF-F8HP is the final incarnation of the UV-5RE line. I'm sure that there will be more new models from BaoFeng (or PoFung), but they'll likely have different firmware and probably won't be compatible with the current accessories. I'd anticipate things like proprietary connectors and new battery terminal locations. While it was marketing genius for BaoFeng to piggy-back on the Kenwood scheme, it allowed others to sell the accessories (antennae, speaker mics, cases, batteries, battery eliminators, etc), and thus piggy-back off of BaoFeng.
Despite all of the 'experts' constipated prophecies, these Chinese HTs have mostly held up pretty well. All of my PuXing HTs still work great, as does my UV-5RB. They may not last thirty years, but who really cares? As the BF-F8HP demonstrates, the radio market is constantly evolving. In five years, DMR might be "where it's at", and the $300 HT that some 'expert' told me to buy will be as obsolete as my $75 monoband Chinese HT.
Nobody ever seems to remember how these same 'experts' predicted anarchy when the Chinese HTs hit the market, nor how they also predicted that amateur radio would become "like CB" when the code requirement was dropped. And these very same out-of-touch bozos are currently pointing at the licensing numbers and patting themselves on the back. That should tell you something right there.
Since that initial post, it was pulled off the shelves over a defect. But it's back on the market again.
On Amazon for $63, same as before.
Listed at 8W RF output, it's been tested at 7.4W on two metres and 6.0W on UHF.
Used as an HT, I'm not sure that the additional power is that big of a deal. As Dutch ham radio blogger PD0AC (Hans) notes on a different 10W HT:
Personally I don’t find anything above 5 Watts output very useful, as range depends more on antenna quality and terrain than raw power. Pumping out 10 Watts close to your face might not be smart either.And I'd agree with that, as far as using the BF-F8HP as an HT with a stock duck. There might be marginal situations where a few extra watts makes the difference between scratchy and being clear, but I think that it's fairly common for new hams to get an inflated idea of how well the HT/stock duck application performs. This is one way that more 'experienced' hams use to pressure these new hams into spending more money, along with a generous helping of sheer disdain.
When I got my licence, I had a monoband (UHF) PuXing PX-777 that put out a real 3.4W. It worked fine for me, because I didn't use it as an HT with a stock duck. Instead, I connected it to an exterior mobile antenna with a magnetic mount on my balcony. I also used it in my car with a mag-mount whip. Certainly, there were repeaters that I couldn't reach well with this arrangement, but I could reach several and I had a great time being on the air - even though I was limited to UHF. Of course, I ran into dozens of old farts telling me that I was "doing it wrong", and recommending various $200-$300 'solutions'. Fortunately, I ignored them. Prices have gone down dramatically since these wondrous 'experts' snarled their words of expensive wisdom at me.
Just two years ago, that UHF PX-777 cost me $75. All told, including the antenna, coax, and other accessories, I got on the air for under $150. Now, of course, you can get a lot more for your money. Instead of a monoband putting out 3.4W, a new ham could get the new BaoFeng and be on both bands with almost twice the power. The thing is, you have to use your imagination and a little ingenuity to make these inexpensive solutions work. That seems to be something that the 'experienced' hams have completely forgotten how to do. If the only tool in your tool box is a wallet, then you've lost sight of the thrill of improvisation.
The point here is that the BF-F8HP has potential to be used in other ways besides the traditional HT/stock duck application.
The new BF-F8HP is the final incarnation of the UV-5RE line. I'm sure that there will be more new models from BaoFeng (or PoFung), but they'll likely have different firmware and probably won't be compatible with the current accessories. I'd anticipate things like proprietary connectors and new battery terminal locations. While it was marketing genius for BaoFeng to piggy-back on the Kenwood scheme, it allowed others to sell the accessories (antennae, speaker mics, cases, batteries, battery eliminators, etc), and thus piggy-back off of BaoFeng.
Despite all of the 'experts' constipated prophecies, these Chinese HTs have mostly held up pretty well. All of my PuXing HTs still work great, as does my UV-5RB. They may not last thirty years, but who really cares? As the BF-F8HP demonstrates, the radio market is constantly evolving. In five years, DMR might be "where it's at", and the $300 HT that some 'expert' told me to buy will be as obsolete as my $75 monoband Chinese HT.
Nobody ever seems to remember how these same 'experts' predicted anarchy when the Chinese HTs hit the market, nor how they also predicted that amateur radio would become "like CB" when the code requirement was dropped. And these very same out-of-touch bozos are currently pointing at the licensing numbers and patting themselves on the back. That should tell you something right there.
Sunday, 17 August 2014
Beefier BaoFeng
BaoFeng (or PoFung, as they are now known) has released the BF-F8HP. The review is here. This is supposed to be the "final" version of the UV-5RC, and is compatible with all of the UV-5RC accessories (battery, mic, 12v adapter, programming cable, etc).
The most notable thing about this new model is that it has more RF output. The specs are listed as a tri-level 1/4/8W output, which translates to a real 7.4W on VHF and 6.0W on UHF. It also has a re-written manual that allegedly makes actual sense. The "stock duck" antenna is also improved.
Despite BaoFeng's claims, the popular UV-5RC (in all it's variants) had only about 4W output on 2M, and about 3W on UHF. This is pretty much the standard range for the other brands of Chinese HTs, too. While BaoFengs have their "idiosyncrasies" ( deficient front-end, weird "inductive loading" on the antenna), six watts on UHF is decent. If a "gain" mobile whip is used, along with the 12v adapter, the BF-F8HP can be a quite practical mobile rig. Attaching it to a UHF Yagi would make it a very nice home option, even if the antenna were indoors. Even on two metres, an extra 3.4W could make an upgrade compelling. If you have trouble hearing the repeaters that you most commonly use, however, the BF-F8HP won't help you out.
What to do with your old UV-5RC (or whatever variant)? Hey, it's somebody's new MURS radio. Or marine HT. Or GMRS repeater-capable HT. Strictly speaking, a BaoFeng isn't certified for those uses because of the "VFO" button on the front. Practically speaking, nobody will care. Maybe super-glue the VFO button open, if you want to be fastidious about it. Programme it for whatever specific use you have in mind, and give it to someone. It's unlikely that they are going to want to change it to make it unsuitable for that use, after all. The easier that you make it for them to use it as, say, a marine VHF radio, the less likely they are to mess around with the settings. If nothing else, it's an analogue scanner for someone. Or your new monitor radio for the kitchen.
Good luck trying to sell your old model, with new ones going for $30.
I also find it interesting that BaoFeng is now offering CHIRP as the programming software for the radio. Using CHIRP allows for seven-character names on channels, instead of six on the BaoFeng software.
On Amazon for $63.
If the BF-F8HP is the final version, one might wonder how long the accessories for the BaoFeng line will continue to be available. Li-ON batteries generally don't have a long shelf-life, but if yours is showing signs of exhaustion it might be wise to pick up a new one. Also, a 12v adapter will guarantee that you will always be able to use your radio if batteries ever become unavailable, either in your car or with an external power supply.
This release is also a game-changer for the other Chinese HTs. A PuXing PX-777 for $65, for example, looks like a poor choice in comparison to the beefier BaoFeng. Maybe other manufacturers will boost the RF output in order to remain competitive. Maybe there will just be a flood of really cheap PuXing and WoXoun HTs in response.
The most notable thing about this new model is that it has more RF output. The specs are listed as a tri-level 1/4/8W output, which translates to a real 7.4W on VHF and 6.0W on UHF. It also has a re-written manual that allegedly makes actual sense. The "stock duck" antenna is also improved.
Despite BaoFeng's claims, the popular UV-5RC (in all it's variants) had only about 4W output on 2M, and about 3W on UHF. This is pretty much the standard range for the other brands of Chinese HTs, too. While BaoFengs have their "idiosyncrasies" ( deficient front-end, weird "inductive loading" on the antenna), six watts on UHF is decent. If a "gain" mobile whip is used, along with the 12v adapter, the BF-F8HP can be a quite practical mobile rig. Attaching it to a UHF Yagi would make it a very nice home option, even if the antenna were indoors. Even on two metres, an extra 3.4W could make an upgrade compelling. If you have trouble hearing the repeaters that you most commonly use, however, the BF-F8HP won't help you out.
What to do with your old UV-5RC (or whatever variant)? Hey, it's somebody's new MURS radio. Or marine HT. Or GMRS repeater-capable HT. Strictly speaking, a BaoFeng isn't certified for those uses because of the "VFO" button on the front. Practically speaking, nobody will care. Maybe super-glue the VFO button open, if you want to be fastidious about it. Programme it for whatever specific use you have in mind, and give it to someone. It's unlikely that they are going to want to change it to make it unsuitable for that use, after all. The easier that you make it for them to use it as, say, a marine VHF radio, the less likely they are to mess around with the settings. If nothing else, it's an analogue scanner for someone. Or your new monitor radio for the kitchen.
Good luck trying to sell your old model, with new ones going for $30.
I also find it interesting that BaoFeng is now offering CHIRP as the programming software for the radio. Using CHIRP allows for seven-character names on channels, instead of six on the BaoFeng software.
On Amazon for $63.
If the BF-F8HP is the final version, one might wonder how long the accessories for the BaoFeng line will continue to be available. Li-ON batteries generally don't have a long shelf-life, but if yours is showing signs of exhaustion it might be wise to pick up a new one. Also, a 12v adapter will guarantee that you will always be able to use your radio if batteries ever become unavailable, either in your car or with an external power supply.
This release is also a game-changer for the other Chinese HTs. A PuXing PX-777 for $65, for example, looks like a poor choice in comparison to the beefier BaoFeng. Maybe other manufacturers will boost the RF output in order to remain competitive. Maybe there will just be a flood of really cheap PuXing and WoXoun HTs in response.
Monday, 21 April 2014
The state of the HT market
The market for amateur radio HT's (walkie-talkies) is changing fairly rapidly. As I noted in December, Puxing has released the PX-UV973 dual-band HT that costs about the same as the monoband PX-777 that I got into ham radio with. With various BaoFeng models selling for around $40 (and the 888S for around $20), one might think that Baofeng will continue to dominate. They are popular radios, obviously, and the UV-B5 can be programmed to work on 222 MHz (1.25M) at about two watts. Only two years ago, hams were raging and shaking their fists over the invasion of Chinese HTs. Now, though, it's not that uncommon for even long-time hams to actually own one. Even though I'm a big fan of Puxing, I still own a BaoFeng UV-5RB (2M/70cm) and a UV-5RS (2M/1.25M) that I mostly just use for monitoring. The flashlight and FM radio functions are a plus for car-camping and boating. I've found that the BaoFeng HTs don't handle being connected to external antennae very well -- beyond the "rubber duck", anyway. If you're just using it as a walkie-talkie, then it's not a big deal. But if you want to use it as a mobile or a base, then you'll find that you get much less improvement in signal strength with a mobile whip, for example, than you would with other radios. Does it "work"? Yes, it does.
If, for whatever reason, you decide to spend more money on a non-BaoFeng HT, you have many, many options. The PX-777 and PX-888 are both available for around $70, are both monoband, and the PX-888 has MSK ANI . The "old" dual-band PX-888K is now slightly more expensive than the new cross-band, dual-band PX-UV973 model. Both have MSK ANI encode and decode. Likewise, there are at least eight other brands offering monoband HTs, all around $68-70. With a market like this, there's little point in taking a gamble with a Golden Spring or a Linton radio that may not have batteries around in the future.
Even the "YaeComWood" manufacturers are beginning to exploit the market conditions. For example, about $100 gets you the Yaesu FT-257 UHF monoband HT. Unsurprisingly, the same type of ham that scowled and snarled over the introduction of the cheap Chinese HT is now dismissing the cheap Japanese HTs out-of-hand. And, the multitudes that ignored those hams and bought BaoFeng, PuXing, and TYT radios continue to ignore those same hams' dire warnings and specious objections.
Digital FM is also experiencing the start of the same phenomenon. PuXing has a DMR Tier-II compliant HT coming. And ConnectSystems is laying the groundwork to steal a significant share of the DMR-based HT market.
Everybody has an opinion on HTs, it seems. Some have a favoured brand, others just loathe a particular brand. For me, the best (non-BaoFeng) deal right now looks like the TYT TH-UVF9 dual-band HT for $69 with MSK. But, realistically, I would spend the extra money and buy the PuXing PX-UV973 if I were in the market for a new HT.
Still, HTs are likely to be the entry point into the hobby for some time. While many new hams will end up buying a "real" radio at some point, the HT will be their best option during that crucial period of introduction and evaluation of the hobby. A snobbish attitude and 'helpful' advice regarding how many hundreds to spend on that "real" radio is counter-productive. In the 18 months or so that I've been a ham, dual-band HTs have come down in price while monobands are no longer competitive. This has meant that UHF is available for "free", and hams that have ignored it are now getting exposed to it. It's clear that HTs "mean something different" to hams that have been around for decades. To them, it's about "emergencies", public service stuff like marathons and parades, and "serious business". To those new to the hobby, HTs are cheap mobiles and base stations to get in the 'fun', such as it is. Thus, the old-timer's plaintive whining about 'quality', the ridiculous $400 bar (when battery packs, software, and antennae are included), and the casually-dropped notion that such a price point is merely the 'start' are things that leave new hams disillusioned.
People can get a lot of fun out of the hobby for very little money. Having a radio that lasts thirty years is not a big attraction, since the hobby might not be viable then. Likewise, this obsession with Armageddon, "emergencies", and 'serious business' doesn't relate to the desire to be able to chat to someone on the drive in to work. The cheap HT is not just an entry point in to the hobby. It's also an entry point into the disconnected and increasingly irrelevant world of the deadly serious and terminally boring 'real' ham.
EDIT: Just thought that I'd add that the Weierwei VEV-V16 dual-band also has MSK for $85. Interesting to me because I've only ever seen PuXing and TYT radios with MSK capability.
If, for whatever reason, you decide to spend more money on a non-BaoFeng HT, you have many, many options. The PX-777 and PX-888 are both available for around $70, are both monoband, and the PX-888 has MSK ANI . The "old" dual-band PX-888K is now slightly more expensive than the new cross-band, dual-band PX-UV973 model. Both have MSK ANI encode and decode. Likewise, there are at least eight other brands offering monoband HTs, all around $68-70. With a market like this, there's little point in taking a gamble with a Golden Spring or a Linton radio that may not have batteries around in the future.
Even the "YaeComWood" manufacturers are beginning to exploit the market conditions. For example, about $100 gets you the Yaesu FT-257 UHF monoband HT. Unsurprisingly, the same type of ham that scowled and snarled over the introduction of the cheap Chinese HT is now dismissing the cheap Japanese HTs out-of-hand. And, the multitudes that ignored those hams and bought BaoFeng, PuXing, and TYT radios continue to ignore those same hams' dire warnings and specious objections.
Digital FM is also experiencing the start of the same phenomenon. PuXing has a DMR Tier-II compliant HT coming. And ConnectSystems is laying the groundwork to steal a significant share of the DMR-based HT market.
Everybody has an opinion on HTs, it seems. Some have a favoured brand, others just loathe a particular brand. For me, the best (non-BaoFeng) deal right now looks like the TYT TH-UVF9 dual-band HT for $69 with MSK. But, realistically, I would spend the extra money and buy the PuXing PX-UV973 if I were in the market for a new HT.
Still, HTs are likely to be the entry point into the hobby for some time. While many new hams will end up buying a "real" radio at some point, the HT will be their best option during that crucial period of introduction and evaluation of the hobby. A snobbish attitude and 'helpful' advice regarding how many hundreds to spend on that "real" radio is counter-productive. In the 18 months or so that I've been a ham, dual-band HTs have come down in price while monobands are no longer competitive. This has meant that UHF is available for "free", and hams that have ignored it are now getting exposed to it. It's clear that HTs "mean something different" to hams that have been around for decades. To them, it's about "emergencies", public service stuff like marathons and parades, and "serious business". To those new to the hobby, HTs are cheap mobiles and base stations to get in the 'fun', such as it is. Thus, the old-timer's plaintive whining about 'quality', the ridiculous $400 bar (when battery packs, software, and antennae are included), and the casually-dropped notion that such a price point is merely the 'start' are things that leave new hams disillusioned.
People can get a lot of fun out of the hobby for very little money. Having a radio that lasts thirty years is not a big attraction, since the hobby might not be viable then. Likewise, this obsession with Armageddon, "emergencies", and 'serious business' doesn't relate to the desire to be able to chat to someone on the drive in to work. The cheap HT is not just an entry point in to the hobby. It's also an entry point into the disconnected and increasingly irrelevant world of the deadly serious and terminally boring 'real' ham.
EDIT: Just thought that I'd add that the Weierwei VEV-V16 dual-band also has MSK for $85. Interesting to me because I've only ever seen PuXing and TYT radios with MSK capability.
Sunday, 8 December 2013
MSK ANI on your HT
Incomprehensible acronyms in this post, I guess. MSK is a "modulation scheme" that sends information digitally. I don't know much about the details, but you can find more info here. ANI is "Automatic Numbering Identification", which is a way for a radio to identify itself to others. And HT is "hamspeak" for a hand-held transceiver -- what most people would call a "walkie-talkie".
There seems to be a lot of confusion over ANI, and it's something that many people find in the manuals for their Chinese HTs. The Baofengs have DTMF, 2-tone, and 5-tone. I'm not going to get into the details too much. DTMF is what phones use to send the number corresponding to keypad, and most everybody is familiar with that. For these modes, a number is sent either at the beginning or end of a transmission in the form of tones. It might be somewhat useful on commercial radios, but on ham radio it's worthless. It's just a slightly more complex "roger beep", which is good way to irritate other hams.
PuXing, TYT, and Wouxun radios have MSK in addition to DTMF. In theory, you can send your callsign in a short data burst at the end of your transmission, and it will show up on the screen of the people receiving you. In practise, it usually doesn't work that way.
My PuXing PX-777s have MSK, and they send the data burst. They don't display anything, though. I don't have a Wouxun, so I can't speak to those. In the PuXing and TYT software, you enter your callsign in the ANI settings.
Here is a screenshot of the PX-888K software where you set up the MSK callsign:
Here is the screenshot from the TYT UV-F9 software where the callsign is programmed:
I am able to send my callsign from my PuXing PX-888K to my TYT UV-F9 (and vice versa) and have it display on the receiving end. I set it up exactly as shown, and it worked right off the bat.
If you don't see "MSK" as one of the options in your "ANI" or "PTT ID" settings, then this won't work on your radio. It won't work with DTMF, 2-tone, or 5-tone. All that you can send with those are numbers, except for the letters A, B, C, and D with DTMF. I don't think that the BaoFeng software will even allow you to enter letters at all, regardless if they are those four. Most radios don't allow you to do this, or it just doesn't work. Like I said, the PuXing PX-777 will send, but not receive, a callsign. My TYT TH-9000 (1.25M) doesn't have MSK, but my TYT UV-F9 (70cm/1.25M) does.
As with most "newfangled" ham radio things, the use of ANI (whether MSK or not) brings out strong feelings in opposition. It's not the way things were done thirty years ago, so it's wrong... and get off of my lawn! I think that MSK ID is great, and I wish that it was more common. Often people mumble their callsigns, or rattle them off quickly as if you already know it. Usually, I have to ask people to repeat it or say it phonetically. Other times, I simply forget their sign during the course of the conversation.
With this digital ID setting, the other person can see your callsign displayed right after you are finished talking, throughout the conversation. There's no confusion over similar-sounding letters. Obviously, it doesn't take the place of the FCC requirements to identify yourself. It's just a convenient supplement to voice identification. It would also be nice if repeaters would use an additional MSK ID, but that isn't likely because the controllers aren't designed for that.
The MSK ID sounds like a short (one second or less) squawk at the end of your transmission. The sender can't hear it, of course, but the person receiving can. This sets the stage for all manner of irritable people to complain or simply refuse to talk to you. On the PuXing and TYT models that support the MSK ID, it can be turned off through the menu keypad, but that could be challenging while driving. You can also set which channels that you want PTT ID to be sent on through the software. So, if you find that people on a particular repeater are annoyed, you can set the radio to not send your ID on that channel.
Another issue is that those fancy, expensive non-Chinese radios can't decode MSK, so the hams using those radios won't be able to see your callsign anyway - but they will still be "exposed" to the squawk.
To avoid the inevitable controversy, I limit myself to using MSK ID on simplex. But, if I know that someone has an MSK-compatible radio, I will often turn the ANI on during the course of a conversation. Since these people are always newer hams, and don't have a knee-jerk negativity to the Chinese radios, it's a safer bet that they won't go ballistic. In fact, they generally think that it's "cool" that they can see my callsign scroll across their display, and they want to know how it's done.
Realistically, I don't expect that MSK ID will ever "catch on" because most radios can't make use of it, and there are competing digital technologies such as MDC-1200. Still, it's just another reason to pay a bit more for a PuXing PX-888K or TYT UV-F9 instead of a BaoFeng UV-5R.
There seems to be a lot of confusion over ANI, and it's something that many people find in the manuals for their Chinese HTs. The Baofengs have DTMF, 2-tone, and 5-tone. I'm not going to get into the details too much. DTMF is what phones use to send the number corresponding to keypad, and most everybody is familiar with that. For these modes, a number is sent either at the beginning or end of a transmission in the form of tones. It might be somewhat useful on commercial radios, but on ham radio it's worthless. It's just a slightly more complex "roger beep", which is good way to irritate other hams.
PuXing, TYT, and Wouxun radios have MSK in addition to DTMF. In theory, you can send your callsign in a short data burst at the end of your transmission, and it will show up on the screen of the people receiving you. In practise, it usually doesn't work that way.
My PuXing PX-777s have MSK, and they send the data burst. They don't display anything, though. I don't have a Wouxun, so I can't speak to those. In the PuXing and TYT software, you enter your callsign in the ANI settings.
Here is a screenshot of the PX-888K software where you set up the MSK callsign:
Here is the screenshot from the TYT UV-F9 software where the callsign is programmed:
I am able to send my callsign from my PuXing PX-888K to my TYT UV-F9 (and vice versa) and have it display on the receiving end. I set it up exactly as shown, and it worked right off the bat.
If you don't see "MSK" as one of the options in your "ANI" or "PTT ID" settings, then this won't work on your radio. It won't work with DTMF, 2-tone, or 5-tone. All that you can send with those are numbers, except for the letters A, B, C, and D with DTMF. I don't think that the BaoFeng software will even allow you to enter letters at all, regardless if they are those four. Most radios don't allow you to do this, or it just doesn't work. Like I said, the PuXing PX-777 will send, but not receive, a callsign. My TYT TH-9000 (1.25M) doesn't have MSK, but my TYT UV-F9 (70cm/1.25M) does.
As with most "newfangled" ham radio things, the use of ANI (whether MSK or not) brings out strong feelings in opposition. It's not the way things were done thirty years ago, so it's wrong... and get off of my lawn! I think that MSK ID is great, and I wish that it was more common. Often people mumble their callsigns, or rattle them off quickly as if you already know it. Usually, I have to ask people to repeat it or say it phonetically. Other times, I simply forget their sign during the course of the conversation.
With this digital ID setting, the other person can see your callsign displayed right after you are finished talking, throughout the conversation. There's no confusion over similar-sounding letters. Obviously, it doesn't take the place of the FCC requirements to identify yourself. It's just a convenient supplement to voice identification. It would also be nice if repeaters would use an additional MSK ID, but that isn't likely because the controllers aren't designed for that.
The MSK ID sounds like a short (one second or less) squawk at the end of your transmission. The sender can't hear it, of course, but the person receiving can. This sets the stage for all manner of irritable people to complain or simply refuse to talk to you. On the PuXing and TYT models that support the MSK ID, it can be turned off through the menu keypad, but that could be challenging while driving. You can also set which channels that you want PTT ID to be sent on through the software. So, if you find that people on a particular repeater are annoyed, you can set the radio to not send your ID on that channel.
Another issue is that those fancy, expensive non-Chinese radios can't decode MSK, so the hams using those radios won't be able to see your callsign anyway - but they will still be "exposed" to the squawk.
To avoid the inevitable controversy, I limit myself to using MSK ID on simplex. But, if I know that someone has an MSK-compatible radio, I will often turn the ANI on during the course of a conversation. Since these people are always newer hams, and don't have a knee-jerk negativity to the Chinese radios, it's a safer bet that they won't go ballistic. In fact, they generally think that it's "cool" that they can see my callsign scroll across their display, and they want to know how it's done.
Realistically, I don't expect that MSK ID will ever "catch on" because most radios can't make use of it, and there are competing digital technologies such as MDC-1200. Still, it's just another reason to pay a bit more for a PuXing PX-888K or TYT UV-F9 instead of a BaoFeng UV-5R.
Friday, 1 November 2013
Condecension from the elite on the "dot one"
About two weeks ago, my new radio came in the mail. It was a dual band BaoFeng that works on two metres and 220 MHz (1.25M). Now, 220 MHz is pretty dead, and there aren't many repeaters for that band scattered around the country. But a BaoFeng is pretty cheap, so it's no big gamble to buy a radio for 220 MHz, especially since it can also work on two metres. Fortunately, we have cross-band operation here in the Twin Cities metro through the HandiHam network. By accessing the local 220 MHz repeater, you simultaneously are heard on 144 and 440 through the other four HandiHam machines. And also EchoLink. Yes, it is awesome.
A couple of days earlier, my 220 MHz mobile whip arrived. It didn't have a brand name on the housing, but I think it was a Jetstream antenna with a NMO mount. While I was able to hit the Arden Hills HandiHam repeater for 220 MHz with the "rubber duck", the repeater in Burnsville (run by TCRC) was just on the margin. So I wanted to see what a "real" antenna would do. I already had a disappointing experience with mobile operation, and I knew that the receiver was lousy. But I had read that one person had some luck using this model in "narrow" bandwidth, and I decided to give it another try.
Using narrow band actually helped with the reception when I was using the "rubber duck" (this is the short stock antenna that attaches to the radio for use as a walkie-talkie). I was listening to KA0PQW (Matt) on his repeater talking to someone, and he came in much better than he had before when I was using "wide" bandwidth. While these two were talking, I went out on my balcony and screwed in the mobile antenna. The signal was terrible again. I couldn't make out the conversation, even though I was using an exterior antenna about four times longer than the "rubber duck". When I unscrewed the antenna, they were still talking and the signal dramatically improved. Reception was actually better without an antenna at all; just the coaxial cable going to the empty NMO mount. It seemed pretty weird, but the BaoFengs have a strange "inductive loading" antenna match that is optimised for the "rubber duck". They almost always work better (in terms of reception) with the stock duck, but they will usually work well enough with another antenna to let you reach typical HT ranges.
The next morning, I got up early to try and get on the TCFMC UHF net and talk about my strange adventure with the new radio. As usual, it was really hard to get in. Not because it's crowded. It's because the "regulars" don't leave any space between each other for someone to jump in. They also are oblivious to "doubling" (someone else transmitting while another person is talking), which is usually a good indicator that someone is trying to break in.
But I did get in. I told the two guys there (KN0V? and K0BUD) about my strange adventure with the BaoFeng, as anyone else would share an unusual tale.
Immediately, I got a load of condescension. Somehow, these two got the idea that I was asking them for help, rather than sharing a story. "I don't know what to tell ya as far as helping ya fix that". I was told that radios work better if you don't use the rubber duck. Wow! I had no idea! What did these two geniuses think I had bought the mobile whip for? "I've never been a fan of rubber ducks". Sheesh. Want to tell me how to work the push-to-talk button, too? It's kinda confusing. Do I pull it? Because that isn't working and I'm out of solutions. Please help me.
Of course, I was also treated to snide remarks about BaoFengs in general. Yeah, they wouldn't use those, so they "didn't know what to tell me". Basically, the problem was that I had bought a cheap radio and I deserved what I got. I have no idea where the got the notion that I was asking for help, much less that I thought BaoFengs were quality radios. I guess that Grandpa has to share his "wisdom" somehow, even if it consists of stating the obvious, and even if nobody asked for his "wisdom" in the first place.
The ultimate stupidity and irony was yet to come. K0BUD told me, as if he was imparting some secret knowledge, "Around here, 220 is about as popular as snow in winter".
Again, thanks for the clue. I had no idea. Sheesh.
It's ironic in two ways. First, I really doubt that this "expert" knew about the cross-band HandiHam repeater operating on 220 MHz. That would have been helpful information, if he truly believed that I was as stupid as every condescending remark he made let on. Or about the repeater in Burnsville. Yep. Big expert, telling the poor newbie that he's screwed because he didn't do what Grandpa would have done.
Second, that's pretty much what people on two meters say about UHF: there's nobody on it. And it's true. Outside of the morning net, there's not much going on at the old "dot one". I throw out my sign every day on the way to work, as well as my return. Only very rarely does someone come back, and they usually express the "information" that nobody is on there very much and I should try elsewhere. We have some really good UHF repeaters in town with excellent coverage (.800, .425, .775, .500, .175 and the .950) but nobody is on them. The .425 at the University has a few people, mostly because of the EchoLink node. And, of course, the HandiHam .650 is cross-band, so it has activity from the other bands. But a guy on the only active UHF-only repeater at the time is telling me that 220 MHz is dead. It's us three on the entire UHF band, and he's talking about low activity on 220.
Obviously, what I should have done is dropped $300 for a quality radio operating on UHF -- like his, with the batteries always dying -- to get in on the "action" of a dying hobby. That way, we could talk about my neat $300 radio, and diss those low-life fools that spend $40 on a radio that won't last 30 years. Who even knows what ham radio will be like in 30 years? There could be some major technical innovation two years from now that makes his $300 radio obsolete. Or, more likely, there won't be anyone on the repeaters at all. I'll be out $40, but he'll be out $300. Hell, let's face it. He'll probably be dead, but his $300 radio will live on. Money well spent.
TCFMC isn't about the future. It's about the past, and snarling about how unfair it is that things change over the course of decades. We're talking about a club that hasn't had a working EchoLink node for over two months, because they can't reboot the laptop and log it on. Yeah, these are real experts. And, when you tell people about it, they say, "I don't really use it". In a really smug, dismissive tone, as if they are too good for that newfangled stuff. Here's a clue: EchoLink isn't for you, any more than your doorbell is, mister expert. It's for people outside of the repeater's range to use. If someone comes over and tells the owner that their doorbell isn't working, would you think the person who lives there was stupid if they chuckled at your naiveté and told you that, "I don't really use it much"? Of course you don't, because you live there! Connect the dots. Likewise with anything involving linking or cross-band. It would seem obvious that linking the two UHF repeaters would make them both more valuable. People in the south-east could talk with people in the north-east. Instead, nobody is on either of them, because there are so few people with UHF radios in either area. Cross-band is something that HandiHam would do -- insert derisive snort here -- much like EchoLink. Our repeaters might be dead, but we're old school about things at TCFMC. Cross-band would open up UHF to two-metre users, who aren't going to buy a new radio for the UHF band because they already spent $300 and this one will last them for thirty years. It's not as if the "dot one" has coverage comparable to the other UHF repeaters that I listed before. It's good in the western suburbs and into Minneapolis proper, but it can't reach St. Paul proper or out to Burnsville. The others can.
With fewer people on the air every year, the way forward is to bring those declining numbers together. EchoLink, linked repeaters, and cross-band repeaters do that. What doesn't work is smug condescension and an expectation that people are going to spend a lot of money to talk to the "elite" about nothing.
The way forward, as I see it, is for MARA to cross-link the UHF .800 and the VHF .850, and get three guys to make a habit of being on the air every morning at drive time. Everybody in the metro could get in on the "net" (really a "roundtable") and have someone to chat with both ways. Activity creates activity. People show up on W0EF because there are other people already there. If people were somewhere else, they would go there. There's already an informal net in the morning on the VHF .370, and it works really well. Waiting for more people to become hams isn't working, and we've got to make the best of what we have here. It's better than in a lot of areas, but it won't stay that way by following what worked thirty years ago.
A couple of days earlier, my 220 MHz mobile whip arrived. It didn't have a brand name on the housing, but I think it was a Jetstream antenna with a NMO mount. While I was able to hit the Arden Hills HandiHam repeater for 220 MHz with the "rubber duck", the repeater in Burnsville (run by TCRC) was just on the margin. So I wanted to see what a "real" antenna would do. I already had a disappointing experience with mobile operation, and I knew that the receiver was lousy. But I had read that one person had some luck using this model in "narrow" bandwidth, and I decided to give it another try.
Using narrow band actually helped with the reception when I was using the "rubber duck" (this is the short stock antenna that attaches to the radio for use as a walkie-talkie). I was listening to KA0PQW (Matt) on his repeater talking to someone, and he came in much better than he had before when I was using "wide" bandwidth. While these two were talking, I went out on my balcony and screwed in the mobile antenna. The signal was terrible again. I couldn't make out the conversation, even though I was using an exterior antenna about four times longer than the "rubber duck". When I unscrewed the antenna, they were still talking and the signal dramatically improved. Reception was actually better without an antenna at all; just the coaxial cable going to the empty NMO mount. It seemed pretty weird, but the BaoFengs have a strange "inductive loading" antenna match that is optimised for the "rubber duck". They almost always work better (in terms of reception) with the stock duck, but they will usually work well enough with another antenna to let you reach typical HT ranges.
The next morning, I got up early to try and get on the TCFMC UHF net and talk about my strange adventure with the new radio. As usual, it was really hard to get in. Not because it's crowded. It's because the "regulars" don't leave any space between each other for someone to jump in. They also are oblivious to "doubling" (someone else transmitting while another person is talking), which is usually a good indicator that someone is trying to break in.
But I did get in. I told the two guys there (KN0V? and K0BUD) about my strange adventure with the BaoFeng, as anyone else would share an unusual tale.
Immediately, I got a load of condescension. Somehow, these two got the idea that I was asking them for help, rather than sharing a story. "I don't know what to tell ya as far as helping ya fix that". I was told that radios work better if you don't use the rubber duck. Wow! I had no idea! What did these two geniuses think I had bought the mobile whip for? "I've never been a fan of rubber ducks". Sheesh. Want to tell me how to work the push-to-talk button, too? It's kinda confusing. Do I pull it? Because that isn't working and I'm out of solutions. Please help me.
Of course, I was also treated to snide remarks about BaoFengs in general. Yeah, they wouldn't use those, so they "didn't know what to tell me". Basically, the problem was that I had bought a cheap radio and I deserved what I got. I have no idea where the got the notion that I was asking for help, much less that I thought BaoFengs were quality radios. I guess that Grandpa has to share his "wisdom" somehow, even if it consists of stating the obvious, and even if nobody asked for his "wisdom" in the first place.
The ultimate stupidity and irony was yet to come. K0BUD told me, as if he was imparting some secret knowledge, "Around here, 220 is about as popular as snow in winter".
Again, thanks for the clue. I had no idea. Sheesh.
It's ironic in two ways. First, I really doubt that this "expert" knew about the cross-band HandiHam repeater operating on 220 MHz. That would have been helpful information, if he truly believed that I was as stupid as every condescending remark he made let on. Or about the repeater in Burnsville. Yep. Big expert, telling the poor newbie that he's screwed because he didn't do what Grandpa would have done.
Second, that's pretty much what people on two meters say about UHF: there's nobody on it. And it's true. Outside of the morning net, there's not much going on at the old "dot one". I throw out my sign every day on the way to work, as well as my return. Only very rarely does someone come back, and they usually express the "information" that nobody is on there very much and I should try elsewhere. We have some really good UHF repeaters in town with excellent coverage (.800, .425, .775, .500, .175 and the .950) but nobody is on them. The .425 at the University has a few people, mostly because of the EchoLink node. And, of course, the HandiHam .650 is cross-band, so it has activity from the other bands. But a guy on the only active UHF-only repeater at the time is telling me that 220 MHz is dead. It's us three on the entire UHF band, and he's talking about low activity on 220.
Obviously, what I should have done is dropped $300 for a quality radio operating on UHF -- like his, with the batteries always dying -- to get in on the "action" of a dying hobby. That way, we could talk about my neat $300 radio, and diss those low-life fools that spend $40 on a radio that won't last 30 years. Who even knows what ham radio will be like in 30 years? There could be some major technical innovation two years from now that makes his $300 radio obsolete. Or, more likely, there won't be anyone on the repeaters at all. I'll be out $40, but he'll be out $300. Hell, let's face it. He'll probably be dead, but his $300 radio will live on. Money well spent.
TCFMC isn't about the future. It's about the past, and snarling about how unfair it is that things change over the course of decades. We're talking about a club that hasn't had a working EchoLink node for over two months, because they can't reboot the laptop and log it on. Yeah, these are real experts. And, when you tell people about it, they say, "I don't really use it". In a really smug, dismissive tone, as if they are too good for that newfangled stuff. Here's a clue: EchoLink isn't for you, any more than your doorbell is, mister expert. It's for people outside of the repeater's range to use. If someone comes over and tells the owner that their doorbell isn't working, would you think the person who lives there was stupid if they chuckled at your naiveté and told you that, "I don't really use it much"? Of course you don't, because you live there! Connect the dots. Likewise with anything involving linking or cross-band. It would seem obvious that linking the two UHF repeaters would make them both more valuable. People in the south-east could talk with people in the north-east. Instead, nobody is on either of them, because there are so few people with UHF radios in either area. Cross-band is something that HandiHam would do -- insert derisive snort here -- much like EchoLink. Our repeaters might be dead, but we're old school about things at TCFMC. Cross-band would open up UHF to two-metre users, who aren't going to buy a new radio for the UHF band because they already spent $300 and this one will last them for thirty years. It's not as if the "dot one" has coverage comparable to the other UHF repeaters that I listed before. It's good in the western suburbs and into Minneapolis proper, but it can't reach St. Paul proper or out to Burnsville. The others can.
With fewer people on the air every year, the way forward is to bring those declining numbers together. EchoLink, linked repeaters, and cross-band repeaters do that. What doesn't work is smug condescension and an expectation that people are going to spend a lot of money to talk to the "elite" about nothing.
The way forward, as I see it, is for MARA to cross-link the UHF .800 and the VHF .850, and get three guys to make a habit of being on the air every morning at drive time. Everybody in the metro could get in on the "net" (really a "roundtable") and have someone to chat with both ways. Activity creates activity. People show up on W0EF because there are other people already there. If people were somewhere else, they would go there. There's already an informal net in the morning on the VHF .370, and it works really well. Waiting for more people to become hams isn't working, and we've got to make the best of what we have here. It's better than in a lot of areas, but it won't stay that way by following what worked thirty years ago.
Sunday, 13 October 2013
A weekend of radio adventure
I've spent a lot of time on the radio this weekend.
First, the 220 MHz mobile whip that I got from Ebay arrived. I hadn't mentioned this before, but I bought a BaoFeng UV-5RS. Yes, that's with an "S". It works on 220 MHz (1.25 M) and 2 meters. Being a Technician Class, I figured that I should all of the bands that others have deigned to permit me to use.
The BaoFeng didn't seem to work very well with the "rubber duck" on 220, so I thought it would improve with a "real" antenna. I ordered a pretty basic base-loaded NMO-mount whip that I could use on the car, or put on the balcony for base use. The whip tuned up pretty good, but that wasn't the issue.
Like all BaoFengs I have tried ( I own three now), the RF output on UHF is dismal. The new UV-5RS has a nice 4 watts out on VHF, but only 2.5 W on 220, which is what I bought it for. But BaoFeng has figured out a new way to cripple their product: make the receiver terrible, too.
There are only two 220 MHz repeaters in town that are actually working, which is two more than most places in the country have. I could hardly hear the repeater in Arden Hills, though it was full scale on the bogus signal meter. Sure, Arden Hills is far, but that's where the UHF WINET repeater is, and I can work that with a "rubber duck". The signal from the repeater was noisy and weak, but I got solid signal reports on my transmission.
One of the local 1.25 m repeaters is kinda, sorta linked to HandiHam. I don't hear the "nets" on the 223.940 that take place on the VHF and 440 MHz machines, but I hear the same signal on the VHF and 223 machines otherwise. It's nice that HandiHam covers three simultaneous bands, all cross-linked. On the other hand, my new radio allows me to hit a repeater network that I can already hit on 2 meters or 70 cm. I tend to doubt that there is any significant FM simplex activity on 1.25 m that I now will have access to.
The other repeater is the TCRC 224.540 machine in Burnsville. This isn't linked to anything, so I suppose this offers me something new. However, much like TCRC's (still off-air) 6 meter repeater, nobody is ever on the 224.540 machine. And Burnsville is pretty far from Plymouth.
So, my new BaoFeng is pretty much like the other two: two meter HTs that have marginal utility on their second band. I'm giving my brother one of the 2 m/70 cm HTs to use as a marine radio, because he's the only one that expressed a vague interest. I offered it, free of charge, to about ten of my friends in an email. Nobody wanted it at that price. See how much interest there is in two-way radio among non-hams?
After my disappointing 220 MHz adventure, I got on 10 meters. It was fun. I tried CW for about an hour, but had no luck. Then I went back to SSB and found that the band was active. I heard a lot of stations on the West Coast, but I didn't try them because they were contesting. Aside from that, I didn't think that I could reach them.
Let me explain how I am set up for 10 meters, and try not to laugh. I have a nice Yaesu FT-897D with a beautiful 30 amp linear power supply. I can run a solid 100 watts on 10 meters. The problem is that everyone in my condo building would be part of that QSO by way of their TV, clock radio, or computer speakers. So I have to keep it down to 15 watts. I don't hear any problem on my electronics at that level, and I'm the one closest to the antenna, after all. There are slight clicks on my computer speakers, but nothing for anyone to complain about or find suspicious. I can't string up a horizontal dipole, or the HOA would have a fit and fine me. Instead, I have a magnet mount on my balcony's sheet steel cap that I put various vertical whips on to. I have a loaded (not full length) vertical "Hamstick" type antenna that I use for 10 meters. Now, anything like SSB, AM, or CW (Morse code) uses a horizontal antenna. By using a vertical antenna, my signal -- which is already ridiculously weak by HF standards -- is reduced to less than one-fourth of it's strength for anyone using a horizontal antenna (i.e. everyone else). In other words, my BaoFeng is about as powerful in terms of effective power. Added to that is the decreased efficiency in using a loaded antenna with a lousy ground plane, and no RF ground.
Most people aren't familiar with CB radio any more, but it's kind of equivalent to a mobile CB radio setup in terms of antenna quality and effective RF power. You don't expect to talk to California on a regular mobile CB radio, folks.
But I listened. It was all contesting, which is boring to me. It's about getting someone's call sign and a number from them that you can report as a legitimate "contact". The person with the most contacts, or highest-quality contacts, wins a piece of paper or a plaque. Since I had no number to offer them, and I wasn't going to log the contact online, it would be pointless to reach them.
After a while, though, I kept coming back to listen to a guy on 28.500. He was coming in loud and clear, and running up contacts like crazy. He used crazy phonetics, and it took me a while to even figure out his call sign. Who uses "Oko" for the letter "O", anyway? Things quieted down at one point, and I came back to CO6LC. There was no way he could hear me, but I wouldn't be interfering with someone else trying to reach him.
Wow! He came back with my call sign. I had no number to offer, and that irritated him because I was wasting his time. But he was nicer than my last HF contact. Then I looked up his callsign online.
Unbelievably, CO6LC is in Cuba! That's about 1700 miles, loud and clear, with a joke of a station on my end. Had I known that, I probably would have irritated him more by trying to engage in conversation.
I also managed to tune up that 10 meter whip for 15 meters and tried some CW with no results.
Later last night, I got in on the HandiHam net. It's hard to believe that it's been nearly a year since I was last in on it. I enjoyed it, and heard a few other people that I had spoken with before on there. Of course, I mentioned my luck on 10 meters.
I also tried 10 meters again with no luck, but found 3 hams on CB SSB having a conversation when I was tuning on the low end of 10 meters looking for CW stations. There was nobody else on the whole band except for these guys. I wonder why they were on CB? Maybe one of the three wasn't a ham, but two were definitely. The Yaesu doesn't transmit on CB, and I wasn't about to dig up my old CB just to talk to them.
This morning I got on the 2 meter HandiHam repeater (145.450) and ran into a guy named Chad whose call sign was something like K0WZ, but was probably KD0UWZ upon a lookup. We had a chat about HF, and drew in two other people. I like doing that, but it seems like most don't know how to handle a conversation. They hammer on a weak topic that the other person clearly has no interest in, or they just repeat themselves until the other person makes up a lame excuse to get off the air.
There are some new people showing up on the air, and the HandiHam network is where they all gravitate to. It's where they're most likely to find someone to talk to, and they haven't had the time to get into the cliques and isolate themselves. That makes it a good place for me to hang out, too. I should spend more time there, instead of the large amount of time that I spend on distant and/or empty repeaters. You also get a lot of out-of-state hams on the network because of EchoLink, which makes it more interesting.
First, the 220 MHz mobile whip that I got from Ebay arrived. I hadn't mentioned this before, but I bought a BaoFeng UV-5RS. Yes, that's with an "S". It works on 220 MHz (1.25 M) and 2 meters. Being a Technician Class, I figured that I should all of the bands that others have deigned to permit me to use.
The BaoFeng didn't seem to work very well with the "rubber duck" on 220, so I thought it would improve with a "real" antenna. I ordered a pretty basic base-loaded NMO-mount whip that I could use on the car, or put on the balcony for base use. The whip tuned up pretty good, but that wasn't the issue.
Like all BaoFengs I have tried ( I own three now), the RF output on UHF is dismal. The new UV-5RS has a nice 4 watts out on VHF, but only 2.5 W on 220, which is what I bought it for. But BaoFeng has figured out a new way to cripple their product: make the receiver terrible, too.
There are only two 220 MHz repeaters in town that are actually working, which is two more than most places in the country have. I could hardly hear the repeater in Arden Hills, though it was full scale on the bogus signal meter. Sure, Arden Hills is far, but that's where the UHF WINET repeater is, and I can work that with a "rubber duck". The signal from the repeater was noisy and weak, but I got solid signal reports on my transmission.
One of the local 1.25 m repeaters is kinda, sorta linked to HandiHam. I don't hear the "nets" on the 223.940 that take place on the VHF and 440 MHz machines, but I hear the same signal on the VHF and 223 machines otherwise. It's nice that HandiHam covers three simultaneous bands, all cross-linked. On the other hand, my new radio allows me to hit a repeater network that I can already hit on 2 meters or 70 cm. I tend to doubt that there is any significant FM simplex activity on 1.25 m that I now will have access to.
The other repeater is the TCRC 224.540 machine in Burnsville. This isn't linked to anything, so I suppose this offers me something new. However, much like TCRC's (still off-air) 6 meter repeater, nobody is ever on the 224.540 machine. And Burnsville is pretty far from Plymouth.
So, my new BaoFeng is pretty much like the other two: two meter HTs that have marginal utility on their second band. I'm giving my brother one of the 2 m/70 cm HTs to use as a marine radio, because he's the only one that expressed a vague interest. I offered it, free of charge, to about ten of my friends in an email. Nobody wanted it at that price. See how much interest there is in two-way radio among non-hams?
After my disappointing 220 MHz adventure, I got on 10 meters. It was fun. I tried CW for about an hour, but had no luck. Then I went back to SSB and found that the band was active. I heard a lot of stations on the West Coast, but I didn't try them because they were contesting. Aside from that, I didn't think that I could reach them.
Let me explain how I am set up for 10 meters, and try not to laugh. I have a nice Yaesu FT-897D with a beautiful 30 amp linear power supply. I can run a solid 100 watts on 10 meters. The problem is that everyone in my condo building would be part of that QSO by way of their TV, clock radio, or computer speakers. So I have to keep it down to 15 watts. I don't hear any problem on my electronics at that level, and I'm the one closest to the antenna, after all. There are slight clicks on my computer speakers, but nothing for anyone to complain about or find suspicious. I can't string up a horizontal dipole, or the HOA would have a fit and fine me. Instead, I have a magnet mount on my balcony's sheet steel cap that I put various vertical whips on to. I have a loaded (not full length) vertical "Hamstick" type antenna that I use for 10 meters. Now, anything like SSB, AM, or CW (Morse code) uses a horizontal antenna. By using a vertical antenna, my signal -- which is already ridiculously weak by HF standards -- is reduced to less than one-fourth of it's strength for anyone using a horizontal antenna (i.e. everyone else). In other words, my BaoFeng is about as powerful in terms of effective power. Added to that is the decreased efficiency in using a loaded antenna with a lousy ground plane, and no RF ground.
Most people aren't familiar with CB radio any more, but it's kind of equivalent to a mobile CB radio setup in terms of antenna quality and effective RF power. You don't expect to talk to California on a regular mobile CB radio, folks.
But I listened. It was all contesting, which is boring to me. It's about getting someone's call sign and a number from them that you can report as a legitimate "contact". The person with the most contacts, or highest-quality contacts, wins a piece of paper or a plaque. Since I had no number to offer them, and I wasn't going to log the contact online, it would be pointless to reach them.
After a while, though, I kept coming back to listen to a guy on 28.500. He was coming in loud and clear, and running up contacts like crazy. He used crazy phonetics, and it took me a while to even figure out his call sign. Who uses "Oko" for the letter "O", anyway? Things quieted down at one point, and I came back to CO6LC. There was no way he could hear me, but I wouldn't be interfering with someone else trying to reach him.
Wow! He came back with my call sign. I had no number to offer, and that irritated him because I was wasting his time. But he was nicer than my last HF contact. Then I looked up his callsign online.
Unbelievably, CO6LC is in Cuba! That's about 1700 miles, loud and clear, with a joke of a station on my end. Had I known that, I probably would have irritated him more by trying to engage in conversation.
I also managed to tune up that 10 meter whip for 15 meters and tried some CW with no results.
Later last night, I got in on the HandiHam net. It's hard to believe that it's been nearly a year since I was last in on it. I enjoyed it, and heard a few other people that I had spoken with before on there. Of course, I mentioned my luck on 10 meters.
I also tried 10 meters again with no luck, but found 3 hams on CB SSB having a conversation when I was tuning on the low end of 10 meters looking for CW stations. There was nobody else on the whole band except for these guys. I wonder why they were on CB? Maybe one of the three wasn't a ham, but two were definitely. The Yaesu doesn't transmit on CB, and I wasn't about to dig up my old CB just to talk to them.
This morning I got on the 2 meter HandiHam repeater (145.450) and ran into a guy named Chad whose call sign was something like K0WZ, but was probably KD0UWZ upon a lookup. We had a chat about HF, and drew in two other people. I like doing that, but it seems like most don't know how to handle a conversation. They hammer on a weak topic that the other person clearly has no interest in, or they just repeat themselves until the other person makes up a lame excuse to get off the air.
There are some new people showing up on the air, and the HandiHam network is where they all gravitate to. It's where they're most likely to find someone to talk to, and they haven't had the time to get into the cliques and isolate themselves. That makes it a good place for me to hang out, too. I should spend more time there, instead of the large amount of time that I spend on distant and/or empty repeaters. You also get a lot of out-of-state hams on the network because of EchoLink, which makes it more interesting.
Friday, 16 August 2013
Baofeng UV-5RE blows on UHF
When my Puxing PX-777 UHF became tenuous, I looked at other radios. The Baofengs were priced great, but I already had one and found that the output on UHF is really low. UHF is important to me. I thought that maybe Baofeng had fixed this by now.
So, I asked on Amazon Answers. What a joke. Sure, it's got 4 watts output on UHF. Just subtract two watts, though. Amazon strikes again!
Aside from a couple of very minor differences on the front metal grill, I can detect no difference between the UV-5RE and the UV-5RB that I already had. Yet, the idiots on Amazon will breathlessly make it sound as if this is a radically re-designed model.
As with the Puxing, the output decreases as the frequency increases. On VHF, the UV-5RE gives you a full 5W. For 70cm work, you get 2W output. On GMRS, you get 1.5W. At the highest frequency of 520 MHz, it's a mere one watt. But, yeah, it's four watts in someone's mind.
I am returning the Puxing PX-777 to 409shop.com, as they seem to believe that I just got a bad unit. They certainly worked with me on the issue, and didn't require me to send the entire order back; just the body of the radio. Since I bought the Baofeng UV-5RE from 409shop.com, I might try the same exchange with that radio if the Puxing exchange works well.
This is irritating to me, because I only bought the Baofeng for the (supposedly) improved UHF performance. It was a very good price ($42), but I don't need another UHF-deficient dual-band. My UV-5RB serves that 'purpose' nicely. I'm looking at both of them as potential MURS radios for camping or mobile use.
Other than my Puxing PX-888K dual-band, I don't really have a decent UHF radio right now. It could take a long time for the PX-777 exchange, and that whole thing could end up not being substantially better. Carol at 409shop.com thinks that 4.7 watts is a reasonable expectation at 440 MHz:
If that's accurate, I will really love the UHF band again. 2 watts is marginal on UHF. I can hit a few repeaters that are close from inside my place. With my best outdoor antenna, I can hit UHF repeaters in St.Paul readably. But 4.7 watts would let me sit at my desk and talk on the UHF HandiHam repeaters (.650/.325) or the Southdale W0EF .125 machine clearly.
But that's a ways off. In another week or so, I should be getting the HiGrade 2.0TS UHF radio that I ordered from 446shop.com at the same time that I ordered the Baofeng from 409shop.com. Actually, I ordered this by mistake, because I had forgotten that I had ordered the Baofeng.
The HiGrade looks pretty cool, has fantastic battery life, and specs at a minimum of 5 watts UHF power. It looks like it charges by USB, too. There's no display, but that's also an advantage because it makes it more durable. There are only 16 channels, but that's enough for UHF. I can hit 17 from my place with the best antenna outside. Really, ten repeaters plus the simplex channel (446.000, if you didn't know) and a few GMRS channels would be plenty. Five watts going in to my new UHF mobile antenna should finally open up UHF for me.
So, I asked on Amazon Answers. What a joke. Sure, it's got 4 watts output on UHF. Just subtract two watts, though. Amazon strikes again!
Aside from a couple of very minor differences on the front metal grill, I can detect no difference between the UV-5RE and the UV-5RB that I already had. Yet, the idiots on Amazon will breathlessly make it sound as if this is a radically re-designed model.
As with the Puxing, the output decreases as the frequency increases. On VHF, the UV-5RE gives you a full 5W. For 70cm work, you get 2W output. On GMRS, you get 1.5W. At the highest frequency of 520 MHz, it's a mere one watt. But, yeah, it's four watts in someone's mind.
I am returning the Puxing PX-777 to 409shop.com, as they seem to believe that I just got a bad unit. They certainly worked with me on the issue, and didn't require me to send the entire order back; just the body of the radio. Since I bought the Baofeng UV-5RE from 409shop.com, I might try the same exchange with that radio if the Puxing exchange works well.
This is irritating to me, because I only bought the Baofeng for the (supposedly) improved UHF performance. It was a very good price ($42), but I don't need another UHF-deficient dual-band. My UV-5RB serves that 'purpose' nicely. I'm looking at both of them as potential MURS radios for camping or mobile use.
Other than my Puxing PX-888K dual-band, I don't really have a decent UHF radio right now. It could take a long time for the PX-777 exchange, and that whole thing could end up not being substantially better. Carol at 409shop.com thinks that 4.7 watts is a reasonable expectation at 440 MHz:
If that's accurate, I will really love the UHF band again. 2 watts is marginal on UHF. I can hit a few repeaters that are close from inside my place. With my best outdoor antenna, I can hit UHF repeaters in St.Paul readably. But 4.7 watts would let me sit at my desk and talk on the UHF HandiHam repeaters (.650/.325) or the Southdale W0EF .125 machine clearly.
But that's a ways off. In another week or so, I should be getting the HiGrade 2.0TS UHF radio that I ordered from 446shop.com at the same time that I ordered the Baofeng from 409shop.com. Actually, I ordered this by mistake, because I had forgotten that I had ordered the Baofeng.
The HiGrade looks pretty cool, has fantastic battery life, and specs at a minimum of 5 watts UHF power. It looks like it charges by USB, too. There's no display, but that's also an advantage because it makes it more durable. There are only 16 channels, but that's enough for UHF. I can hit 17 from my place with the best antenna outside. Really, ten repeaters plus the simplex channel (446.000, if you didn't know) and a few GMRS channels would be plenty. Five watts going in to my new UHF mobile antenna should finally open up UHF for me.