[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: FT-847





Andrew Kissack wrote:

> Hello people....
>
> Replacing the FT-736 with the FT-847 might be good in
> some peoples eyes, but what happened to the VHF radio
> that covered 23cm? the FT-847 wont!
>
> I assume that the true VHF'er really wants is a rig that will
> cover 6m to 23cm (or higher?) with everything for satellites
> and EME etc. Not some HF rig with added VHF bands (or is
> that VHF rig with HF bands?)
>
> Come on Yaesu, bring out the "real" replacement for the 736.
>
> Regards to all, de Andy GD0TEP

  Hi Andy and All,
                        On first reading your message my inclination was
to agree with you, but then after thinking it over for at least 20
milli-seconds I relaized that the problem with a multi-band set-up
covering frequencies above 23 cms is the transmission line losses
between the transceiver and the antennas.
If i had a choice i would opt for a transceiver with variable bandwidths
to be able to receive digital signals using up to 100K baud (for the
future) or perhaps spread spectrum.... the use of good converters and
power amps at the antenna feeding or fed by a good 2M and 70cm
transceiver seems far more preferable than having these frequencies on
the rig.
I have a 736 with 23 cms and I have ordered the 847 - I expect to use
both on P3D. (not  at the same time!!!).
73 de Robin Haighton VE3FRH/GD4INU




AMSAT Top AMSAT Home