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


>  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
Hi Robin, 

Fine on all your comments...... and point taken, thats just what i was
for, comments from other people regarding the FT-847 and the demise of the
FT-736. To me it seems a pity that the 847 isnot a "new" 736, never will
be, in
my mind. 

It still seems to me that whats required is a real replacement for the 736,
23cm, with all the options you mention.

(as a P.S. regarding the gear with the antennas up the mast? it wouldn't be
the first time i've seen a 736 at 40ft! :-)  )

Any comments from anyone else?

73 de Andy GD0TEP