eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Better Portability with the TS-480

Steve Narducci (W9SN) on July 18, 2005
View comments about this article!

Better portability with the TS-480 Kenwood

 

   

In my quest to find the perfect “Patio” rig, I stumbled on something that blew me away.  N4LQ, Steve encouraged me to buy a Kenwood TS-480SAT rig because of his love for it.  I read his review of it here on eHam.  Boy, I am thinking this is it!  Thinking small and all the features, I bit.  After getting it, I was saddened to see that the face was not really attachable.  My thoughts were “what was Kenwood thinking?”

However, using it was really a joy.  It has beautiful QSK, DSP and crystal filtering, built in tuner and 6 meters. No, it is not a contest rig, I have 2 Yaesu Mark V’s for that,  but I just want to have a little fun outdoors. It really had all the features that I wanted but carrying an extra piece of gear (face) to the patio was not my idea of small.  Each day I carried a small 25 amp switching supply, face, body, key, and cables outside to work CW on my new patio. 

I ended up selling this rig looking for one that had a built in tuner, nice features and found none that had a built in power supply.  Icom used to make the IC-736 which was nice.  However they have some years on them now.  It would be nice because I could carry one box and a paddle and I was set.  I tried other smaller rigs only to be compromised in different ways with each. 

            I decided I was going to go back to the TS-480 and suck it up and carry the pieces out each day.  Then a friend WB9RNY, Mike, came over from Illinois for a visit.  While operating my rig he suggested to take the face only outside. 

            Boy, he was really onto something.  So, now on a new quest to make this rig more patio friendly, I asked on some of the user groups about extending the face longer than the 12 ft of cable that Kenwood supplies.  I found I was not the first to ask this and nobody ever replied. 

            This TS-480 uses a detached face but the key jacks and microphone jacks are in the body.  It has a great sounding speaker built into the face.  So, for SSB and CW operation, I had to think how I was going to get the face and paddles on the patio.

            Off to Radio Shack I set.  100 Ft of CAT-5 cable (4 pairs – 24Ga.), RJ25 jacks, and crimpers led me back home for a nice project. 

            First thing I did was to try a full 100 ft of CAT 5 back to the face.  Looking at the Kenwood panel cable, it only uses 5 of the 6 wires in the RJ25.  Wow, I am now thinking 3 wires left over for my paddles back to the shack (CAT-5 cable has 8 wires). RJ25 jacks are the same physical size of the modular telephone jacks but uses 6 wires instead of 4.  Getting my daughter’s magnifying glass out to see the wires confirmed only 5 of the 6 are used. 

            Sure enough, only using 5 wires of the CAT-5 cable, 100 ft long, powered up the rig from the control face with full features.  Next thing I did was to take the 3 remaining and put a nice stereo plug on them for my paddles. 

            All installed and now out on the patio for the first time to fire it up.  DEAD!  Not working.  Well a closer look at my RJ25 showed I had inverted the plug.  The wires had the correct arrangement but was upside down.  As luck would have it, the rig was not damaged in any way.  Now a new jack is installed correctly and I am on the air!! 

            100 watts from the display in the face showed just fine.  Everything worked just as if it had the 12 ft cable on it.  I am not much of an SSB guy but I next thought about putting another CAT-5 cable for the microphone.  It is in fact an RJ45 connection, the same used in computer networking.   I used factory CAT-5 cables with double female jacks to increase my length.  Sure enough 75 ft of this cable gave me full SSB control now. 

 

 

            What I have now, is simply two CAT-5 cables from my shack to the patio.  One CAT-5 has the factory ends on it with just a double female for the microphone.  The other uses 5 of the 8 wires into an RJ25 which plugs into the face and I left a few inches of the 3 remaining wires on a jack that I can plug my paddles into. 

            All I have to do now is to carry my little TS-480 face and paddles outside.  OK, I can take the microphone too.

 

            This TS-480 gives several possibilities.  Maybe having a rig in your living room, garage, or sunroom without running coax, power supplies and such. 

            Another possibility is by having the rig close to where the coax enters the house and put the body there, like the garage for example, and running CAT-5 back to the shack, without the need to run coax or ladder line feeders.  I have no idea what the longest run could be this way, but I found 100 ft of 24 ga. worked just fine for me.  I am now planning on putting some more CAT-5 cables in my garage and sun room with a switch back at the body in the shack for what ever location I decide to operate from. 

            I know there are going to be many different configurations for this rig, but this is my own personal experience.  

            Some guys suggested I run a wireless remote from a laptop back to the shack using VOIP.  Well, that would be great if I was an SSB guy.  But I really wanted CW operation and I really like being able to roll the dial. 

            I am hoping this will spark some more interest in other possibilities I have not thought of. Maybe being able to operate remote controlled to my truck via UHF/VHF back to my shack and use CW?

Others may want to think about doing other rigs like this that uses a detached face, like VHF rigs just to get out of the shack a little more often!

    Comments and suggestions are welcomed!

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KG0R on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>> "I ended up selling this rig looking for one that had a built in tuner, nice features and found none that had a built in power supply."

Did you check the Yeasu FT-897?? It fits this bill perfectly. It has a built-in power supply option. For the tuner, there is the optional FC-30 automatic tuner or the LDG AT-897 third party automatic tuner, both of which side mount to the radio.

I have one of these and it works beautifully for operations in the field. Radio in one hand, antenna in the other.

73,
~Howard, KG0R
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by AF4KK on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
The Kenwood TS-480 was obviouslly designed for a mobile environmament. I use mine in the car and it does its job very, very well!
Congratulations to the inventive HAM operator that can think "outside the rig"! That's what makes a HAM a HAM and not just a radio operator!

Scott Heath (AF4KK)
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K2YQ on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
For the truly ambitious: The use of CAT-5 cabling indicates that it might, just might be possible to convert this to a wireless (as in WiFi) connection.

With the right adaptors, network bridge, and computer connection could the head unit and base talk to each other over the WiFi connection?

Perhaps the networking gurus among us will let us know.

 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KA4KOE on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is neat. Well done.

Philip
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KD5TLC on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Run the Cat 5 cable inside the wall, to jacks at the op locations. This would be better than running 100ft of cable through the house... better with the XYL also. Sounds great... have fun
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WA6BFH on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

I have been doing something similar since the early 1980’s. In those days I installed three runs of Belden 9537 shielded cable from my garage to my radio room in the house. I later expanded these cables to the Den, the Library, my kitchen (I use a Sigtronics S-41 headset), and the patio. Each cable terminates to the chassis mount version of a Philmore L-700 connector. This is the same connector that Yaesu and Kenwood use on their larger fixed station and mobile radios.

In my garage I had a number of Motorola or Harris FM radios on various bands. In the house was my FT-736R, my TS-680 and transverters for different bands. By selecting one of the three connectors, and via either touchtone or “DC” controls, I could select the different radios or frequencies and operate from any of the listed locations.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KC8VWM on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Hmmm. I like the WiFi suggestion but you might have to invent a way to send power to the head unit over the wireless connection.

Great article. Now only if I had a rig with remote head capability.

I can just see it now. I would probobly have permanent network jacks wired into every room in my house including one located outside on the deck.

Very Neat.

Charles - KC8VWM




 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WA6BFH on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!

Hey Charles, the TS-480 would make a good I.F. for transverters, just like the IC-706 or FT-xxx radios. You could operate ALL of Ham radios bands from anywhere in your house -- or the WiFi world!
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WA2ZDY on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Funny this should be here today. Just yesterday I was wondering how long the cable could be between the rig and control head. I plan on putting my 480 in the family minivan, and I'm not sure 13 feet will be enough.

Thanks for the research and good luck!

73,

Chris
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K7PEH on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I looked at this radio and then moved away from it quite quickly because it did not have VHF/UHF (except for 6 m). My decision was between the Yaesu 857D and the Icom 706 and the Icom won. The Icom won because I could not read that itsy-bitsy screen of the Yaesu and my fingers had trouble with some of the controls.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by N5EAT on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This is such a great piece of work and highly informative. Great photos as well.

Note to K7PEH: I have just put my Yaesu 857 in my car to use with my shiny new Tarhill antenna. I find the rig really easy to use because most of the functions I need are conveniently accessed with the touch of one of the buttons on the control head. That being said,
I WOULD have to agree that the display is "teensy"..
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WA6CDE on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Great job on the article but in the wings is this radio already primed and ready to go.... seems they have quit selling the 706 over in Japan... and in its place is this one... talke about features... but, the price is a little high (1500) here is the spec sheet and pic of it....
http://home.online.no/~la4waa/7000.pdf

Your article was passed along to some old vets who are hams in rest home... thanks G.M>
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by NA5XX on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Great article. This probably could be applied to any radio with a detatchable face.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by N3YZ on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
WRT the Yaesu FT-857, it appears that the remote head connects to the body with the same CAT5 and RJ45 connectors. A chap on eBay sells extenders that really look like CAT5 cable. Hmmm...
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by NA5XX on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Run the Cat 5 cable inside the wall, to jacks at the op locations."

And really confuse the phone repairman when he gets a report from the next owner of the house that the phone jacks arn't working.

It's a great idea, but as a phone installer and repairman, I can inagine the frustration of the guy who is called to figure why there is no dial tone on the jacks
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K7PEH on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
K2YQ says:
>>>>>
For the truly ambitious: The use of CAT-5 cabling indicates that it might, just might be possible to convert this to a wireless (as in WiFi) connection.

With the right adaptors, network bridge, and computer connection could the head unit and base talk to each other over the WiFi connection?

Perhaps the networking gurus among us will let us know.
<<<<<<

Well, if we push this idea far enough then what we are really looking for is a nice software interface for any radio that we may want to buy. Not just those software defined radios (is that what they are called?) with the special radio unit but rather a software interface that allows a standard program to interoperate any radio. Of course, this is in the future a little bit after we have defined a standard for the interface and have gotten all the major vendors to support it.

But, of course the obvious interface is not CAT-5 but wireless. The radio base station needs to support a wireless WiFi interface. This way, I can carry my Apple Mac laptop anywhere within range of the wireless signal and operate the radio. Oh, this software radio must be written in Java and platform independent so we can run on Windows, Apple, Linux, or whatever (oh, how about your blackberry or your cell phone).

Crum -- let's take this idea the next stage. We operate the software on your cell phone. That way, the next time I am in some far corner of the world, I can call my base station because it also has a telephone adapter and I can operate my RF signal remote via my cell phone. No more missing those net checkins just because I am out of town.

The only thing we need to make these ideas a reality is a full function software command oriented interface that will allow a single application to be built that would interface to any radio that supports the interface. This interface would of course also support all modulation methods (mike, key, keyboard for PSK31, RTTY, etc.). This should be easy for the modern radio vendors to support as their control interface is virtually all digital now as it is. Here is where Tentec may be ahead of the game already.

OK, I am going to start the design of this now.

P.S. No Echolink comparisons are allowed.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K0JEG on July 18, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
{For the truly ambitious: The use of CAT-5 cabling indicates that it might, just might be possible to convert this to a wireless (as in WiFi) connection.

With the right adaptors, network bridge, and computer connection could the head unit and base talk to each other over the WiFi connection?

Perhaps the networking gurus among us will let us know. }

Not really a net guru, but we need to clear up a little confusion. CAT 5/RJ45 connectors are not necessarly an automatic ethernet connection. For example, a T-1 line uses CAT3 and RJ45, as does token ring, ISDN and many PBX connections. If you plug an ISDN line into an ethernet port, you'll let all the magic smoke out (I think the same goes for a T-1, but I could be wrong).

WIFI is a version of ethernet optimized for wireless connections. No radio I know of uses ethernet to communicate with the head unit (but it would be totally cool if one did). Most of the RJx connections on transcievers have non-standard pinouts, but will not have any problems with a straight through cable.

That being said, all my Kenwoods and my FT-897 have serial data on the mic connector to communicate with the "DTMF" keypads. I would think it would be possible to utilize this with a PC to control the radios, if necessary.

A few links:

Different uses for RJx connectors
http://www.proav.de/index.html?http&&&www.proav.de/data/cables/RJ_types.html

Wiring cat5 cables:
http://www.duxcw.com/faq/network/diff568ab.htm

Hope this helps.
Eric
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by N5EAT on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Note to self: Tarheel, not Tarhill.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KC8VWM on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"Hey Charles, the TS-480 would make a good I.F. for transverters, just like the IC-706 or FT-xxx radios."

Thanks John. I currently own a Yeasu FT-847 in my shack. It's too bad the face isn't detachable like the TS-480. This has possibilities.

73 Charles - KC8VWM

 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W4XKE on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
N3KQX wrote:
<< If you plug an ISDN line into an ethernet port, you'll let all the magic smoke out (I think the same goes for a T-1, but I could be wrong). >>

Allowing about a week for amateur experimenting (pun intended) and we should start seeing a lot of radios for sale on eBay:

"Just a few weeks old and cosmetically 10 out of 10. Don't have any way to test it because I don't have an antenna / PS / etc."

It's real easy to invert the wiring in a plug, short 2 connections or just plain make a mistake. Double and triple check your cable against the schematic using your meter and then check it again before you plug it in! The radio you save may be your own. Johnny
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by AC0H on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<<"And really confuse the phone repairman when he gets a report from the next owner of the house that the phone jacks arn't working.">>
If the phone guy can't tell the difference between CAT5 and phone cable, RJ45, RJ25, and RJ11 connectors, boot him out the house

Nice article, good job.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by N3ZKP on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
<< And really confuse the phone repairman when he gets a report from the next owner of the house that the phone jacks arn't working. >>

That's why label makers exist. You mark the jacks as to their use.

Personally, I install something for MY use. What the next person does with it is their problem.
 
The TS-480.  
by NT4XT on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Excellent, Steve!

Glad to see real happiness with a Kenwood offering at your QTH. I say, if only, because they place energy in two arena's where others have in my opinion failed- Fast QSK/overall keying characteristics, and stock options for the visually impared combined with respectable performance in a package that is affordable.

The pictures are great! I think it's a perfect solution, no other way to twirl the knob without yet another peripherial device if doing lap-top remote. That could be something to try just for fun some time, carrying a laptop, paddle, and knob to the deck. Well then you could network to your station computer, access main log(s), Internet, and utilize the folded lap-top as a tray for carring a paddle, fancy VFO knob, and perhaps a cold drink, LOL... As for me you know, I've been using a mouse/keyboard direct entry to work a radio for about 2 yrs now, it's different, operating a virtual radio, and it appears you're getting a taste for that as well, with the 480. Enjoyed your writing in the Reviews section as well.

Nice work! SEEU-- Darin.

 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W8KQE on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I also operate 'patio mobile' and portable. I have an IC-718 for that purpose, which fits the bill nicely. I don't like those really compact mobile rigs, so the 718 is a good compromise. I have mine in a small steel padded camera case the size of a large briefcase, with a Bencher keyer, and a 25 foot length of coax and 2 PAR 'End Fed' wire antennas for 20m and 15m. Amazingly compact, and ready to go when I attach it to a portable car battery charger power source! The only drawback is that it doesn't have 6m. I too find the lack of attachable face on the 480 a drawback for portability. I was going to purchase the 480 but decided against it because of this.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KD5TLC on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
This might not be a good idea... some people tend to LOSE their head if it's not attached :)
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by NA5XX on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"If the phone guy can't tell the difference between CAT5 and phone cable, RJ45, RJ25, and RJ11 connectors, boot him out the house"

You would be surprised how often phone lines anre run using CAT5. Electritions use it all the time.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KE5EXX on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I agree, nice article.... There is a problem with associating Cat 5 cabling with WI-FI. Category 5 means that you have four pairs of wires twisted in a specific configuration. Ethernet only uses 2 of these pairs, one pair to transmit, the other to receive. WiFi (over simplified) basically does the same thing, so you are actually only using a total of 4 wires. If you only used 4 wires in the patch cable, you definitely would not have the connection between the face and the radio. To do a WiFi remote control, you would have to have a PC or thin client control the radio, then use another PC/Laptop/Tablet/PDA to control that PC. I personally love the idea of a pair of Cat 5 cables connected at both ends to break out boxes with RJ 25, 1/8th stereo for the keyer and RJ45 for the mic.

Of course, this is just my opinion... Thanks again for a great article!!!

73

ke5exx
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K6RSG on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
If wireless implementation is what you seek, and you've got (or are intending to install) the wireless network infrastrucure, take a look at Ham Radio Deluxe software.

This excellent software supports nearly 70 rigs and is already being used in many wireless installations, many with the TS-480.

Rob - AK9G
(prev. K6RSG)
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WA0TTN on July 19, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
>> Perhaps the networking gurus among us will let us know.

No way. It would be like trying to hook your toaster up to your computer. The wireless devices are running Ethernet over the CAT-5 cable. The Kenwood is running some multi-wire digital protocol.

Just because the RJ-45 connectors look the same, doesn't mean they can talk to each other. You'd have about as much luck plugging an Icom mic into the jack.

But I did enjoy your article. Thanks for the info - great idea!

73, Dave, WA0TTN
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by NT4XT on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Okay, I hadn't thought through the paddle part. Might have to key-board your CW.
Steve's install does take full advantage of the detached control head, main-body connections.

The other option is PC all the way. Internet connection at the deck. PC Anywhere. PC headphones.

Best of both worlds. Radio supports all that? And 2 filter slots. The 480 is a super deal.
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by WB9UDJ on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I am really impressed by my TS-480SAT. Have turned others onto it. It just made sense to get the 480 instead of the TS-2000. That TS-2000 is just a lot of money for a bunch of bells and whistles that very few ever use. I find having 2M and 70CM in an HF rig useless, that is why I have the TM-V7A.

I can grab my TS-480 and be mobile in a heartbeat.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K4TOR on July 20, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
I do this on a daily basis. Let the ARHP-480 control the tranceiver, and install the ARCP-480 on your laptop, and use a wireless network connection on your laptop, and a wireless router in the shack. A good router will work out to 100-150 yards. I operate me TS-480 from all over my property.
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W4YA on July 22, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Steve, Good article and pictures. Operate from a rubber raft in your pool and you can sign /MM.

73, Jim W4YA
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W3ZR on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"You would be surprised how often phone lines anre run using CAT5. Electritions use it all the time. "

True, but if the wires terminated at an RJ45 receptacle, the phone dude, would probably figure it out.
 
Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W4ZJN on July 24, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Another way to go is to order the Kenwood Portable Bracket Part No. J29-0705-01 which allows you to attach the Control Panel to the Main Unit. I did this and it works fine for me.
John, W4ZJN
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by VA3DXV on July 26, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
"WRT the Yaesu FT-857, it appears that the remote head connects to the body with the same CAT5 and RJ45 connectors. A chap on eBay sells extenders that really look like CAT5 cable. Hmmm... "

The 857 does not use CAT5 and RJ-45 for the control head. It uses 6 conductor phone cable and an RJ-12. It's easy to wire up if you have the crimper and connectors though. Its a straight-through connection, with the connectors reversed on either end (i.e. if you lay the cable flat, one connectors tab is up, the other connectors tab is down).

The mic jack is however an RJ-45 connection, and I suppose you could use CAT5, but follow the wiring diagram in the manual.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by W9AC on July 28, 2005 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article Steve. My TS-480 just arrived today along with some accessories. I'll withhold any comments as to its performance until I spend some time with it.

However, as I was assembling the optional MB-480 bracket which attaches the faceplate to the rig, it dawned on me that Kenwood should really manufacture two faceplates. The existing faceplate is fine for portable and mobile applications. But, Kenwood could be the first manufacturer to really think out of the box (literally) with the concept of creating multiple-use faceplates with one option being a base-rig size faceplate full of additional panel knobs, larger legends, etc. For both panel versions, I would keep the legend back-lighting. I have come to depend on panel back-lighting with my TS-2000 when the shack lighting is low at night.

Part of the reason for the Kachina and Ten-Tec Pegasus demise is the fact that too many of us like to touch and feel the radio, especially a heavy, well balanced VFO knob. And to your point in bringing the faceplate outside, without a "real radio" human interface, control by laptop alone just ain't the same. The Kachina and Pegasus were really just computers that operated on the ham bands.

There needs to be a way of keeping the electronics in a centrally located location and have the ability to operate with different faceplates and retain the ability to use a laptop PC. Even better would be a faceplate that plugged into a USB port so that the TS-480 could be controlled by a remote laptop PC, but the operator still has the faceplate to control.

Give me the TS-480 with it's current level of specified performance and those choices of user interface, and I'll buy several of them!

-Paul, W9AC
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by K1JMG on March 21, 2006 Mail this to a friend!
Good article and gives us all an idea of how far you can separate the head from the transceiver.

Many suggest WiFi as a way to control the 480. If you have a computer in the shack, next to the 480, download the free software for remote control that Kenwood offers for the 480. There are two pieces -- one goes on the shack computer and controls the 480 directly; the second piece of software runs on another computer. (Can anyone say wireless networked laptop?).

With this arrangement, ALL 480 functions are avaiable. However, break-in CW Keying may be iffy, unless your network is fast enough.
 
RE: Better Portability with the TS-480  
by KC5IDF on April 8, 2006 Mail this to a friend!
Wouldnt it be nice if bluetooth was uses as an interface between head unit and base.. just put 12v to the head unit and your done.. then in theory any bluetooth enabled device with proper software could act as a headunit. would be great for apartment dwellers like me who then could leave rig in car and operate it from a pc or pda. only down side would be the limited distance of bluetooth.. oh and it would make installation in a vehicle extremely simple. just put 12v to base and 12v to head. connect antenna and your finished
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
A Place for Young Hams:
The Future of Packet Radio


Other How To Articles
RFI Mitigation in Rheem RGFG High Efficiency Furnace