Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
George M. (KB9YUR)
on
March 7, 2003
View comments about this article!
It's always nice to see the major Amateur
Radio manufactures come out with new radios
from time to time. More toys to spend money
on but not always more room in the shack or
vehicle.
During the last year, I bought
and use a Vertex VX-150 HT. For the price
I paid, it's a great radio. After a few
months of usage, I thought how much better
it would be if this HT had SSB capability.
When I started looking on the Internet and
talking to others, it became apparent
there are no SSB capable HTs today (at
least not those made within the last 10
years). And why is that? No demand maybe?
I don't think so based on asking that
question to others. Would the price be
too much? How about taking the above
mentioned radio (or any HT for that matter)
and adding SSB for under $300.
So, would you buy an HT with SSB capability
if the price was reasonable ?!?
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC7YSF on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I appreciate what you are saying. It frustrates me to see that you need to buy an HF rig in order to get all mode access to 2 meter, 440 and 6 meter. Many of us have no intention of upgrading until and unless the rediculous Morse Code requirement is eliminated. And now with Echo Link and other enhancements, I wonder if HF is dying anyway?
In terms of an HT, I probably wouldn't buy the one that you are hoping for. I have grown frustrated with HTs that always seem to run out of battery life just when you push the transmit button! I would, however, like a mobile or compact unit that offered 2 meter, 220, 440 and 6 meter, all mode access. Wow, now we're talking!
This of course, is really a pipe dream, as manufacturers will never bundle 220 with a radio like this, because it would be restricted to sales in the US. Oh, well.... any other thoughts? Well, my friend owns a Yaesu FT-817, the QRP rig. That is bigger than an HT, but still easy to carry around. It has all-mode access at 5 watts, or so I have heard. Maybe that is a solution, in the short run?
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N8VCL on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't think people would buy it. Why bother with SSB when you have FM? Sure, you can pack more into the bandwidth with SSB, but you need some really good antennas to work it.
If you can only talk to the guy on the other side of town with it, why not use FM?
Scott
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K3RE on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Although a bit larger than a HT, Yaesu FT-817 is a good choice for all mode 50, 144, and 432.
A rig in Japan is at:
http://www.nishimusen.co.jp/mokuji_e.htm
I havn't been able to contact them, but it's a possibility. Lee
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N5XM on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nice thought, but how are you gonna load one up efficiently? The antenna would be bigger and heavier than the HT, unless I'm mistaken. How you gonna get an impedence match? Add a built in tuner, and with the mini-big antenna, you want to carry around a 7 pound HT? You'd just be fooling the radio anyway, and most of your power goes up in heat. It seems to me if you are willing to accept milliwatt output, even then you would have little luck unless propagation was really good, and we are moving out of the cycle.
Hey, what do I know? The only thing I know is how to make contacts, hi...
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N4GI on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Who are you going to talk to on 2m SSB? There are too many unused 2M repeaters anyway....what use they do get is a bunch of garbage.
WHY DO HT'S LACK CW CAPABILITIES????
Blake N4GI
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB1FLR on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Actually, here in the Northeast, VHF sideband is fairly popular. From Massachusetts it is sometimes possible to check into 2 meter nets as in Pennsylvania using relatively modest equipment.
I agree with a previous post that the FT-817 is a fine choice getting your feet wet in the lower portion of the 2 meter band. Plus it has CW, which is surprisingly active on 6 meters.
To the poster who asks if HF is dying due to Echolink, I would say that HF is alive and well. I had a nice QSO last night with a station in Paraguay on 15 meters CW. He was even running QRP power. Can you get to Paraguay on Echolink?
73 de Rick, KB1FLR
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K0CBA on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
George, A reasonable question; I hope this is a reasonable answer. If the band plan was followed, the antenna would only be maybe 3/4 of an inch longer on 2 meters, tops. I think some of the reasons SSB H/Ts are impractical and not likely to attract a manufacturer's interest... 1) circuitry is more complicated 2) while squelches are on SSB rigs, they sure don't work well (don't work worth a darn to be more accurate) 3) tuning would be a pain; a kHz or two is hardly noticable on FM, while listening to a SSB signal even 30 to 60 Hz off your rx frequency is like fingernails on a chalkboard, and 4) in order to realize any of the advantages of SSB over FM you really have to tighten down the bandwith of the receiver while maintaining good sensitivity. That means more internal filters, coils and circuits among other things. Expense aside, physicial size would become a problem. 5) most people have learned that being "the first kid on the block" to buy something fairly new will have them paying the lion's share of the R&D....look at computer prices, calculaters, digital watches, etc. I agree that having to buy a full blown DC to light rig to get V/UHF all mode is a waste for those that can't/won't/don't want to use HF. Various 'stand alone' muliti band V/UHF combination rigs have come and gone but for even just a 2 meter/70cm all mode rig, the price is breathtaking and then the radio makers hear "why should I spend money on that when I can get a goes everywhere rig for close to the same price?". You're just trying to "milk a mouse" getting 222 standard on rigs for all the reasons we all know.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by JJ1BDX on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Making SSB and CW rigs means you need to add a fine-tuning knob, which is a bit space-consuming. Also you need to build in a stable oscillator and a decent linear RF final stage, which is complex and energy-consuming. I've heard that Yaesu/Standard sells a SSB/CW-capable handheld receiver, but not transceiver yet (I think FT817 is not a hand-held one).
About V/UHF SSB/CW activities: in JA, fairly active in the Kanto plain (#1 district) and some 6m enthusiasts have been pursuing even DXCC on 6m. You rather hear less signals, however, in less-populated areas even in the Kansai region (#3 district), you don't hear much SSB/CW activities, though the bands are somewhat occupied by illegal FM users.
73 de Joe JJ1BDX/3 es AE6LI
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K7LD on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Back in the early to mid 1980's a company called SANTEC made a 2m FM/SSB hand held. Here is a link for the review of the HT
http://www.qsl.net/n2ckh/SANTEC%20LS-202A.pdf
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KE1MB on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
HF dying? hello.. I don't think so.. this is not even worth saying anymore about. As far as SSB in a HT. Maby, but most VHF SSB requires a good beam array. What purpose would an SSB HT serve? You are going to be hell bent to make a contact on SSB with the limited range of an HT. A better idea would be inexpensive VHF/UHF SSB rigs with good output power. $700 is a lot to spend if you only want to use it on one or two bands.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD5QLK on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
JJ1BDX on March 7, 2003 states:
"I've heard that Yaesu/Standard sells a SSB/CW-capable handheld receiver, but not transceiver yet (I think FT817 is not a hand-held one)."
Actually, the Kenwood TH-F6A 3-band HT has SSB and CW receive. Although it is pretty deaf on HF with the stock antenna, at home my G5RV and older full-size MFJ tuner put enough rf into the HT for me to pick up and reasonably copy PLENTY of SSB and CW. In fact, I think it is the only HT that CAN decode SSB, a deciding factor in my choice of this rig. I bought it with this ability so I would listen to HF and get excited about it, and it is my listening to stuff like the Texas 7290 net that drove me on to get my morse code done, and upgrade.
For a general receive radio, even HT size, the TH-F6A is NOT a great choice, but for one radio that has 2m, 220 and 440 transmit, AND can pick up almost anything else transmitted, it fits my needs just right.
Now to get that HF radio...
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K0WA on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
George has an interesting question, and I am somewhat dismayed at all the feedback. Why not have SSB on VHF HT? I think it is a grand idea and lets put in CW as well. I would buy one. The ducky would still work on SSB and CW. Why not? People who think that you need beam to be on SSB on two meters is mistaken. Not true. Years ago, AM was big on the two meter band and people were talking hundreds of miles SIMPLEX. And that was AM at 90 watts. Heck, I remember working 30 miles on two meters using 3 watts on AM. SSB would be even better and with today's RX circuits...it could be a very viable mode of communication with an HT. Motorola really studied this issue in the 50s...and found that VHF SSB signals from a BASE to a MOBILE has an average (AVERAGE) range of around 145 miles. FM caught on because of the audio quality, it could be develop for channels (1,2,3,4,etc) and the concept of repeaters (YUK!) Antenna orientation to the verticle was easier and could fit on cars, trucks, planes and bikes. FM could have been otherwise, but the FM service as understood by Motorola and otheres was for service companies, Safety Organizations, etc. Hams put SSB and CW on these bands and have had great success with very little power and inexpensive antennas. I have worked around 15 states on two meters just dinking around with SSB. I lament that there are very few rigs out there right now that offer this capability (SSB/CW) for just VHF and UHF. The TR751A is a great rig and there are others if you want to pay the dollars. I think TenTec has a dual rig that is making some waves in this area. This is not a dumb question by any means. I think it is a very astute observation. How little would it cost the manufacturers to include these features in an HT? Not much.
This is my point of view...your mileage may vary
Lee - K0WA
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by VE3IVM on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>..And now with Echo Link and other enhancements, I wonder if HF is dying anyway...>>
I would not say HF bands these days are less congested than 20 years ago. I would not say CW is in less use than 20 years ago. Echolink is a good compliment for many hams including myself, but I can not get rid of a feeling that I cheat myself when working DX through the Echolink. I enjoy it but not as much as if I worked the guy over the air. I grew up with headphones on my head hunting for weak CW below noise level. That was what kept my blood running (and still is). So far none of Internet VOIP technologies had same effect on me yet. Getting back to question who is going to die first- I already know the answer (no, I am not a fat bold retired person, just 30+)...
Ivan
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N1KSN on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To answer the question: Yes I would buy an HT with SSB (and CW) capabilities. More Modes = More Fun. Be sure to include 6 meters.
Andy N1KSN
Menasha, WI
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7QX on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I'd buy an HT that had 6m SSB in a heartbeat. One of the small but growing niches in amateur radio is pedestrian or pack operation. Rig of choice is the FT-817 because it's small and fairly efficient. There are some really nifty antenna designs, including many that are "build-your-own", to compement this actvity. A small HT with 6m SSB potential woud be really great for this.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KT8K on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I don't know how a more selective ssb receiver would handle 2M intermod that plagues me in urban areas, but SSB would certainly eat up less battery. I would love to have ssb/cw in a handheld, especially a multiband one, and I think the technology is much more ready to do this at an affordable cost now than it was 10 years ago. I would be interested in doing some mobile/portable hilltopping with such a rig, and I love VHF cw/ssb operating. Multibands would be *very* interesting to me, too.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KZ1X on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No, probably not. The Mizuho and THP SSB VHF "HT" radios didn't sell well, nor did their predecessors, the Icom IC-202 and similar. Too much bother to do the tuning while portable, is why, plus poor ERP.
The 817 is too bulky, eats batteries, and costs too much for this application.
I would, however, buy a VHF "HT" that was CW only, kind of like the Small Wonder Labs RockMite, but on 6 and 2 meters. The S/N advantage of CW would more than make up for the low power and negative antenna gain of the radio. It would have to have a built-in Logikey-type keyer, iambic capacitive keypads on the case, plus a jack for an external key, a variable narrow IF filter like on the TT Scout, and an auto-spot function like the Kenwood 570.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KE1MB on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
why do you need a beam to work VHF SSB, for this reason. Most everyone in the north east anyways runs horzintal. I have a 706 in my car running 50watts and still can barely hear other SSB stations because my ant is vertical. As soon as i get home and hook up the the beam, wham, there they are, strong as can be. If you can tell me you can hold a handheld running a max of 5 watts with a rubber duck and make contacts on SSB then all the power to you. There are some guys here running stacked 12 element beams and 600watts for 2m SSB. I run 10 watts with a 11 element beam 5ft off the ground proped up with a step stool. With this modest station i do very well. Well if there were more of anything with more modes you have a higher chance using and enjoying that mode. I like 2M ssb, it is a lot of fun.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N6HBJ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
About HF. It is not dying and probably never will. HF is fun and the soul of HAM radio.
Echolink and other similar modes make it easy to talk to far away lands but so does the telephone. For that matter, you can just use the internet to talk around the world even if you are not a HAM. So if you think that modes such as Echolink will eliminate HF, then you really don't get it.
HAM isn't just about talking DX. It is about HAVING FUN doing it! "Getting there" is half the fun. We all communicate on HAM radio for the enjoyment of it. Just like we have groups of people on 2 meters, we have similar groups on HF. You never know what friend will drop by the frequency. The only difference is that the friends may be further away (and you can ragchew for hours). If you really think about it NONE of us really need to be here. We could simply pick up the phone. But we are here because we WANT to be here.
If you are not getting on HF simply because of the code, then I feel you are not really that interested in HF anyway. 5 wpm is EXCEEDINGLY SLOW code. Anyone can learn 5 wpm by simple memorization in a matter of weeks.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Regardless of the technical obstacles, which are many, this has been tried many times only to prove the market is not there. Icom, Kenwood and Yaesu, as well as lesser-known Mizuho, NCG, Santec and others have all had VHF SSB "handheld" rigs on the market at various times, and while they had a small following of speciality enthusiasts, none of the gear sold well. I'd be surprised if the manufacturers were able to break even on their investments with any of them.
One huge technical obstacle for which there is no current solution is battery life. SSB requires the use of 100% linear circuitry in all signal paths except frequency generation; but detection, modulation and amplification all must be linear in order to work. Currently, FM handies all use non-linear stages (Class C) everywhere, to maximize efficiency and minimize battery drain. A 3W HT for FM might have a battery pack life of 24 hours receive and 2 hours transmit; the same HT, with the same battery pack for SSB would theoretically be reduced in battery life to 18 hours receive, and 30 minutes transmit time. Is this acceptable?
(BTW, there is no question at all that a SSB handie-talkie would work just fine and have dramatically better point-to-point communications range than FM, for the same power and antenna. This is a given. However since all terrestrial repeaters are non-linear, channelized FM, going to SSB means not using any of those -- and those are the primary reason for VHF-UHF HT's in the first place.)
WB2WIK/6
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K0RGR on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In the world of technology, absent governmental interference, cheap always wins.
FM is cheap. It's also quiet, which made it much more appealing for use in a family car. There were many of us who wanted to explore other technologies, however, because we knew that SSB and even AM had DX advantages over FM.
A lot of us started out with the 'Heathkit Twoer' - a tube-based radio kit that would produce 1 watt of highly overmodulated AM, and a 'rushbox' super-regenerative receiver - very sensitive but with almost no selectivity. It was not uncommon for us to work people 40-50 miles away with the Twoer and a simple antenna - farther with a decent yagi and good feedline.
All of us Twoer lovers craved SSB, but the rigs of the day were horrendously expensive. And to work SSB, you needed a horizontal antenna. Most of us built transverters, which were fairly complex things, themselves. Some of us had AM repeaters on the air, too. AM squelches didn't work nearly as well as on FM because the AM radios had no limiters as good FM radios do.
Eventually, though, we discovered surplus commercial FM rigs. FM required much stronger signals to achieve the same range as AM, but these rigs ran high power, overcoming the difference. The audio quality was great, the radios were silent when not in use, and the price was usually right - sometimes free!
At the height of the FM craze, we decided to devote 3 of our precious 4 Mhz. at 2 meters to FM repeaters. I wonder now if we need to revisit this idea.
If you want to add another mode, maybe we should consider asking for AM on those HT's? It would not present the difficulties of a SSB rig - just a different detector and a fairly beefy modulator. An AM rig should out-DX an FM rig of comparable power.
Years ago, ARRL strongly pushed a new technology called 'Amplitude Compandored Sideband'. It used circuitry to reduce the bandwidth of a SSB signal to 1 Khz. or less. In order to provide simple tuning and positive squelch action, a low-level pilot carrier was injected on the transmit side and removed on the receive end. At one point FCC proposed to replace many of the commercial land mobile systems with ACSB.
However, ACSB never caught on. I think the main reason was the difficulty of producing and procesing the signals using 1970's technology. Now, however, we have these marvelous microprocessors that should be able to do the job in realtime without breaking a sweat. Are there any PC soundcard programmers out there looking for a challenge?
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KU4QD on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I DON'T BELIEVE THIS! THERE ARE HF, VHF, and UHF SSB/CW HTs SINCE 1983!
Yes, 1983. Made by such companies as Tokyo Hy-Power, Mizuho, Nishi Musen, Belcom, and Santec. Most were imported into the U.S. at one time or another. Guess what? They didn't sell.
I have SSB HTs for every band from 80m through 2m, and I will likely buy one for 70cm. Some are monoband, some, like the Tokyo Hy-Power HT-750, cover a few bands.
If you want it, it's out there, and you can still buy it. Here are my web pages on the subject:
http://www.qsl.net/ku4qd/thp
http://www.qsl.net/ku4qd/mizuho
72/73,
Caity
KU4QD
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K3DWW on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Arrrgggh! One must hold one's right instep ahainst his left knee, his tongue against the proper wisdom tooth and put his right ring finger in his ear - or some worse gyration - to adjust the squelch now. And you want another feature? Oy! Seriously, I'd love to have SSB on a mobile but HTs are already hurting for knobs to control all the less useful features packed into them.
73!! K3DWW
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KE6PKJ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I believe ACSB is used today on the inflight phones of commercial airlines and on some of the commercial 219-220 mhz rigs.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N6TGK on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
An HT with SSB would be nice. I remember when AEA had a 10 meter SSB HT. If they can make HTs with SSB detection , it wouldn't be that difficult to add TX. But I don't really know how practical it would be...at least not in my area. 2M SSB acitivity is pretty non-existent.
One other thing...I found KC7YSF's comment about "many of us refusing to upgrade until they eliminate the morse code requirement" to be pretty sad. I'm not pro-code per se, but I feel it's been reduced enough. I hope they don't eliminate it completely. 5 wpm is quite easy and if anyone refuses to learn 5 wpm, it's because they're lazy.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N8ZC on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Better yet... Why doesn't someone come up with a "micro-moble" vhf/uhf satelite rig? Here in my neck of the woods, we have serveral guys that like to run 2m SSB just for the fun of it.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N4OGW on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>WHY DO HT'S LACK CW CAPABILITIES????
Actually, you can use most HT's to send CW. I used to make mode A (2m up, 10m down) satellite contacts on RS10/11 using a HT (Yaesu FT-23R) to send CW.
I would put the HT in transmit (with mic line disconnected), and send CW by keying a small 10W brick amplifier. I was limited by the 5 KHz channel steps on the HT, and my signal was a little "rough" sounding, but I worked a lot of states that way!
Torsten
N4OGW
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by VE6BGM on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Why do we need SSB, let alone FM, if all we have to do is talk to into computer via Echolink? Are we at greater risk of losing our bands when Echolink does not require one to use RF? What is the need for radio companies to produce FM radios, let alone SSB capable HTs?
73
|
| |
|
HF HTs
|
|
|
by NE0P on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
There is currently a 10 meter HT being sold in the US-the Eagle Spitfire. See www.copper.com for ordering instructions. I have had 2 of these, and it is kind of neat to make a long distance QSO on an HT. The stock antenna is a joke, so you need to get the extended antenna they sell. Also, the RIT doesn't have an off position, or even an indented position at O, so you need to work with someone to find the 0 position and mark it, or you will have alot of trouble making contacts. This HT also runs 10 meter FM.
One more correction, 222 is not a US only band. 222 is a region 2 band, which includes all of North and South America. Lets not make the market seem smaller than it is.
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by KC0FDE on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I agree with KC7YSF when it was stated the code requirements are ignorant. Code is a thing of the past and being that this is a hobby... I think being forced to endure boring code is a waste of time when I chose not to participate in it as a mode note: hobbies are things you pick and chose in them what you wish to do...nothing is forced. I think that for all of the old guys who are stuck in their ways and are against being modern that want code they should have to also go back and retest on all modern digital modes to keep their licenses if not sorry bud you fell behind in the requirements of ham radio. Just as some old hams say well that computers not for me well code is so obsolete to me that I dont care about it. I will remain a tech until they do away with something that remains only because the old hams gripe over because its called "change."
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by W6EZ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
SSB HTs? Yeah! I'll take one right now. CW too!
Gee, all the complaints about CW never end do they?
They way I look at it, CW was, and at this time, still is a requirement to play on the HF bands. If one wants to play on HF, one does the CW requirement thing.
It's sort of like joining the Harley Club, and then getting mad when they won't let you ride your Vespa in the Harleys Only Parade.
Any way back to topic, a small low power ht on 2m SSb and CW would be a really fun backpack and mountian topping rig.
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by W6EZ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
SSB HTs? Yeah! I'll take one right now. CW too!
Gee, all the complaints about CW never end do they?
They way I look at it, CW was, and at this time, still is a requirement to play on the HF bands. If one wants to play on HF, one does the CW requirement thing.
It's sort of like joining the Harley Club, and then getting mad when they won't let you ride your Vespa in the Harleys Only Parade.
Any way back to topic, a small low power ht on 2m SSb and CW would be a really fun backpack and mountian topping rig.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K1MKF on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It's simple - PROFIT. They can make a lot of FM HTs and sell them cheap or make a few FM/SSB HTs and sell them for a lot more. With the FT-817 going for $600 and the new FT-857 going for $850 who is going to pay $400 or more for a mono band HT? I know I wouldn't and I would love to have a SSB HT for 6m or 12m or 17m. You see what I mean?
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N9VWA on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To answer the question: Probably! First of all sideband uses less power, which means longer battery life. Granted, you can forget using SSB on a repeater, but an all-mode HT would be nice for satellite work. It would also help extend the range of whatever frequency you are using, as it is more efficent than FM.
SSB in an HT size, QRP HF rig would be nothing short of awesome. I have been whishing that myself for a couple years now. Sure, you have the need for large antennas for lower frequencies. Well folks, that's physics. A tuner?? Well this is QRP so you better be using tuned antennas for maximum efficiency anyway. Using a tuner would be pretty insane with only a couple watts. If you can't figure out how to tune an antenna, you don't deserve the license.
I don't think it would ever REPLACE our beloved FM modes. We all like FM and repeaters for HT's and mobile use. That's fine. SSB would be an aditional feature to play with. For those of us that use HT's in the field frequently, or satellite work, it would be a lot of fun.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by W3DCG on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
2m FM CW HT! Now if that had been normal, My two VX-5R's might actually be used more than for tuning into the WX, and 96 Rock and 99X. I'd listen to the Jazz station with it, but the fidelity makes it hardly worth it. I've tried to use it for hearing Neil Bortz, but WSB doesn't come in on it worth a darn, needs a bigger antenna for AM 750.
hi.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7EFQ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let's face it, Motorola, Nextel, Erricson etc. are going to eventually get our allocations from us on
VHF/UHF thru the new spectrum policy revamping. It's
only a matter of time. The ARRL can't protect us forever from multi-Billion Dollar corporations. So SSB
HT's that work on HF are a real good idea. Repeaters
will probably have to migrate down to 10 mtr FM or
lower. The big 4 compnies, Yaesu, Kenwood, Icom & Ten-Tec should get to work on HF HT's.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N6AJR on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You are a Ham, Build your own ssb HT that solves the problem 73 tom N6AJR
Bye the way check out the yaesu ft-847 $1200-$1300 and it is as close as a dc to daylight rig as I have seen. If I had bought this one first I would never have bought my 30 or 40 other rigs..
The earth station, 160-10 has 100 watts, 6 meters 100 watts, 2 meters 50 watts, 440 mhz 50 watts, and it does am, fm, ssb and cw on all bands, has true dual band transmit and recieve, so you can hear your self on a satalite, most functions are controlled by the front panel, not menu driven, (the menu is for set and forget stuff.)
I love it and it has top noch recievers, DSP and is easy to operate.. check one out next tine you are at the candy store..
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K0CBA on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Another thought....SSB is is 1/2 as old as cw (right after WW2). I would tend to think the radio designers/companies are looking ahead to digital rather than backward to SSB.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7EFQ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To N6AJR, Have you tried to find materials that you dont need an electron microscope to see to work with
at affordable prices? And the old stock of leaded
components is drying up. It's not as easy as it sounds to homebrew these days. 73's kd7efq
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by AC5CH on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would definitely buy a ht with ssb capability! My wife and I run a modest 2 meter SSB setup, and have a communications range much greater than we do on FM. (About 115 miles base to mobile SSB, 50 or so on FM) The base antenna is a 17 element Cushcraft at roughly 50 feet, and the mobile antennas are Hustler "co-linears."
Our antennas are vertically polarized, and we only run around 50 watts in both the base and mobiles. Granted, FM sounds better, but is inferior to SSB by a long shot for reliable communications past 50 miles or so (at least in our case). We've even managed to talk to people as far away as Atlanta, Georgia on a regular basis FROM THE MOBILE!
SSB would work perfectly fine with the rubber duck ht antennas. Heck, if they work on FM, what makes people think they won't work on SSB? Not all SSB stations are horizontally polarized....
Maybe the various manufacturers will make a few ht models with SSB. Personally, I would pay up to $400.00 for a new one with just 2 meter SSB...
By the way, great idea for an article!
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K6MGK on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
in reply to KC7YSF, look at Morse code like a key club
you wouldn't want everyone in this hobbie,I was never into CB but from talking to other individuals, it wasn't any fun once anyone and everyone jumped onboard. I really hopr they never drop the morse code
but if they do I would like to see the question pool
look like Microsofts certification test, where as in atleast 30-40% of the question have at least 3 answers
and if you miss one you miss the entire question, that way book smart type and ones who can memorize test questions will have to apply practical applications in order to pass.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by WZ7W on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I would love to have a HT that did cw, and I guess SSB too. Seems like that and an arrow antenna would be working satelites more than fm does. I would want it in gray though to match my palm paddles.
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by N6TGK on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I see some of the "no-codes" are under the assumption that the older crowd is what keeps the CW requirement in licensing. That would be no. It's by International agreement. I'm not one of the "older crowd" and I don't use CW. If the only reason people are refusing to upgrade is because they don't want to learn the code, not because they can't...then I really hope the code requirement sticks around for a long time. We don't get anywhere in life by being lazy. The people that don't want to learn code to get HF privileges are, in my opinion, like the people who are waiting for that magic pill that will transform you from fat and flabby to muscular in six weeks or less. If had to go back and take a test again on digital modes, as one person suggested, I could take and pass that test because I use digital modes. But if you're going to take a test on digital modes, you might as well take one on CW because, guess what, it's a digital mode. Besides, if I could study to pass all the other amateur tests then I can study to pass any other put before me.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N6AJR on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
How did this go from SSB on a HT to code/no code... please give it up once in a while...
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K9IUQ on March 7, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
HT means Handy Talky. It aint handy if you need a beam to hook up to the "HT" to talk. And that is what you would have to do to makes SSB work on VHF. WHY are HT's Handy? Simple, one word for all you No Coder's. REPEATERS. Why do HT's work well? REPEATERS. How many simplex(you no coders know what that means right?) contacts does any ham make with a HT? Not too many. Yeah, HT FM simplex works when you want to talk to your buddy at the Hamfest, thats about it.
VHF & SSB = Good Horizontal Antennas to work.
Anyway except when the band is open, VHF SSB is dead in most areas.
Forget SSB in a HT. No ham I know ( except maybe a newbie nocoder) would buy one one. THATS why HTs Lack SSB Capabilities.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KG4YQS on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
OF Motto: "Never pass up an opportunity to beat up on Technicians."
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD5SCG on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Has anyone else noticed that it is mostly the techs that complain about the Code. once they actually TRY learning it, most people realize that it takes more intelligence to learn how to program the memory in your new fm rig. So really, try learning it, I did and I'm not an OM.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB0RDL on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Several years ago there was a CB (11 meter) HT sold by Cherokee that had a sideband feature. I bought one, I think for around $250.00, and it actually worked fairly well. The maximum SSB wattage output was 6 watts or about half of the 12 watts that would have been authorized, and the reason for this was the problem with batteries. The 6 NICAD batteries simply couldn't get up to 12 watts for any period of time at all without petering out. The radio did contain a sideband tuner, by the way, and it worked OK if you didn't mind adjusting it anew every time you used the radio and sometimes while you were using it. The radio was complicated to use and unless you really wanted the SSB feature wasn't worth the trouble. I used it to talk to buddies in the local CB sideband group. I finally sold it to another ham earlier this year and he likes it.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N9ESH on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
HT’s are inherently short range due to battery and antenna constraints. Their real nitch is for repeater operation or very short range point to point. This is probably why there are no SSB HT’s. If you already have an HF rig, a transverter and a brick amp will work well on VHF SSB.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by VE6XX on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Greetings All: N5XM states that if the HT had a tuner it would only be "fooling" the transmitter anyway.
I thought that the misconceptions regarding tuners had been disspelled. Apparently not. It should be a condition of holding a license that everyone read & understand Walt Maxwell's book "REFLECTIONS" or "REFECTIONS II " dealing with antenna & feedline matching, tuners, & the priciples of conjugate matching. Much easier to digest than the treatises slanted towards the professional & theoretical readers. Regarding the HT with SSB HF capability, I think its appearance is highly unlikely. As N5XM has adroitly pointed out, multi band matching would prove a formidable technical challenge. There is, I believe a minimum"footprint" for an HF SSB capable radio, below which size it becomes unfeasable, owing to ergonomics & physical constraints.
THere has in the past, been single band SSB HT's but I believe the "817" is something of a first in multiband radio with SSB.
Certainly, an external antenna would be a "must".
CHEERS! Brian, VE6XX
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by W4MGY on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
George;
You have often commented about a desire for a HT with SSB capabilities. Frankly, I don't really see it hapening if you are looking for the Big-3 Jap firms to come up with one. Several reasons why it is impractical. 1. With the exceiption of some digital voice modes used for security reasons; Most VHF/UHF communications, including amateur, is via FM wich is defacto the standard voice mode worldwide. Yes, SSB would be possible, but the stability requirements would drive the price through the roof. Your $200 HT will quickly become a $600 HT. 2. H.T.s are really short range devices that are supposed to be used with repeaters. Sure a few hams use them for long distances, with a beam or anything better than a rubber duck. 3. Money. There is just not enough demand for for a radio maker to design and build these things. It has been tried in the past and failed. What is the justification for having a SSB HT any way? Wanna play SSB on VHF/UHF? Get an FT-817, or other radio of that calibre. Just my take on it. My question is when in the hell are the radio makers going to get back into making real tough two-fisted man-sized radios? It'll Never happen. The imported Toy radio makers have got to come up with another bell and whistle to put in to get us to buy the latest ham radio gizmo.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Wow . . . I would not have thought such a general question would have this many posts! (Minus the CW debate, it's still a long thread . . .) Thanks to all of you 'Old Guys' for explaining some of these SSB principles and how they apply to an HT. All I can say is I'm very less than happy with the VX-5R; It should have SSB, AM and CW on 6 Meters. At least CW, is that hard to do in a small radio? I wouldn't think so anyway . . . Just another external mic plug for a key. That would be fun!
No worries about the big cell companies taking our U/V frequencies. I would imagine we'll always keep 2, 1.25, 70, 33 and 23cm . . . everything up to 2.4Ghz. We use them enough to justify them- Maybe there will be a fight over 33cm at some point, but only because there are not enough 900Mhz portable and mobile stations on the market. I would buy a 900Mhz - 2.4Ghz radio if one came on the market in the price range and quality of a VX-150 type system.
Yaesu has that new FT-857 I think, it's small like an 817 but has the power of an 897. You don't have the internal batteries, but it's nice and slim. Would you be better off with that or an already proven 706/FT-100? Who knows . . .
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by RADIOWEENIE on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I think we are out on a tangent here. Sooner or later, repeaters will have digital modulation, especially in the 440 MHz and 1.3 GHz bands. This means that they will NOT be SSB. Some years ago there was a groundswell for ACSB [Amplitude ComPandored Side Band-- "compandor" means "COMpress-exPAND"] modulation to take the place of FM. For reasons unbeknownst to me, ACSB simply did not "take". Now no-one ever hears about it. But the reality is that today practically all business and public safety radio services are going to the digital set-up and FM is already in the process of obsolescing. This has already happened in HDTV [wherein the audio component used to be FM but is now digital] and there are concrete plans afoot in the broadcast industry to replace "FM Brodcasting" with digital. Have you ever heard of "Sirius Satellite Radio" or "X-M Satellite Radio"? The programming is virtually identical to that of FM broadcasting, yet one must actually PAY MONEY in order to suscribe to the "privilege" of listening to it! You are still assaulted by those imbecilic "PSAs" [Public Service Announcements]. So why do people PAY to hear this drivel when they can hear it for nothing on broadcast radio? It is digital and the sound quality of digital modulation is noticeably superior. What other reason besides that could there possibly be?
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Radio Weenie- Should we all be paranoid about buying ANYTHING because FM/WFM/NFM, AM, SSB, CW, TV Broadcast and even the Analog PSTN will all be replaced by Digital; and then several itirations of digital that wil even make any previous version of digital obsolete? Lets just scrap ALL the V/U repeater frequencies and combine the entire 2M and 70cm bands into digital trunking networks and buy Motorola radios. Lets just forget the Amateur Bands and sell everything to commercial companies; Let them do what they will with our bands, and we'll just pay a monthly service fee to ensure our leased equipment stays eligible for a technology refresh every two or three years. Then we can forget about all that time and money wasting we do with building projects and buying radios that will soon phase out and just become high-end consumers with a federal license that allows use of the established network.
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N1RWC on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi guys, I would like to add that there is a HT on the market that has SSB capability. It's the Tokyo Hi Power which covers 6 15 and 40 Meter bands. Also check the Hamfests, I know a couple of older SSB rigs that were in the same size as a HT but Crystal controlled for SSB/CW or AM. Great subject, hope the Guys at Icom, Kenwood and Yaesu actually do something with the input from us hams. 73 Matt N1RWC
PS I have the FT-817 and switched to the NiMH Battery Pack to save the Hip National Bank, ie the Wallet.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K9NYO on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Echolink is just fine...it's actually kind of fun...I heard some teenagers talking about it on 2m and I went home and downloaded the software and talked to a ham in Germany for 20 minutes. I'm thinking about using Echolink to link some local repeaters for emergency communications purposes. I don't think this should replace RF, though. Echolink requires a computer, power, Internet access, the Internet infrastructure, etc.
I can sit in the middle of the desert with a 12VDC battery, an HF radio and a piece of wire and do the same thing. If I bring a solar panel, I can recharge the battery. Come to think of it, some water would be nice, too. But you get the picture.
Ham radio will always work...to the bitter end...as long as there's somebody transmitting on one end and someone receiving on the other. No other communication system can make this claim, and no other communication system has the widespread yet decentralized structure that amateur radio has.
So to answer the thread's question: the smaller & lighter the radio, the more likely it is that you'll have it with you when you need it. There most certainly should be HTs capable of SSB transmit/receive. My Yaesu VX-5R receives up to 15 MHz, but that doesn't buy me anything without a BFO. You'd think there would at least be receive capabilities.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB8POA on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't know about an HT with SSB... but I think a HT with AM would be great! I've always wanted to play with 2m AM. I wish they still made (affordable) radios with it.
It would be a lot nicer when using simplex. and a lot of radios these days already have AM receive for the aircraft band. Why not add AM transmit to it? :)
One of these days I'll probably get a Heathkit Twoer or something on ebay and play with AM... :)
Just my two cents...
Walt, kb8poa
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by WB9YCJ on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I would be very apt to "grab" a SSB HT as I'm running out the door unlike the somewhat larger and less "handy" FT-817. I think a SSB HT on 18, 21, 24, 28, and yes, even 29 Mhz AM would be a blast!
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB9YUR on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As an addition to my original posting, first,
thanks to everyone who replied. It's nice to see
there's some interest in this. Second, I should
have posted my original reasoning for this.
Like many working people out there, any free time
I now have is usually on the weekend. Of that free
weekend time, I'll try to get on the air either
early in the morning or towards late evening when
I'm already too tired anyway. But, during those
two days when the Mrs and myself are out shopping,
there's always 15-30 minutes when each of us will
shop at different stores or I'll stay in the car
and kill time listening to the FM radio/CD. At these
times, it would be great to have the SSB HT and
make a few calls (maybe some real DX into another
shopping mall. Maybe a future WAM, worked all malls,
contest ?!?). Third, in the two plus years I've
been a Tech, I've seen people leave Amateur Radio
because they got 'burned out' on 2m repeaters.
Their reasons for leaving were many, but more then
once, I heard, "Because of the economy, my budget
doesn't allow for more radios right now." Would the
ones with only an FM HT have stayed had there been
SSB, CW, digial, etc available on their HT?
That's something to consider. I certainly agree
with the reasons of manufacturing costs vs ROI.
But, to paraphrase an old Beach Boys song,
"Wouldn't it be nice."
George ...
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KR4JY on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
There is a SSB HT on the market. It is a 10 meter HT called the Eagle Spitfire 454. I made a contact in California from my front yard in Montgomery, AL. on it. I however have not ever heard of a 2 meter 220 or 440 or 6 meter HT. The Eagle Spitfire 454 is USB, LSB, FM, and AM modes. Really nice little HT and very inexpensive. HT runs 6 watts on SSB.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N8ZUX on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I would have to agree on the battery eating issue, Midland International came out with back in the 1960's a 11M. CB AM / SSB Handheld, the people writing the reviews at that time said the same thing battery eater. I highly doubt if there is one left even to modify for 10 M. use let alone what kind of a performance you would get.
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by N8ZUX on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I thought to go to the web site but went to msn web page acted as there were 255 variables, did you put in the wrong URL ???
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by N8ZUX on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I thought to go to the web site but went to msn web page acted as there were 255 variables, did you put in the wrong URL ???
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by N8ZUX on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As to the code try the Koch Method, you can download a copy of G4FON's web site at http://www.g4fon.co.uk/
read his web page also read the info on the Koch Method at http://www.ees.nmt.edu/sara/sara/finley.morse.html
I will say I have found myself running the free download of this program has some positive effects, I have played with other programs I wish I never bought, and I recently bought a CD player and the ARRL Code CD's, I have found truth to the Koch method I have improved my copy playing at 10 wpm , a VE advised me to try 10 WPM at first I wasn't so sure, now after using G4FON's free download Give it a try.. as to HT SSB I think that it will need some real engineering on that issue.
|
| |
|
RE: HF HTs
|
|
|
by KG4PZZ on March 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just an FYI for people asking for AM on a handheld.
VX-7R has AM on 6m, and not just recieve, either. It's one of those features nobody seems to know about...
Just a thought.
Fred
KG4PZZ
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC6F on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The reasons for this are partly technical. In order to have SSB capability, you need a linear amplifier and good frequency stability in a variety of temperatures. In an HT, frequency stability is very difficult because of the wide range of operating environments. A linear amplifier is a more expensive amplifier to design than the one used in your FM radio.
The other reason is that there is not much point in adding SSB to an HT. Sideband is an old technology that will soon be replaced with digital voice. If you are looking for better performance, I advise you to persue this option.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N1VLQ on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm of the opinion that we need SSB on the 50 watt mobile rigs before we need worry about HT's....
Having an affordable method to get onto the weak signal modes for Tech class licensee's would greatly increase the useage of our bands, and better protect us against losing them. And a 50 watt mobile 2 meter rig with SSB capabilities would be the easiest way to do just that, compared to the Satellite rigs, or Icom 706 and/or FT100 rigs, that a Tech cannot necessarily justify. (Certainly some can and do, but for the beginner, the 2 meter rig would be the way to start.)
73
Bruce, N1VLQ
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by NJ6F on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Because of the vertical polorization/position and the fidelity of FM otherwise most hams would be walking hunchbacks using SSB due to polorization or would not have an antenna very long before it got clipped or put someones eye out. By the way the AM receive and XMIT on my VX7R sounds the same as FM to me when I checked it out last.
Fidelity on SSB might not be so easy to hear from a cheap little speaker.... say what!!! Please repeat...
Just use an Echolink repeater if you are that resigned to work a few extra miles...
Use Lithium batteries and be done with it... they hold up the best
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by W7HV on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yes. SSB AND CW should be included on HTs. As far as internet linked repeaters eliminating HF, give me a break. There is no comparison.
I barely consider yacking on FM repeaters (internet linked or not) to be ham radio at all. You might as well use a cell phone.
Lou W7HV
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KG4PZZ on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I haven't played with the VX-7's AM capabilites, I just know they are there.
As for antenna polarization -- just because it's SSB or CW doesn't mean it HAS to be horizontal! Now, the way to do things is to use horizontal (what's the figure? 20 db loss between a vertical recieve and horizontal transmit signal, and vice-a-versa?). However, if you and somebody you are talking to are both using VHF SSB mobile with a vertical whip, no problems should be noticed. The radio isn't going to start beeping and coughing up smoke and give you an error about SSB on a vertical antenna.
So if there was enough interest in a certain area for mobile / portable VHF SSB, vertical polarization may become the "norm" for that area. It might not ever happen, but if it did, the possibility is there.
Fred
KG4PZZ
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by K0RGR on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First, to the fellow who was interested in buying a Twoer - I would not recommend it. The receiver was so broad that almost any loud signal on the band would take up the whole dial! See if you can find a Gonset Communicator - preferably a model IV - those were the Cadillac rigs of their day - and those black cases with the vertical dials still look really cool today!
A few years ago, MFJ came out with a line of single-band low cost SSB rigs. I and others wrote to MFJ suggesting that a 2 meter version would do well. Lo and behold - they came out with the MFJ9402 - with microphone (MFJ9402X) it runs $299.95 . So for 300 bux, you can have a shiny new SSB rig for 2 meters. I have not worked anybody on 2 meters with one of these rigs yet. What is a reasonable price for a rig like this? I don't think we can expect to get this capability for free.
It would be great if even a tiny percentage of our VHF-only techs would get on SSB - if even 1% were active, 2 meters would sound like 75 meters at night in most areas of the country. You might be amazed at what you can really work with a modest station. With a small yagi and 100 W, it's not uncommon for me in SE Minnesota to work people in the Detroit area. To get there, my signals cross over 40 miles of MN, all the way over Wisconsin, Lake Superior, and Michigan!
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC8HZM on March 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Some people have already mentioned the Tokyo HyPower HT-750 that does SSB on 40, 15, and 6 meters. I thought that it might be worth mentioning that there is one on eBay right now item #3012060589.
Incidentally, the included antenna looks like it would result in horizontal polarization.
Marten
KC8HZM
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KA5BSE on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
HI GEORGE. I DON'T THINK I NEED SSB ON A HANDY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A VOICE CHIP. I HAVE A BLIND FRIEND THAT TRAVAELS ALL ACROSS THE STATES. I GOT HIM THE X-150 THAT HAS A BEEP ON MEMORY ONE AND THAT DOES HELP. I CALL OUT THE PROGRAMED FREQ. AND HE TYPES THEM ON HIS BRAIL TYPWRITER. SURE IS A PAIN WHEN HE HAS TO COUNT FROM MENORY ONE TO GET TO 100. I THINK THER ARE LOTS OF BLIND HAMS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE A MEMORY CHIP. SOME COMPLAINTS TO YEASU AND KENWOOD?? THANKS
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by W9SZ on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It looks like several people have covered some of the reasons why this isn't very feasible - it would add more complicated (and expensive) circuitry that would necessarily make the radio quite a bit bigger; you'd need a tuning knob to tune in SSB; and most of the people you'd try to talk to are using horizontally-polarized antennas on CW/SSB. With a vertical antenna, you'd lose at least 20 dB of signal by cross-polarizing.
Another thing is that people who do weak-signal work on 144 MHz usually have large antenna arrays and preamps that allow them to hear extremely weak signals. You are not likely to hear these with an HT or portable radio. If you call CQ on what you think is a clear SSB frequency and wipe out a signal from the grid square that weak-signal op needs and is trying to work, you could get him a bit upset. I doubt this would happen very often, but it's something to think about.
I have been using my FT290R II with a battery pack and carrying strap as a portable rig. It's bigger than the average HT but can easily be carried with the shoulder strap. I have chatted with people at hamfests on SSB with it, on pre-arranged frequencies. So it is useful for that.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB1GMX on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
TO the one that said SSB is lower power, your wrong.
SSB requires more stages to process the signal and a LINEAR amplifier for a final to get the power up. An efficient linear may run 50% at vhf where the common FM class C is 65-70%.
As someone that has built (homebrew) several 6m SSB radios size is not a problem with modern surface mount but power is. To do more than a watt or two at VHF is costly in terms of power(read batteries!). This is why the 817 eats them (400ma on RX!). My homebrew sixer is much lower in power and does a few watts but there were trade offs to get that like single band, NO fm and No crunchproof frontend.
Also For FM channels are spaced every 5khz making the VFO (synth PLL) cheap and easy, for SSB 10Hz is the usual step and even some call that coarse. A stable PLL to do that is much more complex.
The not enough knobs thing is a red herring. Look at the TenTec 6n2 6 knobs total and 8 buttons. One of my designs have only three knobs and an encoder for tuning. Since the average FM ht has at least two knobs and 16-20 buttons that should be easy figure.
Another factor. When people tried an SSB HT, SSB was not as common on VHF, with the new mobiles and station radios SSB is common on VHF (at least 6,2 and maybe 432). You have to have people to talk to to make it work.
I think there is a growing market for such a device but don't expect multiband and all the other stuff the average inexpensive FM hts have, or at least don't expect it to be cheap. Remember the 817 is still a lot more expensive than a FM dual bander.
Allison
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KB1GMX on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
TO the one that said SSB is lower power, your wrong.
SSB requires more stages to process the signal and a LINEAR amplifier for a final to get the power up. An efficient linear may run 50% at vhf where the common FM class C is 65-70%.
As someone that has built (homebrew) several 6m SSB radios size is not a problem with modern surface mount but power is. To do more than a watt or two at VHF is costly in terms of power(read batteries!). This is why the 817 eats them (400ma on RX!). My homebrew sixer is much lower in power and does a few watts but there were trade offs to get that like single band, NO fm and No crunchproof frontend.
Also For FM channels are spaced every 5khz making the VFO (synth PLL) cheap and easy, for SSB 10Hz is the usual step and even some call that coarse. A stable PLL to do that is much more complex.
The not enough knobs thing is a red herring. Look at the TenTec 6n2 6 knobs total and 8 buttons. One of my designs have only three knobs and an encoder for tuning. Since the average FM ht has at least two knobs and 16-20 buttons that should be easy figure.
Another factor. When people tried an SSB HT, SSB was not as common on VHF, with the new mobiles and station radios SSB is common on VHF (at least 6,2 and maybe 432). You have to have people to talk to to make it work.
I think there is a growing market for such a device but don't expect multiband and all the other stuff the average inexpensive FM hts have, or at least don't expect it to be cheap. Remember the 817 is still a lot more expensive than a FM dual bander.
Allison
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC8VMD on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Hmmm, I'm still a fairly new ham, and haven't yet tried SSB, but from what I've read and heard about it it seems that it would be something useful on an HT. It is by far more efficient in power usage, as you use less power to go the same ammount of distances. I love playing around with new ham stuff, and the more portable a unit is the better for me. I would likely be interested in a SSB capable HT, and an all mode HT sounds great! A small portable like the 817 is good, but you have the inconvenience of finding a power supply just as portable, whereas an HT is easier. The question though would be how would you create an antenna for an HT that would be good for the SSB. I would like to see the manufacturers work on this though... Does give food for thought!
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KG4UMB on March 10, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This Article caught my eye when i saw it because it's a very interesting idea. As a matter of fact, one of the many fine websites involving homebrew has plans for several small, QRP SSB rigs for 6m.
This page is at:
http://www.intio.or.jp/jf10zl
JF1OZL is a well-known (in japan, anyway) Homebrewer and contester. I highly recommend this page to any aspiring homebrewer or experimenter. I have learned much from him.
Oh yeah, KC7YSF, just how ridiculous is the Morse Code? Can YOU send at 20WPM on a straight key and a faulty 1960's oscillator? Didn't think so. Some people enjoy the ridiculous.
73
de KG4UMB
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by BERT on March 12, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here's a 10-meter h/t w/SSB.
http://www.magnum-radio.com/Transceivers/10%20Meter/SSB1010.htm
73 de Bert
WA2SI
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N2YTF on March 13, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
5w hts get out just fine on 2m ssb. With my 5w ft-817 and a telescoping half wave vertical I have made many contacts beyond 100 miles FROM STREET LEVEL walking home from school in Manhattan, a very poor radio location. I also have a 150 mile 2m ssb contact with the 817 at street level just using a 1/4 wave rubber duck at 5w....and all this was unplanned and the result of calling cq on 144.2 for less than 30 min (the time it takes me to walk home from school).
I also have several 432 ssb contacts using a half wave rubber duck antenna (very small at 432). My most exciting contact on 432 ssb was from INSIDE an elevated subway car in Queens to distant points on Long Island (aprox 50 miles).
All of these contacts were made with my vertical polarized antenna going to the other stations' horizontal polarized antennas.
I think many hams would be surprised to find out just how much they can accomplish with low power 2m ssb hts. There are many massive stations out there on 2m ssb that can hear a gnat sneeze hundreds of miles away...with 5 watts you can work a lot of them. When the tropo ducting picks up (unrelated to the solar cycle) even more remarkable contacts are possible. I had a 350 mile 70cm 5w fm contact from a ship a couple of summers ago...just imagine what I could have accomplished with a 70cm ssb rig (one of the reasons I picked up an 817).
I think SSB hts could be a lot of fun, especially if they could make a uhf/vhf 817 that would be the size of a vx 7r or somthing.
73 to all
Tom, N2YTF
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC5NYJ on March 13, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I believe the point is made quite well with the comments regarding the Eagle/Magnum/Dragon/Titan type of 10m all mode. Yes, they are inexpensive, about $150 and as little as $109 last summer on eBay for a brand new unit. Good cheap entertainment. There are plenty of success stories out there with these radios and literally thousands and thousands were and still are sold. With the addition of a CW mode and bit better filtering, perhaps they would have been more of a hit in the amateur world.
Don't look for the Big Three to bring themselves down to this pricing level with anything, though. I'm really surprised Alinco didn't even take a stab at an all mode 10/6m handy, considering the other flea-power rigs they offer for quite reasonable prices.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by G0UWK on March 14, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would certainly buy one,
I use my HT to chat to friends locally whilst out walking & 2m/70cm ssb
would be great, for a start the H.T battery would last longer, Secondly there would be less noise
on low signals.
I like SSB, sure it's not for everyone but then neither is FM !, I remember in the Early 1980's a company
i think call CTVR made a 6 watt 10 Meter am handheld am is nice & quiet without the need for squelch
I have been looking for further information on these,
because i seem to remember the range was very good, But have not been able to find out anymore Info
I think any band lower than 10M would prove a problem because of the antenna implications, Oh if my VX5R Had ssb !
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on March 14, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Does anyone from Yaesu, Icom or Kenwood's R&D departments read this site? If so... make one, I'll buy one.
|
| |
|
Forget HTs... Where are the All-Mode VHF/UHF Radio
|
|
|
by INITZERO on March 14, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I can understand why HTs are generally limited to FM.
Why can't I find an all-mode UHF/VHF base/mobile rig?
I am a tech with no interest in learning Morse code
again or using the HF bands. (I learned the code in
Scouts more than a decade ago and have since forgotten
90% of what I knew.) APRS is what finally sold me on
getting my ticket. I'm a VHF/UHF digital sort of guy.
That said, I would love to work 6M and above SSB. In
order to do that, I pretty much must by an HF rig. I
understand that engineering for UHF/VHF and above is
more complex than HF so I expect to pay a bit more
for a radio that covers 6M/2M/220/440/900/1.2 than I
would for one that covers 160M-10M.
However, I can't buy such a radio at any price. Even
if I throw out 220 mHz and 900mHz as a complete pipe
dream, I can't find an all-mode radio that covers
6M/2M/70C/23CM. Why not?
Certainly if the big three can cram 160M through 70CM
all-mode into a mobile rig for under $900 they can put
6M to 23CM in the same package for that much or a
couple hundred less, right?
The TS-2000 is as close to what I want as I have seen
but it is way too much money for bands I will never
use and a lack of bands I would use -- 220mHz. (It is
also a bit big.)
Matt (k4mls)
|
| |
|
RE: Forget HTs... Where are the All-Mode VHF/UHF R
|
|
|
by KG4PZZ on March 14, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I hate to take on the tone of a "snobby extra" or anything, but come on guys. You don't hear guys complaining that they don't use the WARC bands, so they want a radio without them and something else in their place. You can't have everything you want. It's probably not profitable for a manufacturer to make a 6/2/220/440/902/1.2GHz rig. They're already available, with the exception of 220 and 902. It's called a TS-2000, IC-706 (minus 1.2GHz), and Icom makes a 2/440/1.2 base station. I even think that Kenwood or Yaesu makes a "satellite" radio which has been reviewed on E-Ham as a good VHF/UHF radio and that HF was just an afterthought. So maybe that's something to look at.
As for HT's, well, that's a different animal. The closest you can get is some of the older gear or an 817. I'm surprised that with the 817 selling as well as it did, Yaesu didn't try to make it smaller and tweak a few things (read: 220 or 1.2).
And, if you're really really desperate for a rig -- homebrew. I know not everybody has the skills, tools, etc for this, but it's always a possibility.
Just my thoughts.
Fred
KG4PZZ
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by HB9PJT on March 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
SSB on a handy is a great idea. I own a old Mizuho 2 meter handy with 200 mW Power and could make some nice contacts (max 100 miles). I can hold the HT with the Lambda half telescopic antenna vertical or horizontal to get vertical or horizontal polarization. No problems - no polarisation attenuation - very simple and it works. Draws allmost no power because in SSB the avarage output power depends on modulation and is about 10 or 20 % of full power. SSB saves a lot of battery and has the much better range than FM (FM eats 3 times the batteries of SSB). Would buy a VHF SSB HT.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by VE7VIE on March 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would buy a new SSB HT in a heartbeat, although I already have an Eagle Talon 10m and a Mizuho 6m HT. I long for a Tokyo hi-power maybe with a little more power, and a resonable price. A whip that actually worked would be nice too.
72, Barry
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by VE7VIE on March 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
$250! OUCH! That is $100 more that Copper charges for the Eagle Talon (which is identical). Of course Copper has been sold out for a few years now...
72, Barry
PS: Magnum was suposed to come out with their own, superior 10m HT a few years ago, but they never did and instead got these things. I am sure glad I didn't wait for the 'new impoved' version!
They ARE worth $150 - but probably not $250. You can get an MFJ or Ranger base/portable rig for that.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by WD6EJN on April 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
At one time there were several models mostly made in Europe and Japan, two examples were the Mizuho two watt
ssb/cw handie talkie for vhf and the Tokyo High Power
(sort of a contradiction in terms for a qrp rig!)
which I believe you can still special order from the
factory.
It is a lot easier to walk out on a porch or go on a walk around the block then to have to sneak a long wire out a window at two in the morning.
For this reason I have tried for many many years to
promote the use of portable radios for hams with severe antenna restrictions, rather than having
to use up 10 gallons of gas going mobile, or having to load up a rain gutter and hear tvi complaints.
There are also some qrp rigs that are fairly portable
but most of these are home brew, so you have to settle
for the sky high costs of comercial portable rigs sold
by U.S. manufacturers.
My guess is it has something to do with type exceptance
that these radios were never popular here as they are in Europe.
Also,, even though there are five to ten hams in one square mile of most areas, there seems to be a fixation on dx and fm repeaters, it takes a bit more work to make a portable contact on hf! these days as most hams have gone to the internet.
My gosh! we wouldn't want a little noise or qrm on our signals do we? we have to have an 80 foot tower with
four element beam and 800 watts, might as well make contacts with a cell phone.
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD7KGX on April 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If you want SSB capabilities so you can LISTEN to HF or VHF SSB, then the Kenwood TF6A fits your needs.
If you want to be able to transmit in SSB mode... then your reason for wanting to do so is more for enjoyment or experimentation than practicality, and you would be far better suited with a rig like the Yaesu FT-817 (which is basically an overgrown 5w multi-band multi-mode HT).
HTs are by their very nature small beasts with low power designed for utility communications into a repeater system. VHF and above freqs are, similarly by their nature, best-suited for close-range communications (under 100 miles).
An HT with 5 watts and a decent factory antenna, i.e., the Icom T90A, will work any repeater within line-of-sight out to 40 miles or so (I've done it with mine), and most repeaters within 10 miles can be worked with 1/2 a watt. As long as your signal hits a repeater at a high enough level to provide for a copyable signal, then your communications range is the effective range of the repeater. Running SSB will not add to this, and will bring along complexities of tuning. Any feature that detracts from the usefulness of an HT as a utility communications tool makes that HT less desireable. As some have already pointed out, there USED to be HTs with SSB. The reason they're no longer made is because not enough people wanted one.
So... the answer to this questions is "because HTs are designed for utility and emergency communications and adding SSB capability would not enhance their usability in such a role." I, for one, would NEVER consider buying an HT with SSB.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by W5USB on July 9, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Buy a K2 from Elecraft. Kick butt rig that you build and align yourself. Max(yes, I said max) current drain on recieve (not standby) is 300mA. Most HT's can't claim this low of a value. Great radio and a fine education to boot. I will never buy another pre-assembled rig. Hear that kenwood, icom, yaesu and the rest?
Thanks Elecraft.
Art Granda W5USB <--- K2 owner #3503
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by KD6NXI on August 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
THey do have them. Cherokee who mainly makes cb's had a 50 mhz sideband HT,, more walkie talkie size though. They also had a ten meter one and a ssb cb handheld. Quite innovative really, they were quite expensive though.
|
| |
|
RE: Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by N2YTF on September 2, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
There seems to be a lot of misinformation out there about dx with a 2m ssb ht.
I use a ft-817 with its 5w SSB to a 1/4 wave rubber duck or 1/2 wave telescoping antenna (spring base) from the streets of Manhattan (virtual manmade canyon). My best dx is over 300 miles, with 50 mile contacts being routine...all on 2M portable while walking to and from grad school.
There are plenty of 2m ssb superstations out there, and they compensate in many cases for the low ERP on my side, but I have found that in general people use more ERP then they need on 2m ssb.
I have also made 70cm ssb portable contacts although there are many more stations on 2m.
While there may be other barriers to a vhf ssb ht, ability to make distant contacts is not as much of a problem as some would think.
73, Tom, N2YTF
|
| |
|
Why Do HTs Lack SSB Capabilities?
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on December 8, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A company called Mihitzo made some SSB HF H-T's.
No longer made. Their is a YL on EHAM that collects them. There was a CB SSB-HT that some converted to 10M.
Think about it like this. You have a tiny H-t that has SSB, can you really see your self adjusting the R.i.T, while in the street handheld! You could go nuts
Trying to tune them in a QSO.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
CW and SSB Coexisting
LSB/USB Chaos on the Bands...
When Your Radio Has Saved You
ESSB What?
I See Your Lips Moving...
Other Radios Articles
What's Special About a Tuning Knob?
Cool Radio
Designing the Ultimate HF Front End
Boatanchor AM on a Budget
Keep Your Cool!
|
