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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Building a Shack, "Shack In A Box?"  (Read 7729 times)
NZ4ZN
Member

Posts: 43




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2014, 04:12:16 AM »

My suggestion is this... Wait for the TS-590SG to come out in real soon now. A lot of guys will be upgrading from the TS-590S and putting them on the market.

I looked at the TS-590S, and unless I missed something in the various docs out there it doesn't do anything at all higher than 6-meter - and I use 2-meter a *lot* for local digital and APRS so far.

Is that correct?
The TS590S and TS590SG are both limited to frequencies 6m and below.
Logged
WX4LTG
Member

Posts: 7




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2014, 08:36:46 AM »

The TS590S and TS590SG are both limited to frequencies 6m and below.

That's what I thought. I'm still pondering the FT-857D, IC-7000, FT-991, and TS-2000 - the latter three getting more weighting because they appear to be easier to interface for computer-driven modes over the FT-857D's CAT interface.
Logged
AD5TD
Member

Posts: 114




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2014, 09:07:05 PM »

Here  is a link to a PDF of what I built:

http://tinyurl.com/mk2y2qt

I have since removed the 18ah batteries, the thing weighs over 80 pounds with the batteries!

It works well. BTW, I don't do EMCOMS anymore so it's for sale, make me an offer.

AD5TD
Logged
KM4FMK
Member

Posts: 87




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2014, 12:34:21 PM »

Jpole is a common new user antenna, but I've learned these Baofengs do not like the common mode and active RF created by the Jpole. I have had a LOT better luck with a simple solid sire copper ground plane with my Baofengs.
Logged
N8XI
Member

Posts: 157




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 08:20:46 AM »

Started reading this thread and realized it is very cold outside   Sad
But, decided to put together a QRP Go Kit...
The quickest way without having to work in the cold garage was to grab one of my
several milk crates and see what could be done.

Well, my Elecraft K2 is probably the largest of my QRP rigs.
Then I added an old MFJ-901 (200W Ant Tuner) and a WM-2 QRP Wattmeter.
I used it as is connected to my rotary 40M dipole with an 8 AMP Power Supply. I am awaiting a 7AH SLA battery.
The Go Kit will include three freezer bags to hold  paper, pencils, keyer/paddle, zip cord antenna, etc.

I can see using this setup with some of the smaller HF Rigs.
In fact, one could be a HF Go Kit and another milk crate set up for VHF/UHF.
I am using small bungee cords to hold the gear in place.



73, Rick - N8XI
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 08:24:01 AM by N8XI » Logged
K5TED
Member

Posts: 812




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: Yesterday at 11:32:00 AM »

Not sure what all the concern is over the Yaesu CAT interface. It's as standard a modern ham radio interface as any other.

I have three Yaesu 'shack in a box' radios, the FT-847, 857D and 817ND, and all software I use, including HRD, FLDigi, MMSSTV, EasyPal, VoiceKeyer, DXLabs Commander, OmniRig, HDSDR, Chirp, and the list goes on, run fine with the Yaesu, and allow them to be synced up with my Flex 3000, Icom PCR-1000, and even the venerable old TS-140S.

Is the DIN connector is somehow frightening? Not sure why it would be, but it is a connector, not a religion. Serial DB9 to Yaesu DIN cables are dime-a-dozen. So are Yaesu DIN to USB. Ok, they actually cost around $15 on eBay. I use them all. The FT-817ND travels with a USB to DIN. the FT-857D is my shack 2m/70cm main rig, and uses the DIN to DB9, and the FT-847 is on a straight DB9 to DB9, actually sharing a 4 port serial to USB converter with a PCR-100, PCR1000, and the Kenwood TS-140S.

The USB interface used on Icom, Kenwood and Alinco is not inherently better than a CAT cable. In fact, it's not as versatile.

You say you don't plan to use the ham radio much, so with that said, know that you'll rarely find any activity on 2m and 70cm SSB. 6m ssb is something you will appreciate more. For the price of a FT-991, you can have a brand new FT-450D that hase HF and 6m, plus IF DSP, and a brand new FTM-400DR, which gives you the 2m/70CM, plus same C4FM capability as the FT-991, which is really the only 'new' feature it has, other than the nice display, which, if I read you concern with the CAT interfacing, you don't much care about since you obviously plan to use CAT on a PC.

In the same price range would be a Icom IC-7200 for HF/6m, in conjunction with a ID-5100A for 2m/70CM.

For that matter, TS-590's are about to flood the market.

Or, back to a FT-991, a great radio on paper.  I don't expect a ton of FT-857D owners to dump them for a FT-991 at more than twice the price any time soon. First of all, it doesn't have a removable faceplate, and it's bigger, and looks to be much more fragile, certainly not a mobile rig for most folks.


TS-2000 is probably the value leader in shack-in-a-box, even though it is dated.  IF DSP, nice size, proven track record, satellite capable (you will use this approximately as much as you use 2m SSB, unless you plan to invest in a large or complicated antenna system)


Good luck

« Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:40:40 AM by K5TED » Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6679




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: Today at 07:10:44 AM »

Not sure what all the concern is over the Yaesu CAT interface. It's as standard a modern ham radio interface as any other.

I would not say that. A direct USB plug in would be a standard modem interface.

TS-2000 is probably the value leader in shack-in-a-box, even though it is dated.  IF DSP, nice size, proven track record, satellite capable (you will use this approximately as much as you use 2m SSB, unless you plan to invest in a large or complicated antenna system)

The 2000 is okay but lacks on HF performance and VHF/UHF sensitivity for weak signal work. Also its IF DSP is primitive and lacking. The mere presence of IF DSP does not guarantee good performance. Many analog rigs will outperform 2000 on HF.   
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling to old fall far behind....
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!