Watching from the sidelines (with my FT-847 and K3). One of the reasons I held onto my FT-847 was that with the addition of my DEMI 144/1296 xvtr the total outlay (when they were new) was $1600 + $395 ~ $2K. And that covers 160m - 6m, 2m, 70cm, 23cm. The FT-847 "IS" a satellite radio, full-duplex crossband. Too bad they discontinued production (which begs one to wonder if there might be a new version coming?). All radio are increasing in cost (it's called inflation - err, or maybe more profit?).
When I bought the K3, I struggled with considering selling the FT-847 and buying DEMI 144/28 and 432/28 xvtrs. I also considered buying a used IC910H. But, in the end, it made more sense to keep the FT-847 for satellite and casual VHF. The K3 is in a whole 'nother league than the FT-847, as afar as receiver performance and that is why I bought it. I did give in to buying a new DEMI 144/28 xvtr, so in time if Elecraft can come out with duplex receive sw, I may add the 432/28 and finally say goodbye to the old FT-847. For outright performance, either the K3 or Flex5000 own the real estate (note: TS-590S has been introduced as a contender at Dayton). How they are incorporated for satellite full-duplex operation, remains. The IC9100, TS-2000x are not in that league, sorry. I doubt that DEMI will enter the transceiver business (but?). I was hoping RFSpace would come up with a dual-Rx SDR-IQ and/or TCVR-IQ. The SDR field is wide-open as where ham radio technology is going. "Theoretically" if you purchase a "good" SDR, you will never have to buy any hardware, again - just new sw. With the unlikely launch of new Heos, it is hard for the industry to justify (new or existing) high-end satellite rigs. Icom obviously bundled HF into the new radio to widen its appeal to those wanting a one-box,does-all, radio. PS: in the risk of repeating myself, I bought the K3 to be my state-of-art receiver for eme, ms, mw, and general weak-signal stuff. If it can eventually do satellite that would be an added frill. 73, Ed - KL7UW At 10:59 AM 5/16/2010, Sebastian wrote: >I sold my IC-910H recently, as I had thoughts about going with the >9100. But at that price, I can't justify it. > >I agree that the Flex 5000 is probably a much better radio (since we >don't yet know all the technical details on the 9100). However the >cost of the V/U module for the Flex is about as much as you would >pay for a brand new TS-2000. Sure the Flex offers more, but let's >face it, with the current birds in orbit, it's overkill for the >average ham who makes occasional satellite contacts. > >Perhaps others such as DEMI, will see this as an opportunity and >come up with alternatives? > >73 de W4AS > >On May 15, 2010, at 9:43 PM, Michael Tondee wrote: > > > I guess once I put the upcoming V/U module in my Flex 5000 I'll have > > that amount of money in it but I won't have had to spend it all at once > > and IMHO I'll have a markedly better radio. Also one that isn't outdated > > a day after I walk out of the store with it. > > I'm just not a big fan of Icom's anyway so I guess I'm pretty biased. > > 73, > > Michael, W4HIJ > > > > On 5/15/2010 7:22 PM, Mik Forsythe wrote: > >> Just left Dayton a few hours ago. Icom said that it is > basically a 7600 and a 910. It is bigger than the 910. It was in > a display case so I can't tell you what the feel was like of the > weight. Price is in the $4,000.00 range so that will kill a lot of > the satellite market if you ask me. > >_______________________________________________ >Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. >Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! >Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
