No monobanders outside of 2M left except Alinco. I tried to ask
Kenwood about the TM471, Yaesu about some of theirs (they still have a
440 monoband HT), and didn't bother with ICOM since it would just be a
$700 radio made for D*. The answer was the same -- no market for it in
the US, though they make these radios for other markets.
the only way to get those other bands are a multi-bander or Alinco.
I'm not a huge fan of Alinco, but I did recently buy a pair of DJ-G7s
mainly to get the 1.2GHz. My general experience is that the multi-
banders aren't build to take quite as much abuse, don't have quite the
audio, usually have DC-light receivers with lousier selectivity --
hey, you gotta trade something off. That's why I use mostly commercial
gear and UHF only. If I could buy ham rigs for UHF only, I probably
would.
BTW: The repeaters are all Motorola commercial too. MSR2000 and R1225
(10w running at 1w with a TPL 100W PA), GM300s for link receivers,
barefoot 10W R1225s for remotes. This is repeater builder, so I
thought I should throw that in there :) Nothing against other brands,
just have a lot of time spent getting to know the big /\/\
73 DE N0MJS
On Oct 2, 2009, at 8:09 PM, MCH wrote:
Exactly. It comes back to the mentality that 2M is the only VHF/UHF
band
out there. What the ARRL needs to do is figure out a way to make hams
realize that 2M is not the only VHF/UHF band.
What it really comes down to is that hams are CHEAP and multiband
radios
cost money (but not twice as much for twice the bands - the additional
expense is an inverse log - 2 bands = 50% more, 3=66% more, Etc.).
It's
a wonder we don't see more single-band HF radios. I apologize for
those
who are shocked my this truth or by the fact I was brave enough to
TYPE it.
Maybe the ARRL needs to convince manufacturers to make more radios
with
multi-band capability so the price will come down so more hams will
buy
them.
In WPA there are 3 repeaters on 900 MHz. Actually, there are 2
coordinated, and 1 that is planned - I'm not sure if any are
actually on
the air.
Again, there are plenty of pairs available in my area for narrowband
repeaters. If they only argument is the fact that the 2M repeater
sub-bands are full, then petition the FCC to expand the 2M band. Maybe
give us 148.2-150 MHz and make it a narrowband transmission only band.
But forcing repeaters off the air is not a smart thing to do -
especially when you have users who will be forced to use a lesser
number
of repeaters rather than buy new, more expensive, equipment. (cheap,
remember?)
If the FCC would allow repeater use of the 144.4-144.5 MHz segment,
that
could be paired with 144.9 - 145.0 MHz that has been largely abandoned
by packet users and is already repeater-legal. There you go - 9 pairs
ready to be used for SNFM operations that will not impact the
current users.
Of course, the overcrowding argument is a good one, too. I doubt you
will be able to prove that given the state most repeaters are in (that
being the IDLE state). I've also not seen one OOB repeater on the air.
Oh, and where will all this 10M and 6M repeater equipment come from?
The
commercial users don't have it for Low Band. 900 MHz is already
narrowband for the most part. Where are all these people who want to
put
narrowband repeaters on the air? (reference my maybe 1 planned
repeater
in WPA comment)
Joe M.
Mark wrote:
> This is one reason why I have a 900 MHz machine on the air, Joe.
Plus, it
> is "narrowband-capable" already! <grin>
>
> Seriously, my main concern (as well as another ham north of me who
also has
> a 900 machine) is how to get some users! It sits for hours at a time
> without activity. (Other than me calling out "listening" or having
the
> occasional rag chew with one of the three other users.) If only I
knew how
> to generate more interest in 900 MHz without *ME* having to foot
the bill
> for everyone else's radios... Of course, I'm open to suggestions -
or
> donations!
>
> 73,
> Mark - N9WYS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] On Behalf Of MCH
> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:37 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] ARRL Approves Study Committee to
Research &
> Develop Plan for Narrowband Channel Spacing
>
> I bet there are few places that have every pair used in every
band. It's
> likely more an issue of the fact that everyone *has* to be on 2M and
> nowhere else. Pandering to these types will only result in the
LOSS of
> the other VHF/UHF bands.
>
> And have they through about how to pay for everyone to get a new
radio?
> Will there be a government bailout so all the hams (many who can't
> afford a used radio) can buy new compatible gear?
>
> Joe M.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date:
07/31/09 05:58:00
>
