Please help me out with critical comments about receiver sensitivity vis-a-vis the venerable FT-736R and latest 2-m/70-cm all-mode transceivers best suited for AMSAT work.
Thanks in advance, Dave N4CVX
Sent from my iPad
Please share on list because I am curious as well.
73, John Brier KG4AKV
On Apr 29, 2017 10:50 AM, "Dave Mann" [email protected] wrote:
Please help me out with critical comments about receiver sensitivity vis-a-vis the venerable FT-736R and latest 2-m/70-cm all-mode transceivers best suited for AMSAT work.
Thanks in advance, Dave N4CVX
Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
From everything I've read, the 736R has a fine receiver. The only
issue with using it with satellites today is if you want to use computer control, the CAT port is unidirectional. You can send frequency updates to it, but not read the frequency data from the radio. The limitation that introduces is you can't use the tuning knob to tune around the passband, you'll have to use the controls in SatPC32 (or other software).
73,
Paul, N8HM
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Dave Mann [email protected] wrote:
Please help me out with critical comments about receiver sensitivity vis-a-vis the venerable FT-736R and latest 2-m/70-cm all-mode transceivers best suited for AMSAT work.
Thanks in advance, Dave N4CVX
Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
A look through the ARRL product reviews should tell you what you need to know in an objective fashion.
Having said that, sensitivity is probably not the best parameter on which to judge a potential transceiver. Poor sensitivity can be cured with a preamp. Not so poor strong signal handling performance or ergonomics.
I have a TS2000X, which is only mediocre in sensitivity and strong signal handling capability, but has good ergonomics. It is useful as an HF backup rig and I use it for VHF/UHF roving, at which it excels. It also has a 1296 option. With an outside antenna the notorious birdie is not a problem.
All of the all-mode VHF transceivers have their pluses and minuses. Some are more show stoppers than others. These kinds of rigs are compromises and once one decides on what compromises one can make, selection is easier. The highest performance option, a pair (or more) of transverters, can be a task to integrate, is expensive, has primitive ergonomics, and requires two IF transceivers for satellite work.
Let us know what you decide. — Duffey KK6MC
On Apr 29, 2017, at 8:50 AM, Dave Mann [email protected] wrote:
Please help me out with critical comments about receiver sensitivity vis-a-vis the venerable FT-736R and latest 2-m/70-cm all-mode transceivers best suited for AMSAT work.
Thanks in advance, Dave N4CVX
Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
participants (4)
-
Dave Mann -
James Duffey -
John Brier -
Paul Stoetzer