Hello all,
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X or the Icom IC- 9100 ??
Best regards
Andrew HK4MKE
_________________________
algaviri1@une.net.co
Hi Andrew,
A 'loaded question' for sure, but 1 issue for me:
The TS2000 has internal 'birdies' at 436.799 which make it difficult to work some sats. See page 103 of the manual. People claim 'work arounds' but it's an issue in a $2,000 radio and should not be.
Don't know about the Icom rig
GL, Ted, K7TRK
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Gaviria Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 1:51 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Question about radios
Hello all,
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X or the Icom IC- 9100 ??
Best regards
Andrew HK4MKE
_________________________
algaviri1@une.net.co
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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
Hello all,
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X or the Icom IC- 9100 ??
Best regards
Andrew HK4MKE
The Yaesu FT-847 always working since 2001 either on HF or satellite
"-"
Luc Leblanc VE2DWE Skype VE2DWE www.qsl.net/ve2dwe DSTAR urcall VE2DWE WAC BASIC CW PHONE SATELLITE
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X orthe Icom IC- 9100 ??
Andrew, the "better" radio depends mostly on individual preferences...they all receive, and they all transmit...
A few, maybe10 years ago, five of us from North Shores ARC in San Diego tested those two and as I remember a couple of "yaysus", and the IC 900 was voted "the best"....
I'm 89, poor hearing, and have been on the ham satellites since Oscar 7, and have to admit that I favor Kenwoods....
We coax switched the radios so the comparison was instant, fades not in the picture....
HRO in San Diego let me take several radios home before I chose the IC910...perhaps you could do the same...
73, Dave, WB6LLO dguimon1@san.rr.com
Disagree: I learn....
Pulling for P3E...
Andrew, Being in this end of the hobby for "many" years, I have learned that sometimes the choice comes down to what you can afford. While the TS2000 is a nice radio, with the birdie problem, it leaves a question. Ihave had 2 Icom 910's for many years and even have one of them adapted with the 1.2ghz module. Both have worked flawless and have been more than adequate. The new ICOM 9100 (which you ask about) is a bit pricey for the bands provided. I have been following the production of the 9100 and it has become out of an average hams price range. While the specs are very good, you can achieve the same effect with a TS2000 - Icom 910- Yaesu 847 and even the older icom 820 (?) - Once again, I have always advised sat ops to spend the money on the antennas and coax as this is where you'll find the most advantage for your operation. Good luck and go to the AMSAT website to obtain a truck load of info pertaining to satellite station construction and operating advice. 73, Dee, NB2F NJ AMSAT Coordinator
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Gaviria Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 4:51 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Question about radios
Hello all,
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X or the Icom IC- 9100 ??
Best regards
Andrew HK4MKE
_________________________
algaviri1@une.net.co
_______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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
Having the FT-847 since early 1998 and observing the IC-910 I would recommend both over the TS-2000 or new IC-9100 on basis of bucks spent. I realize both the 847 and 910 are out of production but good used units are available for <$900.
The TS-2000 "birdie" issue is unforgivable for the money spent (Unless you are not interested in satellites which the FT-857/897 would then be my choice). The IC-9100 is outrageously expensive and would only be a choice if you have no HF equipment. It is still too new for a complete opinion (for what you spend you could have top notch transverters and a new K3*, or buy two FT-817 with amps for a lot less).
*Note: the K3 is not able to do duplex at this time, but I have an idea how it could by using the dual receiver IF. My K3 with DEMI transverter is much superior to the FT-847 on 2m, but that is only for very weak-signal applications (satellites are on the strong side of weak-signal if you get my drift), and use on HF (which is not the question that was asked).
73, Ed - KL7UW
At 06:46 AM 5/3/2011, Dee wrote:
Andrew, Being in this end of the hobby for "many" years, I have learned that sometimes the choice comes down to what you can afford. While the TS2000 is a nice radio, with the birdie problem, it leaves a question. Ihave had 2 Icom 910's for many years and even have one of them adapted with the 1.2ghz module. Both have worked flawless and have been more than adequate. The new ICOM 9100 (which you ask about) is a bit pricey for the bands provided. I have been following the production of the 9100 and it has become out of an average hams price range. While the specs are very good, you can achieve the same effect with a TS2000 - Icom 910- Yaesu 847 and even the older icom 820 (?) - Once again, I have always advised sat ops to spend the money on the antennas and coax as this is where you'll find the most advantage for your operation. Good luck and go to the AMSAT website to obtain a truck load of info pertaining to satellite station construction and operating advice. 73, Dee, NB2F NJ AMSAT Coordinator
-----Original Message----- From: amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@amsat.org] On Behalf Of Alvaro Gaviria Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 4:51 PM To: amsat-bb@amsat.org Subject: [amsat-bb] Question about radios
Hello all,
Can someone tell what is better for satellite work, the Kenwood TS-2000X or the Icom IC- 9100 ??
Best regards
Andrew HK4MKE
algaviri1@une.net.co
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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 AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. 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
73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45 ====================================== BP40IQ 500 KHz - 10-GHz www.kl7uw.com EME: 50-1.1kW?, 144-1.4kw, 432-100w, 1296-testing*, 3400-? DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubususa@hotmail.com ======================================
Ed,
I have not done it yet, but the parts are in the shack: I will be installing two buffer IF amps on the IC-910H. These will feed my SDR-IQ (main and sub rx) . This was my original thought. However, I also ordered a FM filter for my K3, and I will simply have the K3 monitor the IF tap of the main receiver of the IC-910H. One annoyance to me is the +/- 1 kHz RIT of the IC-910H. Not good enough when chasing some non computer assisted folks on the birds (ssb/cw). With the K3, I then would have essentially an unlimited RIT just from the tuning control.
There, now that I explained it, I had better warm up the iron right?
tom K8TB
On 5/3/2011 11:50 AM, Edward R. Cole wrote:
*Note: the K3 is not able to do duplex at this time, but I have an idea how it could by using the dual receiver IF. My K3 with DEMI transverter is much superior to the FT-847 on 2m, but that is only for very weak-signal applications (satellites are on the strong side of weak-signal if you get my drift), and use on HF (which is not the question that was asked).
participants (7)
-
Alvaro Gaviria -
Dave Guimont -
Dee -
Edward R. Cole -
K8TB -
Luc Leblanc -
Ted