[amsat-bb] Re: Icom 9100

[Mark L. Hammond]

Yaesu should "cash in" with a new satellite radio in the $2k price range.  It would likely be a "good thing."  Almost $4k for the IC-9100 seems a bit extreme...

73,

Mark N8MH 

At 11:50 AM 5/16/2010 -0800, Edward R Cole wrote:
>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 AMSAT-BB at 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 at 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


Mark L. Hammond  [N8MH]