[amsat-bb] In addition to a Baefong UV-5R, what should one get to work SO-50?

[John Brier]

This is great! Thanks Patrick.

I only sent you an email directly to make sure you would notice it.
:-) Definitely agree this should be public information.

Thanks again,

John KG4AKV

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Patrick STODDARD (WD9EWK/VA7EWK)
<amsat-bb at wd9ewk.net> wrote:
> John,
>
> I saw your direct e-mail as well as this post on the -BB, but will
> answer you in the public forum for the benefit of others as well.
>
> I have used a pair of the Baofeng HTs for working SO-50. I
> have tried
> two UV-5Rs, two UV-82s, and mixing one UV-5R and one UV-82. When
> mixing the radios, same or different models, I swapped which radio
> was used as the transmitter and receiver. I even posted a YouTube
> video with audio from working one hamfest demonstration with the
> UV-82/UV-5R combination in 2014:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cLx9h-vNRA
>
> I added photos and slides with text to the audio, in making the
> video, as I did not have actial video of the demonstration. In
> the video, I went with the UV-5R for the transmit radio, since it
> has a two-way PTT that can directly key either VFO, and a speaker-mic
> that could also key either VFO directly. This let me put 145.850
> MHz in both VFOs for working SO-50, using different PL tones in
> each VFO for waking the satellite vs. talking through the FM repeater.
>
> A second UV-5R could work to make a full-duplex station for SO-50.
> Many have used two UV-5Rs, or a UV-5R with another Baofeng (or other
> low-priced Chinese-made HT) to make a full-duplex station. The price
> is obviously low enough to do that, without breaking the bank. It
> can be done, but there are almost as many that have had frustrations
> with the two-Baofeng setup for satellite work as those who have had
> success doing.
>
> If the budget for the second radio is more than the price of
> a UV-5R or UV-82 type of radio, I'd recommend going to something
> like one of the traditional ham manufacturers, or possibly Wouxun -
> radios that generally have better receivers than the Baofengs,
> no matter which Baofeng model you choose. The unfortunate facts about
> many of the Chinese-made HTs - outside of possibly newer Wouxuns -
> is quality control on the assembly line borders on the nonexistent.
> One UV-5R might be working well and within the appropriate technical
> requirements for use on the amateur bands, where the next unit off
> the assembly line is horrid. There was a recent QST article that
> addressed this point, based on ARRL testing of HTs at Dayton last
> year. From my testing, I'd prefer to use a Wouxun KG-UV8D over
> almost anything Baofeng (or the other HTs based on the UV-5R, sold
> under a zillion different names), especially on the receive side.
> Even better, in terms of a Chinese-made HT, would be a Wouxun
> KG-UV9D - the one Chinese HT that seems to have a nice receiver
> that finally starts to approach what comes from the traditional
> ham manufacturers. The KG-UV8D and KG-UV9D will also work full-duplex
> for AO-85, where the uplink is on 70cm, but both fail for full-duplex
> using 2m uplinks (SO-50, LilacSat-2).
>
> I have not put any of my Baofeng or Wouxun HTs (or the others from
> different Chinese brands) on test equipment. All of my testing is
> from buying the radios, trying them out, and seeing what happens when
> working the satellites. I have not tried the two-Baofeng combination
> for AO-85 yet, as most of my Baofeng testing was done in 2014 when
> we only had SO-50. I did more testing recently with Chinese-made
> HTs, trying to clear up some misstatements online on whether or
> not any of those HTs could be used to work AO-85 full-duplex.
>
> 73!
>
>
>
>
> Patrick WD9EWK/VA7EWk
> http://www.wd9ewk.net/
> Twitter: @WD9EWK
>
>
>
>> Patrick in particular, I know you have done a lot of testing with the
>> Chinese Radios, at least for AO-85, can you advise what this ham
>> should get and which one to use for up/down to work SO-50 in addition
>> to what they already have? I assume the purpose is to work
>> full-duplex.
>>
>