New Ham radio for getting back into things

[hostile]

Been off the air for about 15 years now and wanted a fresh start with a new radio.  Haven't kept up with the latest and greatest, but I was looking at the Yaesu FT-991A as a catch all for me.  I like HF and we have a repeater on 440MHz. Does any one have experience with this model and if so what is your take on it ?  is there better similar option for same bandwidth and size ?   Thanks ahead of time for any information or opinions.

[HB9EVI]

the FT991(A) doesn't really convince with inner parameters; specially phase noise is an issue.

multibander including VHF/UHF are rare today; if QRP is an option the IC705 is available; otherwise it needs two devices e.g. IC7300 for HF/6m and IC9700 for 2m/70cm/23cm

afaik the IC9100 is not produced anymore (hasn't good parameters either), also the TS-2000 is not available anymore new.

[hostile]

because of the of space around here I was intrigued by the one radio all bands.  I always liked the IC-706MKII and was hoping to get something similar.  I get that one radio can't do everything as well as multiple radios focused on different bands, but is it bad enough to eliminate it entirely ?  If so I could surely get a 2mm/440 unit separate, but if I can get by with one radio I would be happy.   Do you feel like the yaesu suffers on HF, VHF/UHF or both.  Asking because I could possible get it for everything now, then get a dedicated rig for where it suffers.

[geggi1]

If you are considering the IC-706 I recommend to go for the next in line the IC-7000.
Because the 706 is getting very old the PA transistors are getting harder to replace in canse of falure.
The 7000 is kind of an upgrade on the 706 but with more modern features.

[HB9EVI]

the IC706 was indeed not so bad, but the thermal design wasn't that convincing; and yea, final transistors could be tricky to get by now
to my memory the IC7000 had some thermal issues too; both are rather small for a 100W final;
although it's a terrible ugly design, the IC7100 might still be available new; I just don't remember how good the technical parameters are.

depending on your planned activities on VHF/UHF, you maybe don't need an allmode device for those frequencies; there are plenty 2m/70cm FM boxes out there. If you don't want to CW/SSB DX, such a transceiver could fit your needs, plus a normal HF/6m allmode box

[Electro Fan]

Been off the air for about 15 years now and wanted a fresh start with a new radio.  Haven't kept up with the latest and greatest, but I was looking at the Yaesu FT-991A as a catch all for me.  I like HF and we have a repeater on 440MHz. Does any one have experience with this model and if so what is your take on it ?  is there better similar option for same bandwidth and size ?   Thanks ahead of time for any information or opinions.

About 2/3s of the way through your off the air hiatus I got on the air.  When I first got my licenses I was looking at a Kenwood 590 which seemed to be a strong traditional contender for HF.  About that time was when the 991 (without the A) was introduced and that looked like the way to fly.  Not long after that the Icom 7300 was introduced.  That forced me from an all in one radio to a Kenwood TM-V71A.  The 71A is a fine radio and it's easy to take outside and operate from a picnic bench or from inside the shack, or it can go in a vehicle.  But the real winning move in this was the Icom 7300.  It is an outstanding radio that is a joy to use.  I think if you look at the numbers of radios sold you will find that the 7300 has probably outsold the 991A and all other HF radios by a large margin.  Before you decide, look into the the 7300 further.

Having said that I get that an all in one will take up less space and perhaps the decision might be driven by how much / how often your are going to use which bands.  For shooting the breeze on UHF/VHF repeaters it's frankly not that big of a deal which radio you use, imo.  As always the antenna will be a big factor in where you can reach.  But if HF is going to a significant part of your ops I can't see how you could miss with the 7300.

[hostile]

Been off the air for about 15 years now and wanted a fresh start with a new radio.  Haven't kept up with the latest and greatest, but I was looking at the Yaesu FT-991A as a catch all for me.  I like HF and we have a repeater on 440MHz. Does any one have experience with this model and if so what is your take on it ?  is there better similar option for same bandwidth and size ?   Thanks ahead of time for any information or opinions.

About 2/3s of the way through your off the air hiatus I got on the air.  When I first got my licenses I was looking at a Kenwood 590 which seemed to be a strong traditional contender for HF.  About that time was when the 991 (without the A) was introduced and that looked like the way to fly.  Not long after that the Icom 7300 was introduced.  That forced me from an all in one radio to a Kenwood TM-V71A.  The 71A is a fine radio and it's easy to take outside and operate from a picnic bench or from inside the shack, or it can go in a vehicle.  But the real winning move in this was the Icom 7300.  It is an outstanding radio that is a joy to use.  I think if you look at the numbers of radios sold you will find that the 7300 has probably outsold the 991A and all other HF radios by a large margin.  Before you decide, look into the the 7300 further.

Having said that I get that an all in one will take up less space and perhaps the decision might be driven by how much / how often your are going to use which bands.  For shooting the breeze on UHF/VHF repeaters it's frankly not that big of a deal which radio you use, imo.  As always the antenna will be a big factor in where you can reach.  But if HF is going to a significant part of your ops I can't see how you could miss with the 7300.

That one is already on the radar.  Been going back and forth between the 991a and the 7300.  Current situation was to get a decent uhf/vhf that I could use later when I can setup a proper HF station.  I was about to pull the trigger on the 991a until I can back and read your post    keep going back and forth between buying a dual band for now and looking at the 7300 later or just grab the 991a now.  it appears that the larger display on the 7300 also has a faster refresh rate and more useful,  but previous radios didn't have any of that anyway.  I have heard many people say that the audio on the 991a is amazing.  so here I am confused again.

[Electro Fan]

Been off the air for about 15 years now and wanted a fresh start with a new radio.  Haven't kept up with the latest and greatest, but I was looking at the Yaesu FT-991A as a catch all for me.  I like HF and we have a repeater on 440MHz. Does any one have experience with this model and if so what is your take on it ?  is there better similar option for same bandwidth and size ?   Thanks ahead of time for any information or opinions.

About 2/3s of the way through your off the air hiatus I got on the air.  When I first got my licenses I was looking at a Kenwood 590 which seemed to be a strong traditional contender for HF.  About that time was when the 991 (without the A) was introduced and that looked like the way to fly.  Not long after that the Icom 7300 was introduced.  That forced me from an all in one radio to a Kenwood TM-V71A.  The 71A is a fine radio and it's easy to take outside and operate from a picnic bench or from inside the shack, or it can go in a vehicle.  But the real winning move in this was the Icom 7300.  It is an outstanding radio that is a joy to use.  I think if you look at the numbers of radios sold you will find that the 7300 has probably outsold the 991A and all other HF radios by a large margin.  Before you decide, look into the the 7300 further.

Having said that I get that an all in one will take up less space and perhaps the decision might be driven by how much / how often your are going to use which bands.  For shooting the breeze on UHF/VHF repeaters it's frankly not that big of a deal which radio you use, imo.  As always the antenna will be a big factor in where you can reach.  But if HF is going to a significant part of your ops I can't see how you could miss with the 7300.

That one is already on the radar.  Been going back and forth between the 991a and the 7300.  Current situation was to get a decent uhf/vhf that I could use later when I can setup a proper HF station.  I was about to pull the trigger on the 991a until I can back and read your post    keep going back and forth between buying a dual band for now and looking at the 7300 later or just grab the 991a now.  it appears that the larger display on the 7300 also has a faster refresh rate and more useful,  but previous radios didn't have any of that anyway.  I have heard many people say that the audio on the 991a is amazing.  so here I am confused again.

Everyone generally likes and promotes what they use so that's just something you have to factor in, of course.

Don't know where you are located but I think it would be great if you could play with both.  Not sure if HRO has their stores open or if one is near you but they used to carry both and generally put both on display.  I think DX Engineering also sells both.

As I mentioned, when I was getting started the Kenwood 590SG was the radio I really wanted.  When I saw the user interface on the 991 I was really intrigued.  In some respects the 991 and the 7300 look similar but when you see how nice it is to operate the 7300 it's really really enjoyable.  For sure it would have been a mistake to go with an old school dial like the 590 rather than a panadapter - and I think when you compare the 991A and the 7300's panadapter/UI you will see why the 7300 has sold so many units.  With the panadapter you can see an entire band - so rather than tuning up and down the dial and listening to find an opportunity or to hear if anyone is on a frequency you can see all the signals your rig can hear, and you can see at a glance how strong they are relative to one another.  Then once you pick a signal of interest you can zoom in with a more narrow span and see that signal up close including a detailed heat (audio frequency distribution) map of the signal.  You can see how close you are to another signal and if your signal or the other signal has any splatter - which you won't because the 7300 puts out a very clean signal.  With the stock mic on SSB you will get all sorts of people complimenting you on how good the audio is, and you will probably bump into a small ton of other 7300 users.  It's the closest thing there is to a no brainer in it's price class. 

If you decide to do FT8 the 7300 plays great with a computer and WJSTX and JT Alert, and pskreporter. 

https://www.dxzone.com/wsjt-x-2-2-0-new-version-available-to-download/

https://hamapps.com/

https://pskreporter.info/pskmap.html

Not everyone is a fan of FT8 but in the so-so 11 year cycles it's a good way to do DX and with pskreporter it's a great way to see where your signals are landing around the world, and with what signal strength.

btw, don't forget to get your computer logging and online QSLing setup including LoTW.

I think just in the last month or so Icom released new firmware for the 7300 that has more features including one or two that users are pretty high on.

The 7300 100% deserves your best look-see.  73

Edit: 



this guy and other reviews I've seen think the 991A is a very good performing radio but the general consensus is that the 7300 UI is better; I think with the panadapter the UI is pretty powerful and important but maybe that's offset by a good enough UI plus the built in VHF/UHF.  Looks like you have two good options. 

[Electro Fan]

I tried to find some display captures from the 7300 and couldn't quite find what I was looking for.  These don't really do justice to what you can see on the 7300 but there is something very compelling about the responsiveness and the detail of what you can see on the panadapter, and the ways that you can view your ops.  I know it sounds kind of goofy to put emphasis on the visual representation of what you are listening to and how you use visual navigation to facilitate audio mgmt, but somehow the whole experience put together is nearly magical.  These are some zoomed in views; couldn't find bandwide views.

[hostile]

Ok, I am convinced, plus I have always been an Icom fan.  So the curve ball is, since as stated before, no room for the HF antennas currently, I am going to get the Icom-9700 and then later when the area allows, twin it with the Icom-7300 or whatever variant of that future time.  Thanks for talking me out of a potential mistake.

[Electro Fan]

Wow, a 9700 and 7300 - that is a very cool combination.  Probably some synergy in learning/using two similar UIs.  One of my bucket list items is EME - I think it’s possible to do that with the 9700.  On the early 9700s there was some issue about keeping the VFO spot on, and I think were some attempts by users and Icom to make hardware and/or firmware mods, some of which might have included interfacing the 9700 to GPSDOs.  I think it’s since been sorted but now that I realize I was was selling the 7300 and also the 9700 I thought I should mention it.  Probably worth a double check to make sure this is old news that is now a non-issue.

Looks like the 9700 works for EME
https://stationproject.blog/category/eme/

Edit:
For anyone interested in EME the video in the link is outstanding.  At about 1:15 in his presentation he does some Q&A that describes and quantifies his use of a GPSDO mod/integration with the 9700 that might help you decide whether the internal oscillator drift will or won’t be an issue for you; I guess I’d be inclined to do the mod, maybe with the same Leo Bodnar kit he is using.

[A.Z.]

Hello "hostile"  a question for you, if I may dare

When you write

So the curve ball is, since as stated before, no room for the HF antennas currently

Do you mean that you have absolutely NO ROOM for ANY antenna or just that you don't have room for a full size antenna ?

I'm asking since there are some HF antenna (like this for example) which may fit in restricted spaces and get you on air 

[hostile]

Hello "hostile"  a question for you, if I may dare

When you write

So the curve ball is, since as stated before, no room for the HF antennas currently

Do you mean that you have absolutely NO ROOM for ANY antenna or just that you don't have room for a full size antenna ?

I'm asking since there are some HF antenna (like this for example) which may fit in restricted spaces and get you on air 

I could probable sneak up some of the smaller hidden antennas but think it would frustrate me since I still have some nice larger antenna.  I always have an old Icom-745 in storage and a beat up 706-mk2g that I can borrow for the time being.   I am still debating it all, but feel like it would be nice to get into some of the more exotic uhf/vhf stuff that wasn't happening when I was last active.  From my understanding the HF bands are still pretty dead but hopefully start picking up.   
Thank you for linking that antenna,  looks nice.  I am assuming it should still be 1/4 - 1/2 wavelength above ground which would be hard here, but think my father would absolutely love it.   

[A.Z.]

I could probable sneak up some of the smaller hidden antennas but think it would frustrate me since I still have some nice larger antenna.  I always have an old Icom-745 in storage and a beat up 706-mk2g that I can borrow for the time being.   I am still debating it all, but feel like it would be nice to get into some of the more exotic uhf/vhf stuff that wasn't happening when I was last active.  From my understanding the HF bands are still pretty dead but hopefully start picking up.   
Thank you for linking that antenna,  looks nice.  I am assuming it should still be 1/4 - 1/2 wavelength above ground which would be hard here, but think my father would absolutely love it.

I see, well, if you prefer waiting until you'll have space for some better antenna, that's up to you

Bands aren't to their best, for sure, but they seem to be opening up a bit; as for putting the antenna up, for sure as high and free is the usual rule, but if the approach is "better than nothing", then it will work even at lower height and/or installed as an inverted vee; although, if placed low, on 80m (and maybe 40) it will be quite NVIS ... but it may still be good for ragchewing  on those bands

[fourfathom]

I used to work the world on HF using a "Slinky Dipole" tacked to my apartment wall.  (Morse code gear, that was all I could afford.)  Even a poor antenna is better than no antenna.

[A.Z.]

I used to work the world on HF using a "Slinky Dipole" tacked to my apartment wall.  (Morse code gear, that was all I could afford.)  Even a poor antenna is better than no antenna.

that was my point, putting up an antenna and getting on air, then when time and space permits, one may even put up a cubical quad for the 160m band but till then the "poor antenna" will at least allow getting back on air, and may even give surprising results

[edit]

although, sincerely I'd rather use a linear loaded doublet like the one at the link I posted than a slinky

[hostile]

I used to work the world on HF using a "Slinky Dipole" tacked to my apartment wall.  (Morse code gear, that was all I could afford.)  Even a poor antenna is better than no antenna.

that was my point, putting up an antenna and getting on air, then when time and space permits, one may even put up a cubical quad for the 160m band but till then the "poor antenna" will at least allow getting back on air, and may even give surprising results

[edit]

although, sincerely I'd rather use a linear loaded doublet like the one at the link I posted than a slinky

I would probably go down that rout,  just need to decide on what comes first.  the 9700 or 7300.  if money was not a concern it would be both now.  I still lean to the 9700 because I never had a higher end vhf/uhf/1.2G radio with all the options.  I can always grab the other HF rigs I have. just have to dust them off and tune them up.  really want a new HF rig though.    

[A.Z.]

If you already have some others HF rigs, start with an antenna (like that doublet) and then, once you'll be on air, even with an old rig, decide where you want to go

my 2 cents

[A.Z.]

Had a bit of time in my hands, so decided to put together a NEC model of the antenna and simulate it, the model is the following

Code: [Select]


CM -------------------------------------
CM lldoublet.nec : linear loaded doublet
CM -------------------------------------
CE

' design symbols
SY vspc=0.05                        ' vertical wire spacing
SY feed=0.10                        ' feedpoint spacing
SY hgtA=10                          ' upper wire heigth
SY hgtB=(hgtA-vspc)                 ' middle wire heigth
SY hgtC=(hgtB-vspc)                 ' lower wire heigth
SY wire=0.00125                     ' wire radius
SY leng=18                          ' total arm wire length
SY arms=((leng-(feed+(2*vspc)))/3)  ' folded arm length
SY freq=7.150                       ' test frequency
SY segL=51                          ' long wires segments
SY segM=1                           ' mid  wires segments
SY segS=1                           ' short wires segments

' feedpoint unloaded sections
GW  1 segM     0 0  hgtA   feed 0 hgtA wire
GW  2 segM     0 0  hgtA  -feed 0 hgtA wire

' horizontal arms
GW 10 segL  feed 0  hgtA   arms 0 hgtA wire
GW 11 segL -feed 0  hgtA  -arms 0 hgtA wire 
GW 12 segL  feed 0  hgtB   arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 13 segL -feed 0  hgtB  -arms 0 hgtB wire 
GW 14 segL  feed 0  hgtC   arms 0 hgtC wire
GW 15 segL -feed 0  hgtC  -arms 0 hgtC wire 

' vertical junctions
GW 20 segS  arms 0  hgtA   arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 21 segS -arms 0  hgtA  -arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 22 segS  feed 0  hgtB   feed 0 hgtC wire
GW 23 segS -feed 0  hgtB  -feed 0 hgtC wire

' ground parameters
GE -1
GN 2 0 0 0 13 0.005

' wires loading
LD 5 0 0 0 58000000

' feedpoint
EK
EX 0 1 1 0 1. 0 0

' initial frequency
FR 0 0 0 0 freq 0

' end of model
EN


the antenna uses the original size (see here) and in the model it's placed at 10m (33ft) above ground, willing to simulate different heights you may just change the "hgtA" symbol in the NEC file; at any rate, the image below shows the antenna vertical and horizontal radiation patterns on the 80, 40, 20, 15, 10 and 6 meters bands



as predicted (assuming my NEC model is correct), on 80m the antenna is NVIS, but things start improving on 40m and, on 20m the radiation angle is good for DX; given that it's cheap and quite easy to build and that it may fit in a relatively small space, I believe it may be worth some consideration; again, it's not a beam or a full size dipole, but if you want to get on air even w/o having room for a full size antenna, that doublet may be ok

Notice that if you can't run the 300Ohm line all the way to the shack ingress, a workaround may be running the line down to about 1ft from ground, connect it to a balun (the original design uses a 1:1, if you want you may experiment with a 2:1 or a 4:1) and from the balun, run a length of coax to the ATU in your shack

[hostile]

Had a bit of time in my hands, so decided to put together a NEC model of the antenna and simulate it, the model is the following

Code: [Select]


CM -------------------------------------
CM lldoublet.nec : linear loaded doublet
CM -------------------------------------
CE

' design symbols
SY vspc=0.05                        ' vertical wire spacing
SY feed=0.10                        ' feedpoint spacing
SY hgtA=10                          ' upper wire heigth
SY hgtB=(hgtA-vspc)                 ' middle wire heigth
SY hgtC=(hgtB-vspc)                 ' lower wire heigth
SY wire=0.00125                     ' wire radius
SY leng=18                          ' total arm wire length
SY arms=((leng-(feed+(2*vspc)))/3)  ' folded arm length
SY freq=7.150                       ' test frequency
SY segL=51                          ' long wires segments
SY segM=1                           ' mid  wires segments
SY segS=1                           ' short wires segments

' feedpoint unloaded sections
GW  1 segM     0 0  hgtA   feed 0 hgtA wire
GW  2 segM     0 0  hgtA  -feed 0 hgtA wire

' horizontal arms
GW 10 segL  feed 0  hgtA   arms 0 hgtA wire
GW 11 segL -feed 0  hgtA  -arms 0 hgtA wire 
GW 12 segL  feed 0  hgtB   arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 13 segL -feed 0  hgtB  -arms 0 hgtB wire 
GW 14 segL  feed 0  hgtC   arms 0 hgtC wire
GW 15 segL -feed 0  hgtC  -arms 0 hgtC wire 

' vertical junctions
GW 20 segS  arms 0  hgtA   arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 21 segS -arms 0  hgtA  -arms 0 hgtB wire
GW 22 segS  feed 0  hgtB   feed 0 hgtC wire
GW 23 segS -feed 0  hgtB  -feed 0 hgtC wire

' ground parameters
GE -1
GN 2 0 0 0 13 0.005

' wires loading
LD 5 0 0 0 58000000

' feedpoint
EK
EX 0 1 1 0 1. 0 0

' initial frequency
FR 0 0 0 0 freq 0

' end of model
EN


the antenna uses the original size (see here) and in the model it's placed at 10m (33ft) above ground, willing to simulate different heights you may just change the "hgtA" symbol in the NEC file; at any rate, the image below shows the antenna vertical and horizontal radiation patterns on the 80, 40, 20, 15, 10 and 6 meters bands



as predicted (assuming my NEC model is correct), on 80m the antenna is NVIS, but things start improving on 40m and, on 20m the radiation angle is good for DX; given that it's cheap and quite easy to build and that it may fit in a relatively small space, I believe it may be worth some consideration; again, it's not a beam or a full size dipole, but if you want to get on air even w/o having room for a full size antenna, that doublet may be ok

Notice that if you can't run the 300Ohm line all the way to the shack ingress, a workaround may be running the line down to about 1ft from ground, connect it to a balun (the original design uses a 1:1, if you want you may experiment with a 2:1 or a 4:1) and from the balun, run a length of coax to the ATU in your shack

thanks for all the information. 
Big issue here is the height.  I have a one story house with no trees in the yard.  So anything that sticks up too much over the house is probably going to ruffle some feathers, alone with now tower or trees to suspend anything from.  You have given me some food for thought.  I will grab my old HF out of storage and see if I can figure out a work around.

[A.Z.]

Hmmm ... what about a "flagpole" antenna ? You may place a flag at the top and it will become a stealth antenna !

see here

https://sites.google.com/view/kn9b/hf-flagpole-antenna

[edit]

also see

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dxengineering.wordpress.com/2016/10/19/building-a-flagpole-antenna-in-an-hoa/amp/

and, if you seek for "stealth antenna" or "camouflage antenna" you'll find other ideas

HTH

[edit #2]

also check this totally invisible multiband dipole

http://www.hamblog.co.uk/how-to-construct-a-multi-band-dipole-using-speaker-wire/

or either

https://www.simplehamradioantennas.com/2019/01/perfect-hoa-friendly-antenna-discrete.html?m=1

not perfect, but again, given the limitations...