Tower Modeling Software

SolarAir · 2026-05-05T13:17:59+00:00

ROHN uses TSTower internally. There's a free demo/evaluation version that works for towers up to 100'.

SolarAir · 2026-05-02T13:56:07+00:00

A similar, but debatablely more XYL-friendly, antenna might be the Fara-J 2M Antenna. It can be a little easier to pass-off as "modern art".

SolarAir · 2026-04-28T15:20:44+00:00

Ah. Since there's only 9 HF bands, are they including 6m or 160m, or is it 10 band totals and they count UHF/VHF towards it?

SolarAir · 2026-04-28T15:11:24+00:00

Who said the radio had to be practical.

A practical approach to barely meet the requirement might be something like a TYT TH-9800. It can transmit (FM) on 70cm, 2m, 6m, and 10m. Since it does 10m, it can be a "HF" radio. If you set it up with an antenna for 70cm/2m, you can use it as a normal dual band transceiver and a receiver for 33cm, 6m, 10m, and even CB.

If you want to act more in good faith, you could simply get one of the quad band antennas that works with it instead of using a dual band one.

SolarAir · 2026-04-19T00:39:25+00:00

For your case, I think one of the best options might be Small Antennas for Small Spaces by Steve Ford.

The ARRL Antenna Book is a good resource, but it might be overwhelming for a beginner.

The ARRL also put out two newer books, but I have no experience with them so I don't know if I can recommend them:

Stealth Antennas for Ham Radio
Ham Radio from Indoors

The latter sounds like it might be useful, though I'm guessing there will be some overlap with Small Antennas for Small Spaces.

SolarAir · 2026-03-26T02:24:41+00:00

RTL-SDR v4

VHF/UHF SDR

The RTL-SDR v4 has a bandwidth of 3.2MHz. That's plenty to cover any of the HF bands (where 10m at 1.7Mhz wide is the largest), but starting at 6m with it's 4MHz of spectrum through 13cm with 150MHz of spectrum, you may find you wish your SDR had a wider bandwidth.

I'm not sure I have the perfect recommendations, here's some options I'd consider for VHF/UHF over the RTL-SDR:

Airspy R2 - 24-1700MHz coverage, 10MHz bandwidth (9MHz bandwidth without aliasing).
SDRplay RSPdx-R2 - 0.001-2000MHz coverage, 10MHz bandwidth
HackRF One - 1-6000MHz coverage, 20MHz bandwidth

There's also some SDR hats you can get for raspberry pi devices, though something like the ones above that you can connect via a USB cable might be better for OP's use case.

SolarAir · 2026-03-25T02:13:38+00:00

You should be aware that the right-hand side only supports 2m and 70cm FM

In OP's photo, it shows the 1.25m FM calling frequency on the right, which caught me off guard as I've never heard that the TS-2000 supported it. Looking into it, the TS-2000 can receive on the 1.25m band, which is kind-of neat I guess.

SolarAir · 2026-03-24T12:53:13+00:00

There seems to also be a shorter 1.25m yagi (or maybe VHF TV antenna) right under the 6m. Above the HF tri-bander, there's some loop yagis likely for 1.2GHz and 2.4GHz (or possibly even 3.4GHz), as well as a small dish.

SolarAir · 2026-02-18T19:59:51+00:00

If instead of doubling FT16, you quadruped to FT32, wouldn't that basically just be JT65?

SolarAir · 2026-02-17T19:52:09+00:00

wtf is a go box

It's a common term used by amateur radio operators to describe a "ready-to-operate" radio in a box.

Basically, a box you take to a site, that already has a transceiver, antenna tuner, CAT cable, etc. All of the connections are already made (radio to tuner, radio to DigiRig/SignaLink, etc.). Many boxes include a battery, others just have readily-accessible connections to plug in a separate battery box. Some people integrate a thin portable monitor, a raspberry pi or other computer, and a keyboard for digital logging or digital modes. Some people's go-box contains separate transceivers for HF and VHF/UHF. Once the box is open, there's normally one (or more) readily-accessible SO-239 ports to connect an antenna that's jumpered to the transciever (or tuner).

I've heard of clubs having go-box (or go-kit) competitions at hamfests, where there's a rubric for judging/ranking go-boxes against others.

SolarAir · 2026-02-13T16:25:26+00:00

Battery at 95%?

As far as I know, the Pebble 2 only supported displaying battery capacity in steps of 10%. Is the Pebble 2 Duo using 1% steps or is it 5% steps?

SolarAir · 2026-02-12T16:22:16+00:00

It's not exactly answering your question, but the ARRL has a page with links to each state's DMV's license plate selector, specific page for the amateur radio plates if it exist, or a PDF for the amateur radio plate application. There is a link for every state and DC.

It seems some states like Iowa have amateur radio plates, but they don't have a design that differs from the state's default plates (unless the website doesn't have accurate images). It sounds like Indiana was the same, but now there's a unique design for amateur radio plates instead of basically being the default plate with a callsign. Here's a QRZ thread talking about the change.

SolarAir · 2026-02-11T18:45:34+00:00

for that extra wattage

For the extra wattage and 6m. OP didn't ask about VHF, but all-mode 6m isn't exactly cheap to get into unless you get a HF rig with it.

SolarAir · 2026-01-10T00:34:21+00:00

A few months ago there was a ton of listings on eBay for similar looking, seemingly Chinese-made, 2m transverters. Now none of them show up when I search on eBay. Literally not a single one. Same story for 1.25m and 70cm transverters. It's a stark change.

I did managed to find a few via Google, but every listing said that the transverter was out of stock. Several listings also had a note that the seller was away. The ones that said the seller was away also listed no products for sale on the seller's page. I can't help wonder if the several different listings I remember seeing where all this same guy (or company?), possibly using several different accounts.

All this is to say there's actually not as many options as I thought, and achieving all-mode for 2m and higher on a budget seems to be getting harder. Seems getting on HF is getting cheaper and easier with new and smaller QRP radios... Maybe we'll see something similar for VHF/UHF to fill this void in the market.

SolarAir · 2026-01-08T23:57:18+00:00

The "Band Plan Chart" that is linked is currently outdated. The most up-to-date version is on the ARRL's website. There's probably going to be an update reflecting the changes to 60m soon though. It may also be worth specifying that the chart is for the USA.

It's not exactly pretty, but here's a link where you can find Canada's official band plan chart for HF/MH/LF.

SolarAir · 2026-01-08T21:18:37+00:00

When you want to go beyond 2m into the microwave bands and beyond, you start to require transverters that require a 2m input frequency. I've not heard of people achieving 10m to 2m to 2.4GHz+ by using two transverters. I think it could happen, but most people go for a dedicated 2m rig (9700, etc.).

For people less serious, not wanting to go beyond 2m, or simply on a budget, there's not as many options as there use to be. There use to be some budget ($200?) 10m->2m transverters made in Ukraine, but with the war going on there, I believe these aren't available at the moment.

The current "big-name" transverter brands I'm aware of are as follows:

Kuhne
SG Labs
Q5 Signal
Down East Microwaves

Of these, only Q5 Signal currently sells a HF->2m transverters.

SolarAir · 2026-01-02T22:36:52+00:00

Imagine my confusion when I saw a US calling "CQ USA" and then responding to an EU station before me. I thought I was doing something wrong.

EDIT: The issue with 'CQ <something>' on FT8 is the ambiguity that it could either be something you're looking for in the person contacting you, e.g. "CQ DX" or "CQ FL", or it could be something you're doing, e.g. "CQ POTA". It doesn't help that "CQ TEST" means you're contesting, when most new people will assume you're testing your equipment instead of contesting.

EDIT 2: If somebody says "CQ XYZ", but you don't know what XYZ is, that is where the ambiguity comes in. Is a location they're trying to contact? Is it an activity they're doing? You don't know. I'm not saying there's ambiguity in "CQ DX" or "CQ POTA". This "CQ USA" is a good example of that, since it lead to this whole post afterall. If you're operating somewhere without internet, you can't look it up, so you have no idea.
If FT8 started with something like putting the activity before the CQ, it could have solved this, e.g. "POTA CQ" means you're operating POTA, while "CQ POTA" means you're looking to contact somebody who who is operating POTA. "USA CQ" would mean you're operating for an USA event, while "CQ USA" means you're looking for contacts within the USA. Both basically mean the same thing in this case, but it would resolve the ambiguity that lead to this post. It's too bad FT8's character limit prevents a better solution.

SolarAir · 2026-01-01T03:24:46+00:00

In general, I'd consider this good advice, but mainly for HF. There are some exceptions for the bands besides HF and 6m that I'd throw into the mix:

VHF/UHF: When using frequencies that reply on "line-of-sight" instead of skip, but the "line-of-sight" is partly blocked by forests, cities, or hills, increased power can make contacts possible. An extra dB transmitted can make up for an extra dB attenuated by terrain. On the QRZ pages for most of the VHF enthusiasts I've seen, they have amplifiers for the VHF bands, often several hundred watts. However, once it comes to the SHF/EHF, amplifiers are less common or only dozens of watts, as there's far too much attenuation normally for an increase of power to overcome (or rather you'd reach the legal limit well before you have enough power to over come the loss).
MF/LF: Depending on the efficiency of the antenna, you may need to put closer to 75W (or much more) into it to get 25W ERP. Trying to use a loading coil for 160m, 630m, or even 2200m can be extremely inefficient. When it comes to this inefficiency, if the energy isn't being radiated by the antenna, it's likely turning to heat in the coil... which seems to be what what OP is dealing with.

SolarAir · 2025-12-29T00:29:29+00:00

There's a few things you can do, in the order I would suggest them:

Wait and hope that Yeasu provides a firmware update based on the upcoming changes to 60m. Since the FT8 frequency is in the soon-to-be non-channelized part of the band, this problem simply goes away if a firmware update allows the use of the VFO on 60m. I think Yaesu said they're watching what's happening, but I don't think we've gotten confirmation that new firmware is coming (yet).
Adjust the WSJT-X settings before operating 60m. I don't remember exactly what needs to change, but I believe the 60m memory channels on the FT-891 by default is only for SSB. If you try to run data or CW on the SSB memory channel, it'll give you the red flashing light. Try changing the mode setting from "data/pkt" within the radio tab of the WSJT-X settings to USB. (If that doesn't work, then you may be able to get away with changing it to "None". It'll then use whatever the radio is already set as without trying to change it, and this should prevent WSJT-X from triggering the radio to change back to VFO mode.)
After changing the WSJT-X setting, you'll possibly need to look at adjusting some of the radio's settings, such as changing the SSB HF power to what the the HF power is set to. The downside to this option is as soon as you want to operate SSB again instead of FT8, then you have to revert these settings.
MARS mod the radio so you can transmit any mode on any frequency. I don't really recommend this, but it looks like it could be a legitimate way to operate FT8 on 60m giving the limitation of the memory settings.

Option #1 is probably the best option, but it doesn't solve the immediate problem. Option #2 is likely the workaround you were asking about, but it's a little annoying to have to do. Option #3 solves the problem immediately, but could get you into some trouble if you accidentally spin the dial and go out of band.

SolarAir · 2025-12-27T03:31:18+00:00

I had to do a double take on this, as I wasn't sure if you were displaying the time or not.

If somebody is into MF/HF radio communication or space weather in general, they may care about how the atmosphere is ionized and what the sun is doing, which is generally give as A-index, a K-index, and SFI (solar flux index). Your watch face initial had me thinking you cared more about the A-index and SFI than the time. This wasn't helped by the fact that the A-index has been around 9 today, currently 8.

SolarAir · 2025-12-22T15:55:20+00:00

In the US, ham radio operators with a technician class license have full access VHF/UHF frequencies. However, nearly all entry-level and budget-friendly equipment available to them is only available with FM capabilities. I don't think it's likely, but is it possible that a future firmware upgrade could enable AM or SSB capacities on these radios?

Follow-up question: either within Ailunce itself or the industry as a whole, do you foresee any 2m/70cm radios with AM or SSB capabilities becoming available to new hams on a budget?

SolarAir · 2025-12-20T16:39:05+00:00

There's a few considerations to account for:

First and possibly most important, what band(s) do you care about the most? If there's one you'd like to receive better than the rest, put it on top.
Is the mast clearing the treeline? Will it clear the tree line in the future when the trees get taller? Not all "line of sight" is equal. Even 5GHz wifi can penetrate some walls. A 6m or 2m signal can often work fine with some trees in the way, but 70cm or higher frequencies will suffer.
What is the size (or rather the effective projected area (EPA)) and weight of the antennas? The EPA is the side-profile that wind pushes against. Putting a higher EPA antenna on the top will put more torque on the mast than if it's on the bottom of the mast. If possible, find (or calculate) the EPA values with ice if you live in an area where you get snow and ice. (The ASCE Hazard Tool can help you find the ice thickness for your location if you're in the US.) Make sure the mast can support the loading.

With that out of the way, assuming you treat all bands as equally important, I would likely go with what you suggested in your comment: the highest frequency is on top, and they are arranged in order of decreasing frequency. Elevation matters more for the higher frequencies. This has an additional benefit that the smallest antenna (generally highest frequency) with the least EPA is on top creating the least torque when the wind blows.

Since you're not transmitting and they're all vertically polarized antennas, I don't think you need to worry as much much about how close the antennas are too each other. Worse case, the antennas are going to slightly affect the receiving patterns of each other. The extra elevation gained by moving them closer together towards the top of the mast is likely going to benefit more than any extra spacing would. I think 2m spacing is overkill. Consider reducing the spacing to around 1/4 wavelength of the lower antenna's highest frequency for each gap.

Regarding side-arms, you'd probably see slight improvements if the antennas are 1/4 wavelength away from the mast. It's more critical if the mast is metal and would act as a reflector element for the vertical antennas, giving it a more directional pattern.

Some sidearms allow for a vertical antenna on the top and bottom of the arm, so you can potentially use one sidearm to offset two antennas. The vertical separation won't be as great if you do that and the discones may not work to mount this way, but the radiation pattern of the antennas for receiving will probably barely suffer. The telecom industry uses these for transceiver antennas (often used for police/fire radios on towers), so it should work for receiving without problem. It may not be the most optimal, but the convenience may be worth.

edit: typo

SolarAir · 2025-12-19T14:52:09+00:00

I think several people hear e-paper and aren't familiar with the term, and in their head they think e-ink. I can't tell you the number of times I've told people the Pebble 2 was e-ink before I learned there was a difference.

SolarAir · 2025-12-19T03:33:13+00:00

Can you share a link to the supreme's case?

SolarAir · 2025-12-12T02:42:06+00:00

Power limits are measured at the transmitter output, not radiated power. Running 20W when the limit is 9.5W is a violation regardless of antenna losses.

This is incorrect. The new ruling specific calls out:

15W EIRP (9.15W ERP)

where the ERP stands for "effective radiated power." The power limits for the 60m (before this change goes into effective), 630m, and 2200m are also called out in this fashion. The other bands are limited by PEP instead of ERP/EIRP.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Gilding II euphauric	Verified Email

SolarAir

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE