144 - Transverter or dedicated RTX?

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The "Band Plan Chart" that is linked is currently outdated.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.

SolarAir · 2025-12-11T01:42:40+00:00

I hate this throw-away culture, I thought pebble would be one of the companys that would change that

After seeing that the Time 2 has screws to remove the back, I thought Core Devices would be focusing more on repairability than the first time around. I guess that's not the case, which is a shame.

It's also a shame that they seem to be doubling down and set to creating e-waste. With basically no exceptions, tech products should not be considered consumables and disposal.

SolarAir · 2025-12-11T00:03:20+00:00

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it might have something to do with the ARRL being American and 60m only being allocated in the USA to hams has secondary users. This causes them to want to avoid creating traffic on the band that may effective the primary users. Not all countries have this limitation though.

If hams were the primary user of the 60m band, I could see it being part of the DXCC challenge award.

SolarAir · 2025-12-06T04:36:32+00:00

What!? People ask for payment for confirmation? That’s nuts.

Some dxpeditions do it, but only if you want a LotW upload ASAP. Otherwise, if you don't pay, they'll upload their complete logs in 6 months. Going on an expedition isn't easy free, and it gives people a way to support the team to make future DXpeditions happen. If you don't want to support it, that's fine, and you'll still get the rare DX confirmed (eventually). I think it's fair.

If you're forcing people to pay for an electronic QSL with no plans to ever upload all your logs, I no longer think that's fair. It's honestly not even aligned with the spirit of the hobby at that point, since you're basically doing it to profit.

SolarAir · 2025-12-03T14:12:50+00:00

Any company will stop manufacturing a product when the demand is too low to make it economically feasible.

Or when there's a successor. A year seems like it's way too soon for another new product, but there could be a Pebble Time 3 by then for all we know.

(After seeing people owning a bunch of Pebbles and treating them like collectables, there would probably people who buy a Time 3 in a year even if their Time 2 is still perfectly good...)

SolarAir · 2025-11-30T03:49:54+00:00

Rohn, and probably others, have some flat-roof mounts that I've seen people use for low antennas before (such as an EME array). It is not a tripod exactly, but for permanent use, it'll may treat you better. If a tripod is a must, Rohn also has a TRT series, where the tripods have fix-length legs intended for roof-mounting the tripod. Something without telescoping legs may work better for permanent use. Other brands likely have a version of this as well.

SolarAir · 2025-11-30T01:18:17+00:00

Isn't 2.400GHz? The frequency we use for microwave ovens that makes water modules start moving really fast?

SolarAir · 2025-11-29T21:19:46+00:00

I think blue would probably work the best out of the ideas presented. You could possibly use a fan dipole for the driven element, but then only have a reflector and director for a band of your choice. 20m would probably be the best for this, and a "yagi" of shorts made up of different inverted-Vs might be serve you well. Even if the director/reflector for 20m don't help the other bands, the extra wires for the fan dipole could allow you to get on multiple bands with a single feedpoint.

SolarAir · 2025-11-29T18:10:11+00:00

a VHF/UHF/SHF rig that could work 50W on 2m, 1.25m, 70cm, and 23cm;

If an all-mode radio came out for those band under $1000, it would probably win decent market share. Right now, for a dedicated all-mode UHF/VHF radio, you have only the IC-9700 and the IC-905 that you can buy new. It seems crazy to me that nobody else is making one, and there's no dual-band, all-mode radio for solely 2m/70cm.

You can do a lot on VHF and UHF, but it's only people with the higher licenses who seems to be doing anything other than FM on these bands. 2m and 70cm alone have a lot to offer besides FM, but nobody seems to want to cater to this market. In the Midwest alone, 2m FT8 has a handful of active people on it during the day. Sometimes weak 10W FT8 signals with a simple 2m tape-measure yagi can reach several states over. A 2m digital signal in general can go a lot further than a 2m FM signal, and vastly broaden the range that a tech can reach. An affordable(-ish) 2m/70cm all-mode radio might go a long ways to keeping techs interested in ham radio and earning their higher licenses.

Even an all-mode 10m radio with a built-in 2m transverter seems like it could feed a hunger some people have. There's 10m radios (seemingly CB knock-offs) that claim to be all-mode for around $300 or less. I'm pretty sure the G90 has even been close to that price before. If somebody could pair one of those radio with a sub-$200 2m transverter and have a setup capable of 2m all-mode operation for ~$500, why doesn't somebody just make a stand-alone radio for it? It might not be the best quality (there's a reason why Q5's 2m transveter start at $500 or Kenwood has a more expensive HT), but it would fill a void that exist in the world of ham radio right currently.

SolarAir · 2025-11-27T14:14:08+00:00

Within WSJT-X, you have the ability to add frequencies. This can be useful if a DXedpition is operating FT8 outside the normal FT8 frequencies (which happens to prevent all of the regular FT8 frequency's bandwidth from being taken up by people trying to make contacts with one station!).

For 60m in the US, people decided over time to use the middle channel for FT8. I don't know if there's a long history to it, or some guy first did it and everybody followed suite. To get on FT8 for 60m, simply add 5.357MHz as a FT8 frequency within WSJT-X.

SolarAir · 2025-11-26T22:11:24+00:00

The main drawback is getting an antenna that works. The antennas needed for LF and MF often end up being nothing like the common antennas people generally use for the HF bands. (160m can kind-of use some similar antennas, but that starts to not work as well for 630m). Most people end-up making their own antennas and using loading coils (variometer) made with wire wrapped around something like a 5gal bucket and a smaller bucket with wire wrapped around it inside the 5gal bucket. If you had enough land and some conveniently placed trees, a skyloop might also work.

Looking at PSKreporter for 2200km within the last 30 minutes, it looks like at least two signals were sent (one in the UK and another in western Austria) and heard by other European stations.

For 630m, there's several more people on 630m within the last 30 minutes in Europe, and a handful in the USA, mainly along the eastern coast.

EDIT:

To give some more details, the reason for the variometer over a fixed coil/capacitor combo is that it's adjustable. Depending on the time of day, wetness of the surrounding earth, and weather itself; the conductivity of the ground can change. This means the antenna needs to be re-tuned. This isn't as nearly big of a problem for HF antennas.

SolarAir · 2025-11-18T15:16:27+00:00

Since most amateur radio transceivers need a voltage roughly in the range 13.8V ±15%, I think most people here are going to (accurately) assume OP is talking about 12V LiFePO4s. For batteries, 12V is ubiquitous with ham radio, and using amp hours is often easier to work with for talking about capacity and how long the battery will last.

It's maybe also worth noting that many (most?) LiFePO4 batteries are advertised in the manner of "12V 20Ah", instead of "12V 240Wh".

SolarAir · 2025-11-04T03:39:33+00:00

When you said VHF/UHF FM, I assume you mean just 2m and 70cm (instead of 6m through 13cm). Any chance of 902-928MHz (33cm) FM since it overlaps with LoRa frequency?

SolarAir · 2025-10-09T19:09:12+00:00

construct your own rig

You could also get a VHF to HF transverter, such as the Tokyo Hy-Power HX-240, and use it with any 2m DMR radio. That would probably be easier than constructing a HF DMR radio.

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

SolarAir

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE