[ICOM] IC970H vs TS2000

Adam Farson farson at shaw.ca
Fri Apr 29 01:35:03 EDT 2005


Hi Johnny,

Here is a thought for you.

To address the question as to why the radio manufacturers are placing far
more emphasis on HF and HF/6m rigs than on VHF/UHF all-mode radios:

1. Many amateur HF transceivers find their way into non-amateur
applications. This seems to be especially true of Icom. The same cannot be
said for V/U all-mode rigs.

2. The HF amateur bands are pretty safe due to international allocations by
the ITU. Due to the long-haul nature of HF communications, one particular
country could not guarantee that all amateur traffic from beyond its borders
would vacate an HF band which it attempted to reallocate unilaterally to
another service. As we know, radio propagation is no respecter of borders.

3. By contrast, the VHF and UHF bands (2m and above) are not as well
protected (except for the internationally-allocated Amateur-Satellite
sub-bands). The relatively short-range, line-of-sight propagation of VHF and
UHF signals (discounting anoprop)  lends itself to national and regional,
rather than international frequency management. Thus, the radio
manufacturers will always perceive a threat to amateur bands above 54 MHz,
whether one actually exists or not at any given time. Such perceptions are a
powerful dissuasive factor in product-planning decisions. (220 MHz is a
prime example of this thinking.)

4. Demand is also a factor; the vast majority of amateur 2m and 70cm
operators seem content to stick with FM/repeater operation, via a small
handheld or mobile radio. There may not be a sufficient number of VHF/UHF
weak-signal ops to justify a bold new R&D initiative such as an IC-970A/H
replacement.

6m is probably not under severe threat from other services, as the demise of
Band 1 TV has released the 50-54 MHz block in much of the world. 

Cheers for now, 73,
Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ

-----Original Message-----
From: icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:icom-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On
Behalf Of JS
Sent: 28 April 2005 19:07
To: ICOM Reflector
Subject: Re: [ICOM] IC970H vs TS2000

Hi Dave,

I once owned an IC970H with ALL the options / modules fitted in.  I
eventually disposed of it about two years ago and replaced it with an
IC910H.  I also own a Kenwood TS790 as well.

IC970H was once the flat ship V/U rig from ICOM .  However, due to aging of
components, the plastic trimmers in various PLL units are deterioating.  To
me, servicing of the rig becomes a problem.

The advancement in V/U rig design in the past decade is far less than that
of the HF/50Mhz rigs.  Today, we have IC7800, IC756pro3 which imply a entire
new design concept in transceivers.  Looking at the V/U rigs, it seems we do
not have much improvement over the past years.

Your question will sure generate different views from Kenwood and ICOM
groups.  While it is too subjective for me to comment about IC970H's
performance, servicing and maintenance due to age is my main concern because
I am not a radio man by profession.

73

Johnny VR2XMC


Scanned by WinProxy
http://www.Ositis.com/


More information about the Icom mailing list