Why not do APCO-25?

[VE7TKO]

Why not do APCO-25? That way we can continue in the fine tradition of using used commercial gear.

Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself. It requires extra computer software and hardware that the average ham does not have. You will never find ham radio equipment that comes with the APCO P-25 standard built in. Some day, every ham radio manufacturer will be offering a D-STAR compliant / dual mode radio, because it is an open standard owned by the JARL (Japan Amateur Radio League).

<span style='color:red'>D-STAR was designed by Amateur Radio Operators for Amateur Radio Operators.</span>

That so called fine tradition of using used commercial gear limits the skill that can be learned by the user, because he is prevented from changing anything. Commercial gear has no VFO. You can’t add or delete a channel in the field. If another ham asks you to QSY to a simplex frequency that you haven’t got programmed in, you’re out of luck. If you go on holidays, and want to search the band for repeaters in the area that you are visiting, again you are out of luck. Commercial equipment leaves the end user totally out of the loop as far as control is concerned.

<span style='color:blue'>A D-Star dual mode ham radio has been designed with the needs of hams in mind.</span> The ham radio operator is in full control of the radio. He is free to set it up any way he wishes. The D-STAR 2-meter repeater is not yet a reality. It is just a mater of time before we will see them. They will link together like any other repeater or a D-STAR Internet Gateway can also link them.

Quote: (Can you spell "CELL PHONE"...........KB7UXE)

How to tell the difference? Simple – no monthly cell phone bill and no private line. Like any other ham radio, the world can listen in if they own a D-STAR dual mode ham radio. Only the hams that chose not to participate in this new ham radio technology will be unable to listen in. The person who owns a D-STAR dual mode ham radio will be able to talk to any ham that chooses not to participate in this new ham radio technology. He is the one who owns a real ham radio and chooses to be on the leading edge of technology.

[W9JAB]

[B]commercial radios are not field programmable for a reason. the reason is they are work radios. like the bat lab stuff it's a rock. made for working not for the hobby guy.
get it.
w9jab
JOE

[W5HTW]

"Real ham radio?"

Wow, I sure feel left out with my Drakes. Been fooling myself for years.

[VE7TKO]

Just a short reminder. I am not knocking any other mode, VHF, UHF, SHF or HF. I also use a lot of older and commercial equipment. I am only trying to point out some of the differences between commercial equipment and equipment designed by hams, for hams.

D-STAR cannot be applied to HF radios, so let’s not discuss them in this thread. My sole interest is the use of D-STAR in the 2-meter and 70 cm bands. Currently the only Dual Band / Dual Mode radio available is the ICOM ID800H. More choices will become available as other manufactures play “catch up” with the open protocol from the JARL (Japan Amateur Radio League).

If you want to learn more about D-STAR look at : http://www.icomamerica.com/amateur/dstar/DStarHistory.asp and learn about it’s history.

[KC9ECI]

How much did Icom pay for this commercial?

[N8NOE]

I think it sounds Good, But till it really takes off, Nobody is going to jump with both feet. The Concept is good, and I can see Right off the possable uses, But you have "Icom's (only at this point) D-Star, Yaesu's Wires (Again Yaesu Only)"... Till someone makes it a solid choise, and it gets accepted, I'll hold off.. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[N8NOE]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 19 2005,08:49)]How much did Icom pay for this commercial?
Your NOT disfunctional, Just Mis-interpreted...
"Just because your Paranoid, Doesn't mean there NOT out to get you!"

[g8khs]

Well Shucks, I guess that ol' boy really likes that there D-Star.

Thank you kindly there Jan, reckon we heard you the first time.
Have a nice day from the deep south of the UK.

John:cool:

[ke3d]

But what about Motorola Syntor and the GE Delta radios?
For the appliance operators, there are assembled Control heads that provide the ricebox scan and offer full programmability. Some of the APCO standard radios are that flexible, but being newer no one offers a "kit" to modify them. But you can't get neighboring counties to buy radio systems that interoperate! So why you expect hams to be any different! Just my opinion but I love the low band syntor and the UHF delta that I run in my vehicle. You can't beat 100W for simplex range. Maybe they didn't sell those up the cold north land.

Have fun, it is only a hobby and not a profession. 73 Ed KE3D

[n9vo]

Hey didn't this ad run a week ago. We know you love it but pleeeeez give us a break. Almost makes code/no code look good.

[kb7uxe]

I have a few questions:
how reliable is this if the power goes out?
or maybe how reliant are they on telco/hard wire links?
will it be like a cell site ? a cell site that can;t talk to other cells is useless.
or will they operate just like a ham repeater does now ( if batt backup avail)
When we had an earthquake here in washington,
NO cell /land line phones worked, only ham repeaters ( god bless the hams)
Even the Seattle coast guard resorted to useing their ham radio ops to get help. (go figure.....)

Dan. kb7uxe.

p.s. just how will my key work on this thing??? ...-.-

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (kb7uxe @ Sep. 19 2005,14:54)]I have a few questions:
how reliable is this if the power goes out?
or maybe how reliant are they on telco/hard wire links?
will it be like a cell site ? a cell site that can;t talk to other cells is useless.
or will they operate just like a ham repeater does now ( if batt backup avail)
When we had an earthquake here in washington,
NO cell /land line phones worked, only ham repeaters ( god bless the hams)
Even the Seattle coast guard resorted to useing their ham radio ops to get help. (go figure.....)

Dan. kb7uxe.

p.s. just how will my key work on this thing??? ...-.-
It is just as reliable as any other ham radio or commercial radio product. The only question is how well prepared are you for an emergency. It works radio to radio, and does not need telco/hard wire links. It is 100% radio with the versatility of connecting a laptop for data. This data can be 100% sent via the air waves, but you are free to use the telco/hard wire links, should they be available.

<span style='color:red'>When the 2-meter / 70 cm D-Star repeaters become a reality, you will be able to link them together just like any other repeater. You can chose the more expensive method of linking via the air waves or you can also chose to use the telco/hard wire links.</span>

If your D-STAR ham radio repeater is not touched by the disaster, It too will be working. (God bless the ham who builds one.)

P.S. - Sorry, your key won’t work with this thing unless you decide to build a digital interface for it. It is possible, but why would you want to?

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 19 2005,13:49)]How much did Icom pay for this commercial?
O – zip – zilch!
I am living on a disability pension and enjoy sharing my enthusiasm with my fellow hams.

[g8khs]

Can you say Déjà Vu?

[kb7rky]

Guess he likes Icom A LOT ;)

Well, hey, so do I...my first rig was an Icom IC-2GAT.

This D-STAR stuff sounds interesting, but, like most other operators, I'm going to take this with a grain of salt and look at it from every possible angle before I sink my hard-earned bucks into just such a system. Heck, I'm having a tough time just getting my analog, rock-bound 220 repeater operational. Now, if D-STAR were available on 220...

Doug, KB7RKY

Visit my "Mythbusters" fanpage:

http://church.mythbustersfanclub.com

[k5ktd]

I read everything I can get my hands on regarding ham radio and communications tech in general. I stay up on the most recent developments and emerging technologies. So, what's D-STAR?

[KC9ECI]

I'm thinking a little less of Icom with each passing day.

[wa0kbz]

As a holder of a General Radio Telephone License, downgrade from 1st Class FCC Phone license, We don't allow commerical user to program their own radio PER THE FCC... otherwise we have people on fire frequencies and police frequencies talking like CBers.

I keep up with all the lastest digital modes and I too am living on Social Security Disabliity, and this hobby is the only thing I can do and have loved it for 42 years.

73, Bill WA0LBZ PS keep the flames down please.:) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[n4xts]

D-star will not become a mainstream reality until:

1)-it is widely accepted by the ham community

2)-it offers something that is 10 times better than what it replaces

3)-it is AFFORDABLE enough for the average ham to get it.

P-25 is the default air interface for digital radio in the public service world. Since it has been around for a short while (and due to Motorola making disposable and much shorter life span products), there is now much P25 VHF/UHF gear showing up on the suplus market. So just like other commercial gear that makes it's way into the ham hands, it becomes prevalant.

I can't count how many hams I know that have HT1000's, Sabers, MT1000's etc. They are superior to any imported radio in the ham world as far as performance, reliability and durability. For a digital standard to make it in the ham world AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE is key.

There are a ton of surplus VHF and UHF Quantars out there, and I know of many on the ham bands now. Icom pushes D-Star on 1.2GHz, an impractical and infrastructure heavy band. D-Star backhaul and network component hardware are in the same price point as new P25 publci safety hardware. Let's see:

I can buy a D-Star repeater, spend a bunch of cash, and talk to myself on 1.2 with my 1200 dollar D-Star mobile.

Or I can buy a used VHF Quantar, program it up on 2 meters, and buy a 600 dollar VHF Astro, and talk to everyone (in both analog and P25).

What do you think will be the most viable option?

A local car dealer's moniker is "Price Sells Cars"

So true. Until D-Star is widely available and cheap, it's about what we as hams can afford. And P25 is still more available and affordable than D-Star is right now.

Now I got to get D-Star to be a real ham? In the past couple of years I have heard that I had to get Anderson Power Poles to be a real ham, then I had to get on APRS to be a real ham, and now this. Guess I had better send my 20wpm Extra Class license back to the FCC, and get on freeband with the fake hams.

[kb7uxe]

Quote[/b] (ne0p @ Sep. 20 2005,03:49)]Now I got to get D-Star to be a real ham? In the past couple of years I have heard that I had to get Anderson Power Poles to be a real ham, then I had to get on APRS to be a real ham, and now this. Guess I had better send my 20wpm Extra Class license back to the FCC, and get on freeband with the fake hams.
Yea, wut he said....
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
it's just a passing fad.
I'll stick with my key mfg around 1865. ( c.w. lewis )
Werks fb fer me om.
I use it almost every nite on 3.696 mhz
( i'm listening....)

[VE7TKO]

I have requested that this thread be kept on topic, an honest discussion about a new technology. We are not discussing what makes a real ham. I admire the accomplishments that you have made as hams.

The subject of this thread is VHF / UHF ham radio and the new D-STAR digital voice mode. This is all that is to be discussed. I guess only time will tell what kind of hams you are. I have always believed a licensed ham to be a person of the highest calibre. It is my hope that you don’t prove me wrong.

[kb7uxe]

Your right,
only the highest calibre of ham would work me at 20 wpm ..
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[g8khs]

Jan, you plugged D-Star the other week, why again?
If this system is so good, then it'll sell itself!
I think as you are such a fan of D-Star, then why don't you have your own D-Star website to help folk get onboard this new system.
The Apco-25 guys could have their one too!

73 es gd dx John

[kd7rto]

Quote[/b] ]Or I can buy a used VHF Quantar, program it up on 2 meters, and buy a 600 dollar VHF Astro, and talk to everyone (in both analog and P25).

Good luck finding an available repeater pair to put it on.

[K8ERV]

Neat looking key. What lock does it fit?? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (g8khs @ Sep. 20 2005,00:12)]Jan, you plugged D-Star the other week, why again?
If this system is so good, then it'll sell itself!
I think as you are such a fan of D-Star, then why don't you have your own D-Star website to help folk get onboard this new system.
The Apco-25 guys could have their one too!

73 es gd dx John
John - Your question is a fair and legitimate one. People who had no interest in the subject hijacked the former post, and changed the subject.

I am interested in getting some real honest input from other interested hams about the possibilities of D-STAR. That is why I provided the link to the history of its development. This is such a new technology, that the future possibilities have not all been thought of yet.

Yesterday KB7UXE asked me if he could use his key on it. That is one possibility that I never considered. It is possible with a proper interface, but I don’t know how practical it would be. I already have an old ICOM IC-211 that can do SSB and CW. It only gets used at field day one a year for contesting. I have made some very good long-range calls with it on 2-meter SSB. I cannot do CW because I have Parkinson’s disease.

All ham radio has its place within the proper bands. I just happen to like the 2-meter and 70 cm bands. It is the only area that I can afford. It is my hope to some day set up a 2-meter D-STAR DV repeater. I could never afford to do this by myself, so I am hoping to create enough interest to accomplish this within my lifetime.

We have only begun to break the surface with this new technology, and I hope to stimulate some real creative thinking among the younger hams. They are the future to the continuance of this hobby. I am not in favour of throwing out any part of this hobby, in favour of new technology. I believe that all technology, old and new, has a place in this hobby.

It is the inventive minds of some of our more open thinking hams that have given things such as IRLP and APRS. These two examples are being used commercially by law enforcement and industry alike. Just remember that a licensed ham did it first.

I like to think that guys like many of those who partake in this forum will think of uses for D-STAR, that haven’t even been thought of yet. Because it is a truly open protocol, the chances of this happening are great.

It is my hope that you and I will see eye to eye and become Elmer’s to those who have not yet considered this new technology.

[n4zou]

2-meters and up is pretty well dead in my area. Standard 2-meter FM repeaters take up all the available pairs and the only activity is a once a week net with 2 people (the owner and the club president). Now you want to add another level of complexity and cost? Sorry, it just wont happen here!

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (k5ktd @ Sep. 19 2005,16:43)]I read everything I can get my hands on regarding ham radio and communications tech in general. #I stay up on the most recent developments and emerging technologies. So, what's D-STAR?
Check the October QST. #There is an article on how ARES in, I believe, TN is using D-Star 1.2GHz repeaters and Winlink. #Also a 6 page ICOM insert explaining D-Star. #If our local ARES/RACES group moves in this direction I will likely get a dual mode radio otherwise I will wait and see. #No D-Star repeaters here at present and no one using it that I know of.

BTW, where are the 1.2GHz dual mode HTs/mobiles? #That and a suitable repeater would get me interested.

73,
Mike WA3KYY

PS Shouldn't this topic have been started in the Talk and Opinions section?

[aa1mn]

Quote[/b] ]O – zip – zilch!
I am living on a disability pension and enjoy sharing my enthusiasm with my fellow hams.


Unless you decide to start sharing your new found wealth with the rest of us amateurs many, like myself, aren't going to waste the time, trouble and money getting the extra gear and programming it and setting it up.

Please keep in mind that most of us have to work for a living and I, for one, do not wish to part from my dearly deserved money.

Even a simple dual band handheld walkie talkie or mobile units are overpriced as it is and have too many useless features on 'em that that makes it a pain in the ass to figure out how to program as it is.

The adage "Expansion means complexity, and complexity decay" applies here.

Chuck, AA1MN

[W9WHE]

"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE

[K0RGR]

The 6-page insert in QST is very informative. I hope it explains how a digital system could play in our analog repeater world. Instead of having two separate systems to do voice and packet radio, you only need one digital system that does both simultaneously, and you can concentrate on linking them via microwaves or the internet, whichever floats your boat. It's designed to integrate with the rest of our world.

Yes, it's a system designed for amateurs. We should be supporting this standard.

Let the repeater wars begin! How many unused analog machines and good-ole' boy paper repeaters can we replace?

[n4ecw]

Everything always come back to a key and a spark gap transmitter doesn't it? I suppose only life in all its fullness will supply the answers . . . .

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 20 2005,07:39)]"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE
I am not at all sure what point you are making here. #We do not presently communicate via radio with Fire, Police or EMS unless we place an amateur radio operator with them and use our frequencies. #What difference does the protocol used on amateur frequencies make? #We cannot transmit on their frequencies and they cannot transmit on our frequencies. #Just how would we use APCO 25 compliant amatuer radios to communicate with public service agencies? #

Would it be some form of store and forward system where we would copy the traffic from the public service frequency then retransmit under manual control on an amateur frequency to another location which would then either deliver it as a printed message or inject it back into the public service system?

Mike WA3KYY

[k0ru]

This is a round device capable of rotating a various speeds and rpm. #If 2 were used, and a shaft connecting them together some sort of axle or weight carrying device could be assembled on the round objects making it easier to move them around.

When someone was inventing the wheel, you had your nay-sayers, and even today you have people so stuck on the past, they can't see the forest for the tree's in front of them. #Look beyond, open your mind and think of all the possiblities. #Don't just set in your shack and perceive it the way (you) would use it, but how it could be used in many different applications.

Think outside of the box... (shack)

What it cost you is irrelavent, if your not going to use it anyhow, why would that bother you. #Its your contributions of its useage and ideas thats being asked of. # Just because you have a ham license doesn't mean you can go out and buy an ICOM 7800, or a YAESU FT9000 or whatever Kenwood is coming up with for TS2010 rig that is reality and understandable. #But those that can spend the money, and develop D-Star or What-Star, or oh yeah PACKET RADIO then they will and hopefully the rest of use can learn something from it.

You have to be willing to contribute ideas and help broaden the ideas to get enthusiaism of something that could become possible and benifitial to Amateur Radio... Oh yeah AMSAT, who in the world would spend money on tossing a ball into outer space? #Bet, thats been said before.

DREAM, THINK, and stop WHINNING, how can we HELP?

OH PS: for the newbies to QRZ out there, here on QRZ about 8 years ago, a couple of gentlemen were discussing the topic of antenna's that would have adjustable elements, or tubes filled with water and salt that could be used as elements. #Those two gentlemen later went on to become FLUIDMOTION, heard of them? #Oh here, let me spell it out a different way: # STEPPIR

During those post, many responded with the same stupid insight not realizing the benifits of having an antenna with fully adjustable elements. #Wow, what a concept, ... Today, its probably one of the most fasinating concepts that has taken on a whole new meaning to YAGI antenna. #Is it Good, Bad? doesn't matter its the fact a couple of gentlemen had an idea and was sharing it with us, only for us to submit stupid remarks and not add to the benifits of the idea. #Probably some of those people that made the stupid remarks could have LEARNED something.

Thanks
W8YRB - Rob - 73

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Sep. 20 2005,08:28)]Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 20 2005,07:39)]"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE
I am not at all sure what point you are making here. We do not presently communicate via radio with Fire, Police or EMS unless we place an amateur radio operator with them and use our frequencies. What difference does the protocol used on amateur frequencies make? We cannot transmit on their frequencies and they cannot transmit on our frequencies. Just how would we use APCO 25 compliant amatuer radios to communicate with public service agencies?

Mike WA3KYY
Consider the ability simply to monitor the agencies that us P25, and thier ability to monitor ham communications.

If hams use P25, we can easily listen to thier traffic, especially P25 UHf systems. If P25 ham HT's ever come out we may even see ones capable of scanning trunked systems.

In addition, the agencies can program thier radios and scanners to monitor ours.

I also stringly disagree with the authors assertion that a ham with D-star is a real Ham. A ham with D-star is an appliance operator. A ham who buys commercial gear and retunes it, hacks the software, and modifys it for his needs is a ham in the same tradition of those before us who bought and modified surplus WWII radios. Go over to batlabs and see what kind of work hams do retuning commercial radios.... much more in the real ham realm than plug and play, at least in my opinion.

An yes, some commercial radios are field programmable, including some P25 radios. I am issued an EF Johnson 5100 here that will do analog or P25 and is field programmable.... and works well on 2m. However, field programming is a moot point for the most part. Most commercial radios have more than enough memory to handle ALL the common 2m repeater splist and simplex frequencies. In years of using commercial radios I have programmed them right and never found myself wishing for a VFO.

P25 is the standard. To put it in historical terms, P25 is VHS, D-Star is Betamax. As P25 is the commercial standard, new high quality products are devloped for it every month. D-Star? It is such a limited market why would manufacturers spend the money? The best repeaters out there are almost always commercial units set up on the ham bands... don't expect and commercial D-Star units any time.

[n3sdo]

Don't we have a lot of silent, barely used analog repeaters now? You can link them via echolink, or something else using an HT, and a PC with a sound card.

Im all for experimenting, and playing with new modes.
Have your own little clique with fm sstv, and aprs, I did!
Anybody wanna buy a slightly used Kenwood VCH1?

But bottom line, when you need special event or emergency comms, the simpler the better. I don't have the $$$ to buy any more toys for a while. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[W9WHE]

"What difference does the protocol used on amateur frequencies make?"
If hams go D-star INSTEAD of APCO 25, then:

1) We can't monitor PS stuff;

2) In a true emergency, under 47 CFR 97.403 & .405 you can communicate with PS on their frequencies, and vice versa;

3) You Totally defeat INTEROPERABILLITY and erect a NEW and unnecessary obsticle for communications;

4) With APCO 25, your radio can be programmed to monitor, decode and display emergency messages like wheather alerts, pages, etc, etc. from PS systems, especially important where Ham repeaters don't exist;

5) Why not piggyback on new technology leaders like Motorola, who is wayyyyyyy further along then ham vendors will ever be.

6) If the purpouse is to "communicate" why adopt different languages?


Just a few thoughts to consider.

W9WHE
"Fully APCO 25 compliant"

[KG0R]

Jan,
I think using APCO-25 (or at least the same standard as law enforcement agencies) isn't so much about being able to use commercial equipment on an individual ham level as it is about using it on a repeater level. How many Micor, GE Master-II, etc ham repeaters are there out there? Everywhere!

It is also very useful for hams to be able to monitor EM frequencies, etc when necessary. Will both APCO-25 and D-star codecs be built into future radios? I think they will need to be if we utilize our own protocol.

[KI4SP]

Just a check at my local ham radio dealer, yes it's a real life radio shop, the going price for the icom ID-1 is over $1599.00... # ya'll have fun with your new toys.

[KD6NIG]

If you all want to run this standard, you go ahead. #But, the moment I have to go out and shell out mondo funding to talk on my local repeater, you'll probably find that I and many others won't be too happy with you.

A new mode is fine if the mode is reachable with the same amount of funding a radio costs now, but from what I'm seeing, this is quite pricey. #And I don't see this standard becoming the standard like they say. #I only buy Yaesu radios now, mostly, and they are pushing thier 'WIRES' standard. #Now ICOM (I can only monitor?) is pushing this standard.

Like I said, you all can have your nice digital systems, your internet linking capability, etc, etc.... Please leave the one repeater I use locally alone though-I like my plain FM repeater with tone squelch. #It works for me and all of my ham radio friends I talk to.

I just see ham radio becoming the internet more and more. #Practically, it has SOME uses, but I don't know about using my local repeater to send pictures to someone. #I have a camera phone for that. #

I dunno, maybe I'm just closed minded, but thats the way I see it. #I've used echolink twice, and it was okay, but if I could have made the contact with pure RF, I wouldn't have used echolink. #Once I learn code, that will be possible and the route I will take first in any contact I would be attempting.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Sep. 20 2005,08:28)]Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 20 2005,07:39)]"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE
I am not at all sure what point you are making here. We do not presently communicate via radio with Fire, Police or EMS unless we place an amateur radio operator with them and use our frequencies. What difference does the protocol used on amateur frequencies make? We cannot transmit on their frequencies and they cannot transmit on our frequencies. Just how would we use APCO 25 compliant amatuer radios to communicate with public service agencies?

Would it be some form of store and forward system where we would copy the traffic from the public service frequency then retransmit under manual control on an amateur frequency to another location which would then either deliver it as a printed message or inject it back into the public service system?

Mike WA3KYY
Even if THAT were possible, there's a question of leaglity in retransmitting on Amateur Frequencies... LOT'S of legal considerations.

[n9vo]

Quote[/b] (KI4SP @ Sep. 20 2005,12:17)]Just a check at my local ham radio dealer, yes it's a real life radio shop, the going price for the icom ID-1 is over $1599.00... # ya'll have fun with your new toys.
Must have a pretty good disablity pension to afford that! And all for 1.2ghz no less.........

[wc4rav]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 20 2005,07:39)]"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE
because p25 phase 2 uses the same modulation scheme as D-star does now ( atleast a very similar)

imbe(p25 phase 1) is sold as software only leaving the vendor to devolved their applications and hardware so one must purchase a license to use the software at a high cost-

ambe is sold as an OEM chipset making it inexpensive to implement and more universal.

forr you moto fans - the complete p25 plan calls for a d-star like modualtion scheme- which might even be compatible -- has any one down any testing to detirming this.

[AC0GT]

Let's see if I can get some facts straight.
APCO-25
- FM analog or 9600bps IMBE digital voice
- 12.5 or 6.25kHz channel spacing
- transmitted in the clear or with one of three standards for encryption
- not data capable
- trunking capable
- frequencies http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

D-STAR
- FM analog or 4800bps AMBE digital voice
- compatible with 20, 15, 12.5, 6.25KHz (or even 5kHz?) channel spacing
- no encryption, as required by Part 97
- trunking http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
- data capable at speeds varying by frequency (e.g. 4.8k/VHF, 128k/UHF, 10M/SHF)
- voice and data can share a channel and be sent simultaneously
- frequencies from 30MHz on up http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif (I'll comment on this later)

Does that sum it up? #I'm sure I missed a lot. #I think the main points are:
- APCO-25 has encryption, D-STAR does not
- D-STAR has data capability, APCO-25 does not
- both contain fall back to FM and/or simplex

One thing I noticed in the specification for D-STAR was that the digital voice standard occupies only 5.5kHZ of bandwidth. #DSB/AM occupies about 5.5kHz of bandwidth. #Does that mean D-STAR standard voice could be used on any frequency where AM voice is allowed? #That would include frequencies all the way down to 1.8MHz. #D-STAR on HF? #Why not?

I think APCO-25 has some nice features but it was not designed with Amateurs in mind. #I certainly would not be opposed to people modifying APCO-25 commercial radios for Amateur use but I don't think it is a one-for-one replacement for D-STAR. #Each have their place and much of the utility of each overlap, it seems used APCO-25 equipment cannot compete with new D-STAR on price and availability so for the moment APCO-25 seems to win on that basis alone.

I think D-STAR will get a slow but steady adoption. #In populated areas the room on 6M/2M/440MHz bands for repeaters are scarce. #Since Icom has their new D-STAR systems for the less popular 1.2GHz band it has a better chance of gaining ground. #People that want digital can still choose from Icom's family of FM/D-STAR dual mode radios on 2M, 440MHz and 1.2GHz but only the 1.2GHz D-STAR repeater is available now.

Who will buy these D-STAR repeaters? #Individuals and groups that want the latest and greatest. #(Ego boxes?) #I assume the price will come down after demand, production, and competition go up. #After the big dollar buyers are satiated then Icom will lower the price for a larger niche. #Perhaps the semi-pro communicators looking for something that FM cannot do, such as search and rescue (GPS data and voice at the same time) and storm spotters (telemetry and voice). #Maybe those looking for a new high bandwidth packet radio where things like 802.11b/Hinternet are proving to be too limited.

D-STAR is not for the home brewers and postcard collectors. #I've seen where APRS, fast-scan and slow-scan video, text transfer (AKA e-mail) have been shown to be very useful for emergency communications, search and rescue, disaster recovery, etc. #D-STAR takes many of these disparate technologies and allows them to work together better. I know I probably sounding like a D-STAR fan-boy like Jan/VE7TKO but I feel I have to offset all the negativity it is getting here.

I have some questions about APCO-25 and D-STAR. Can either digital voice mode be decoded or encoded with a standard FM Amateur radio connected to a common PC? In other words, is there software for these modes? Where can I find more information on APCO-25 and the radios that use the mode?

[K2WH]

Stay tuned. #After APCO, D-Star, On Star, Packet, PSK31 die on the vine, some other new way of digitizing crap and its acronim will appear.

K-JANK, ELAP, DIMWIT, BOHUNK etc.

How about simple RF.

Linking of repeaters is stupid and has a debilitating effect on the users. Look at how hot EchoLink was. Look at it now. Many repeaters that had it dumped it.

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (VE7TKO @ Sep. 19 2005,04:53)]He is the one who owns a real ham radio and chooses to be on the leading edge of technology.
Well, I don't need no stinkin D-Star to be a real ham.

Are you on Icoms payroll?

Didn't you just run this same thread about two weeks ago?

Why in the world are the board editors allowing you to keep posting this same crap?

[n3eg]

Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Sep. 20 2005,16:01)]Linking of repeaters is stupid and has a debilitating effect on the users.
Horsehockey. #

Sure, your busiest stand-alone repeaters should NOT be linked. #But the 440 repeater in the suburbs, or the low-level garage repeater, or the 2 meter repeater 150 miles from the nearest interstate - they survive on linking, whether to a radio network or VOIP network. #

What we need is a kit - a TAPR kit, a FAR circuits kit, or something else where you breadboard or buy a board and toss a collection of 4000 series chips alongside a vocoder and build your own. #Homebrewing is the grassroots of ham radio, and when it reaches that level, it grows. #Not from the $1599 level down, but from the $99 static proof parts bag level up.

[kb7uxe]

gee it all just new stuff. some may werk, some may knot.
Pesonally, I like binary, simple 1 & 0.
That dang ascii thing will never catch on.....

Hey, who are those guys at iEEE anyway?

( In memory of my friend, Al Gross. W8PAL I will never forget you.)

[k5ktd]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Sep. 20 2005,05:37)]Quote[/b] (k5ktd @ Sep. 19 2005,16:43)]I read everything I can get my hands on regarding ham radio and communications tech in general. #I stay up on the most recent developments and emerging technologies. So, what's D-STAR?
Check the October QST. #There is an article on how ARES in, I believe, TN is using D-Star 1.2GHz repeaters and Winlink. #Also a 6 page ICOM insert explaining D-Star. #If our local ARES/RACES group moves in this direction I will likely get a dual mode radio otherwise I will wait and see. #No D-Star repeaters here at present and no one using it that I know of.

BTW, where are the 1.2GHz dual mode HTs/mobiles? #That and a suitable repeater would get me interested.

73,
Mike WA3KYY

PS Shouldn't this topic have been started in the Talk and Opinions section?
Ah, that explains it. #I don't do ARRL, Win32, or WinLink for that matter. Each of these is far too proprietary in nature to be of interest to me. (A qualifier, if you please: #I am a developer in my 34th year of experience with all manner of hardware and software.

I did, however, follow the link to the article that the VE OM mentioned. #This is very interesting technology and holds lots of potential, but it requires replacement of existing equipment for club/repeater owner groups as well as individual operators. #I say replacement because freq pairs and repeater locations are already difficult enough to come by. #I can't see two parallel systems in operation, one straight analog and one potential dual analog/digital. The economic imparative isn't there and there are so many choices of competing technology.

I predict that the d-star standard will BEGIN to catch on when we see choices in the market place. #This will begin to happen about 3-5 years after the introduction of the technology to the retail buyer...so, 2008-2010. #So, if everything is done just right, the market will reach 35% saturation about 10 years from now. That's when the big wholesale kicks in (see below). The choice that will really drive acceptance is a hardware device that can be added to existing equipment to enable d-star compatability. To make the market move on this, there must be several offerings of compatable products from several manufacturers. #This will push price point, drive retail, and open up wholesale markets (govt, institutional) where manufacturers are able to recoup the spin-up money they've spent to bring it to market.

As long as the technology remains essentially proprietary, as it is now with only one brand in the stream, there will be no retail acceptance in the free marketplace.

[w3mz]

Quote[/b] (k5ktd @ Sep. 20 2005,18:12)][quotmarket.

As long as the technology remains essentially proprietary, as it is now with only one brand in the stream, there will be no retail acceptance in the free marketplace.
I believe you are right on the money there. Open Source is the way things happen these days. Look at Linux. As long as you depend on proprietary software, with the chance that the next incarnation will make these $1599.99 radios obsolete, you will slow growth while an open source format that allows upgrades and customization (and user input) will take off. Put the code on Sourceforge and let the guys and gals that are interested and motivated set the standard. Having a digital capable box, you will be able to do more with it with every software upgrade. You will be able to essentially download a new radio. This Hams will go for, especially if there are schematics and kits as well as manufactured radios that we can customize for our own use. If D-Star or any of the others takes off, they will go through many more changes before that time comes, and $1599.99 radios will set on Ebay alongside my Betamax tape VCR ( $2000.00 new adjusted for inflation) that I can't get ten bucks for.

I am one of those who doesn't much care for digital radio merged with the internet. How long, with the ease a tech license can be secured these days, before porn idiots decide this is a free way to exchange their pictures? And on our Ham bands. That is publicity we don't need. I use DX Summit too, and have been into computers and what they can do to enhance Ham radio since I bought my first computer at Dayton in 1983. But using the internet to make QSOs, and calling them QSOs, a lot of people are missing out on a lot of Ham Radio. No propagation, no antenna adjustments in dead of winter, that weak signal that becomes your first SE Asia QSO, the thrill of getting that QSL, that is my version of "real ham radio". Still if this technology was open source, GPL, I would have to try it. But buy a box that lets you do this, but no way can you do that, nah, another pile of parts for the junk box. I wish you that are interested in this the best of luck, and VY 73 all. Mike w3mz

[WA4RYW]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 20 2005,10:39)]"Commercial gear is not field programmable from the radio itself"

The Motorola JT1000 and HT1550 are BOTH keypad programmable commercial radios. Neither NEEDS a computer to program it.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the author. Why ham vendors choose to re-invent the wheel is beyond me. APCO 25 is well established and IS THE STANDARD. Every ham HT should be APCO 25 capable (my XTS5000 is). D-Star is an orphan that will fragment us and make hams less useful. As more and more municipal Police, Fire and EMS go APCO 25, we will become LESS AND LESS able to communicate with them. How does that sit with you emcom types?

I will not buy any radio with D-star. I encourage you to only buy radios that are APCO 25 compliant.

W9WHE
I'm not so sure it's doing that much "fragmenting". Does anyone know where anyone has dropped the bucks for ICOM's gigadollar system?

[WA9SVD]

"The person who owns a D-STAR dual mode ham radio will be able to talk to any ham that chooses not to participate in this new ham radio technology. He is the one who owns a real ham radio and chooses to be on the leading edge of technology."

"D-STAR cannot be applied to HF radios..."
=============================

So does that mean HF isn't "Real Ham Radio?" either?

[WA4RYW]

Well, I’ll tell you boys and girls. My biggest problem here is that I simply don’t trust ICOM any longer. Yes, they build a good product, but they’re going down a road that I refuse to invest my dollars in, especially when we’re talking about a $1000+ UHF radio. Ever since I bought my IC-756PRO, they lost me when the PROII came out and they abandoned the PROs without an upgrade path. Now the PRO3 is out, and that’s a forklift upgrade as well. The PRO3 is quite different, but there is no excuse for not upgrading the PROs to the PRO2. My radio devalued like a Chevy in its first year, and it could have benefited from one or two of the upgrades. Kenwood, Yaesu, and TenTec, by comparison, will upgrade (for a small charge) any production changes incorporated in a unit they sell. My TS-2000 has had three software updates since I bought it. ICOM used to live by that policy. I just don’t want to buy into obsolescence, and refuse to do business with ICOM while they practice this policy. Let ‘em sell that stuff to the appliance guys.

[g8khs]

Thank you Kurt, KC0LXK, for taking the time to illustrate a comparison of the two systems, and thanks to Jan and all the others that have made this discussion informative to all.

It seems to me that digital comms is not for everyone, but has at least has some value to be experimented with on the amateur service.
I hope that it's used wisely and kept simple to use.

73 es gd dx to all, John

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (KI4SP @ Sep. 20 2005,12:17)]Just a check at my local ham radio dealer, yes it's a real life radio shop, the going price for the icom ID-1 is over $1599.00... ya'll have fun with your new toys.
KI4SP - JACK A BELEW, JR

Did your local ham dealer show you the ID-800H? It works on all the normal 2-meter and 70 cm FM repeaters that are set up in North America. It has a very affordable price of around $630.00 US.

I rather doubt that you have any interest in the 1.2 GHz band. I can’t understand why you would be pricing this stuff out. The dealer who quoted you $1599.00 for an ID-1 is giving you the suggested list price. Most U.S. dealers, who stock this radio, charge $1349.95 or less.

If you would like to see a club that is doing something with the ID-1, take a look at: http://www.ve7vic.ca/dstar_wara.htm . They have a very interesting work in progress.

I will be purchasing the more affordable ID-800H for my base. This way, I will be able to continue using all the regular repeaters that I have used for years. On the plus side, I will be able to use it in digital mode when I am talking with my friends who also have an IC-V82 with a UT-118 digital board installed. If the time ever comes, that you are looking for a new dual band mobile or base, the ID-800H should be worthy of your consideration. If you are only into used equipment, you will have to wait a few years. It is just too new.

[K2WH]

Quote[/b] (n3eg @ Sep. 20 2005,12:52)]Quote[/b] (K2WH @ Sep. 20 2005,16:01)]Linking of repeaters is stupid and has a debilitating effect on the users.
Horsehockey. #

Sure, your busiest stand-alone repeaters should NOT be linked. #But the 440 repeater in the suburbs, or the low-level garage repeater, or the 2 meter repeater 150 miles from the nearest interstate - they survive on linking, whether to a radio network or VOIP network. #

What we need is a kit - a TAPR kit, a FAR circuits kit, or something else where you breadboard or buy a board and toss a collection of 4000 series chips alongside a vocoder and build your own. #Homebrewing is the grassroots of ham radio, and when it reaches that level, it grows. #Not from the $1599 level down, but from the $99 static proof parts bag level up.
What do you mean they "Survive on linking"? Survive? What the hell does that mean. Before any of this stupid, idiotic linking became all the rage, repeaters were doing just fine.

Here in the NYC area, there are some repeaters that cover entire tri-state regions due to linking. One of the most idiotic things to come along to make repeaters unusable.

K2WH

[ky5u]

While I agree that the ICOM system is both cool and pricey, I would worry supporting anything from APCO. All it takes is for someone to get a "Homeland Security" bug up their caboose...

[KI4SP]

Jan van Vugt - VE7TKO

NICE ad you ran for ICOM, but you failing to win many converts, myself included, I can only think you must have sold used cars in the past.. or maybe insurance in New Orleans....

Sure is funny you ran it the same day I got a my QST with the same junk ad. What is the going rate for kick-backs from ICOM, in some trades this could be the ole PAY-OLA scam. How many to you have to "Sell" to get your freee one....

[KX7ID]

JARL's D-Star is an interesting concept, however it is not interoperable with Project-25. I strongly support moving to digital but I don't have the $28K to change my repeater to a P-25 repeater as done by hams in Pasadena, California. Apparently the D-Star protocol will not even allow putting two D-Star mobiles back to back to make a 2m or 440 repeater according to a post I received after asking the quesion on ICOM's D-Star forum.

We need (must) move to digital to save bandwidth if nothing else but we also MUST have interoperability same as our analog radios have now. D-Star does not provide that interoperability. Shame . . . shame . . . shame . . . in my humble opinion.

Chuck
KX7ID

[W5TXR]

Why are we discussing D Star and APCO-25 Again??
We has this discussion a couple of weeks ago.

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (VE7TKO @ Sep. 20 2005,23:39)]Quote[/b] (KI4SP @ Sep. 20 2005,12:17)]Just a check at my local ham radio dealer, yes it's a real life radio shop, the going price for the icom ID-1 is over $1599.00... # ya'll have fun with your new toys.
KI4SP - JACK A BELEW, JR

Did your local ham dealer show you the ID-800H? It works on all the normal 2-meter and 70 cm FM repeaters that are set up in North America. It has a very affordable price of around $630.00 US.

I rather doubt that you have any interest in the 1.2 GHz band. I can’t understand why you would be pricing this stuff out. The dealer who quoted you $1599.00 for an ID-1 is giving you the suggested list price. Most U.S. dealers, who stock this radio, charge $1349.95 or less.

If you would like to see a club that is doing something with the ID-1, take a look at: http://www.ve7vic.ca/dstar_wara.htm . They have a very interesting work in progress.

I will be purchasing the more affordable ID-800H for my base. This way, I will be able to continue using all the regular repeaters that I have used for years. On the plus side, I will be able to use it in digital mode when I am talking with my friends who also have an IC-V82 with a UT-118 digital board installed. If the time ever comes, that you are looking for a new dual band mobile or base, the ID-800H should be worthy of your consideration. If you are only into used equipment, you will have to wait a few years. It is just too new.
Yes, the D-800 is a nice radio but how much does a D-Star VHF or UHF repeater cost? Are they readily available? the key is having widely available and affordable infrastructure (ie, repeaters, link radios, and other backhaul).

This poster is beginning to remind me of a Motorola salesman peddling 800MHz trunking systems to a public safety or government entity. Everytime they are presented with facts about the impracticality of the system they are given a different sales pitch.

For the record, I like D-Star, it has potential. Until it is AFFORDABLE and WIDELY AVAILABLE from all the manufacturers it doesn't have a chance of being embraced by US amateurs. P-25 otoh, is available from many sources, is available from surplus sources (read CHEAP in some cases) and is an accepted standard.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (KB4TPP @ Sep. 21 2005,10:25)]Quote[/b] (VE7TKO @ Sep. 20 2005,23:39)]Quote[/b] (KI4SP @ Sep. 20 2005,12:17)]Just a check at my local ham radio dealer, yes it's a real life radio shop, the going price for the icom ID-1 is over $1599.00... ya'll have fun with your new toys.
KI4SP - JACK A BELEW, JR

Did your local ham dealer show you the ID-800H? It works on all the normal 2-meter and 70 cm FM repeaters that are set up in North America. It has a very affordable price of around $630.00 US.

I rather doubt that you have any interest in the 1.2 GHz band. I can’t understand why you would be pricing this stuff out. The dealer who quoted you $1599.00 for an ID-1 is giving you the suggested list price. Most U.S. dealers, who stock this radio, charge $1349.95 or less.

If you would like to see a club that is doing something with the ID-1, take a look at: http://www.ve7vic.ca/dstar_wara.htm . They have a very interesting work in progress.

I will be purchasing the more affordable ID-800H for my base. This way, I will be able to continue using all the regular repeaters that I have used for years. On the plus side, I will be able to use it in digital mode when I am talking with my friends who also have an IC-V82 with a UT-118 digital board installed. If the time ever comes, that you are looking for a new dual band mobile or base, the ID-800H should be worthy of your consideration. If you are only into used equipment, you will have to wait a few years. It is just too new.
Yes, the D-800 is a nice radio but how much does a D-Star VHF or UHF repeater cost? Are they readily available? the key is having widely available and affordable infrastructure (ie, repeaters, link radios, and other backhaul).

This poster is beginning to remind me of a Motorola salesman peddling 800MHz trunking systems to a public safety or government entity. Everytime they are presented with facts about the impracticality of the system they are given a different sales pitch.

For the record, I like D-Star, it has potential. Until it is AFFORDABLE and WIDELY AVAILABLE from all the manufacturers it doesn't have a chance of being embraced by US amateurs. P-25 otoh, is available from many sources, is available from surplus sources (read CHEAP in some cases) and is an accepted standard.
A street price for additional equipment of $630.00 is "VERY AFFORDABLE?"
Perhaps to some; not so for others.

[AC0GT]

Quote[/b] (KX7ID @ Sep. 21 2005,07:59)]JARL's D-Star is an interesting concept, however it is not interoperable with Project-25. #I strongly support moving to digital but I don't have the $28K to change my repeater to a P-25 repeater as done by hams in Pasadena, California. #Apparently the D-Star protocol will not even allow putting two D-Star mobiles back to back to make a 2m or 440 repeater according to a post I received after asking the quesion on ICOM's D-Star forum.

What prevents you from connecting two D-STAR radios back to back to construct a repeater? #From what I can tell the radios have standard mic and speaker connections like any other Icom mobile. #It should be no different than say using two Icom IC-2100s. #Can you be more specific about the problem/limitation? #I am especially confused since I have seen an Amateur radio club post pictures on the web of their new D-STAR repeater that contained two ID-1s. #(http://www.ve7vic.ca/dstar_wara.htm)

Quote[/b] (KX7ID @ Sep. 21 2005,07:59)]We need (must) move to digital to save bandwidth if nothing else but we also MUST have interoperability same as our analog radios have now. #D-Star does not provide that interoperability. #Shame . . . shame . . . shame . . . in my humble opinion.

Chuck
KX7ID
I'm not sure what you mean by "interoperability". #All current D-STAR compatible radios are also capable of FM operation. #Same site linking of an FM repeater with a D-STAR repeater should be no more difficult than linking a 2 meter FM repeater with a 440MHz FM repeater, something that is done quite often already.

D-STAR is just as interoperable with FM as much as AM is interoperable with FM. #If we keep trying to maintain interoperability with the old we will never move on to the new. #I'm sure the first few that experimented with FM realized that they could not talk to people that had AM only radios. #The solution was not to abandon FM but to move the AM users to FM. #Interoperability can be done with the same site repeater linking I mentioned. #In fact if you want the APCO-25, D-STAR, and FM users to all be able to talk to each other over the same repeater then it would be possible with enough hardware at the repeater site. #Another solution is for the D-STAR and APCO-25 users to switch to FM.

In short I guess I'm trying to say I'm not quite sure what you are complaining about.

[K8TEK]

Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 20 2005,18:06)]Let's see if I can get some facts straight.
APCO-25
- FM analog or 9600bps IMBE digital voice
- 12.5 or 6.25kHz channel spacing
- transmitted in the clear or with one of three standards for encryption
- not data capable
- trunking capable
- frequencies http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

D-STAR
- FM analog or 4800bps AMBE digital voice
- compatible with 20, 15, 12.5, 6.25KHz (or even 5kHz?) channel spacing
- no encryption, as required by Part 97
- trunking http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
- data capable at speeds varying by frequency (e.g. 4.8k/VHF, 128k/UHF, 10M/SHF)
- voice and data can share a channel and be sent simultaneously
- frequencies from 30MHz on up http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif (I'll comment on this later)
I think you need to get your facts straght. P25 and D-STAR are both data capable.

[WA2ZDY]

$630 is a great price for a dual bander. I think I'll run right out and buy a few.

D Star will appeal to those who want ham radio and the internet to be more merged. Some of us don't want that, but according to "experts," that's the only way we'll attract new hams. I of course use my ham radio and I get on the internet. But I don't do both at the same time.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned here is the coverage areas of a 1.2 GHz repeater. I've never been on the band, but my understanding is that to be effective, a system will need lots of sites. This isn't 2m folks, things are different at high frequencies like that. That's one reason there aren't too many repeaters on the air up there.

There is already a serious lack of activity on VHF/UHF repeaters. Why would anyone spend that kind of money to talk to . . . ?

I suppose the data capability would be useful in the case of an emergency. I can see the utility for a situation like in New Orleans - shelter occupancy lists could be easily transferred and shared. But, would the 1.2 GHz infrastructure still be up? I assure you the simplex range between two mobiles is in the range of a mile or so.

But on any given day, my $39.95/mo cable internet connection is MUCH better for data than the ham radio would be. And at the prices for doing it over ham radio . . . I can pass.

Icom is becoming a shady company. Their new sponsorship of ARRL award plaques is VERY disturbing. ARRL is now beholden to Icom and as such I expect to see much more D Star pressure from Newington. Winlink, D Star, what will be next?

Jan, you're not a real good advertising guy, but I'll give you credit, you don't quit easily. And isn't Icom America up there in Washington? Not far from VE7 at all. I hope they're paying you well.

[AC0GT]

Quote[/b] (K8TEK @ Sep. 21 2005,11:58)]Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 20 2005,18:06)]Let's see if I can get some facts straight.
APCO-25
- FM analog or 9600bps IMBE digital voice
- 12.5 or 6.25kHz channel spacing
- transmitted in the clear or with one of three standards for encryption
- not data capable
- trunking capable
- frequencies ???

D-STAR
- FM analog or 4800bps AMBE digital voice
- compatible with 20, 15, 12.5, 6.25KHz (or even 5kHz?) channel spacing
- no encryption, as required by Part 97
- trunking ???
- data capable at speeds varying by frequency (e.g. 4.8k/VHF, 128k/UHF, 10M/SHF)
- voice and data can share a channel and be sent simultaneously
- frequencies from 30MHz on up ??? (I'll comment on this later)
I think you need to get your facts straght. #P25 and D-STAR are both data capable.
I was not aware of that as no one has yet made a reference to the data capability of APCO-25. #I'm curious and would like to know more. Can you provide a link for more info or give a brief description of how data is sent?

[k7ov]

Quote[/b] (VE7TKO @ Sep. 20 2005,03:53)]Quote[/b] (g8khs @ Sep. 20 2005,00:12)]Jan, you plugged D-Star the other week, why again?
If this system is so good, then it'll sell itself!
I think as you are such a fan of D-Star, then why don't you have your own D-Star website to help folk get onboard this new system.
The Apco-25 guys could have their one too!

73 es gd dx John
John - Your question is a fair and legitimate one. People who had no interest in the subject hijacked the former post, and changed the subject.

I am interested in getting some real honest input from other interested hams about the possibilities of D-STAR. That is why I provided the link to the history of its development. This is such a new technology, that the future possibilities have not all been thought of yet.

Yesterday KB7UXE asked me if he could use his key on it. That is one possibility that I never considered. It is possible with a proper interface, but I don’t know how practical it would be. I already have an old ICOM IC-211 that can do SSB and CW. It only gets used at field day one a year for contesting. I have made some very good long-range calls with it on 2-meter SSB. I cannot do CW because I have Parkinson’s disease.

All ham radio has its place within the proper bands. I just happen to like the 2-meter and 70 cm bands. It is the only area that I can afford. It is my hope to some day set up a 2-meter D-STAR DV repeater. I could never afford to do this by myself, so I am hoping to create enough interest to accomplish this within my lifetime.

We have only begun to break the surface with this new technology, and I hope to stimulate some real creative thinking among the younger hams. They are the future to the continuance of this hobby. I am not in favour of throwing out any part of this hobby, in favour of new technology. I believe that all technology, old and new, has a place in this hobby.

It is the inventive minds of some of our more open thinking hams that have given things such as IRLP and APRS. These two examples are being used commercially by law enforcement and industry alike. Just remember that a licensed ham did it first.

I like to think that guys like many of those who partake in this forum will think of uses for D-STAR, that haven’t even been thought of yet. Because it is a truly open protocol, the chances of this happening are great.

It is my hope that you and I will see eye to eye and become Elmer’s to those who have not yet considered this new technology.
Hi,

What advantages does it have over the present technology? Does it offer better audio quality? How about range, does it offer longer range using the same or lower power levels. How much spectrum does it need? Can it be used in the same spectrum limits as the current FM modes now on those bands you are interested in? If not, who do we kick off to allow this mode to be used? I am a repeater owner myself, I would not leave voluntarily for another mode that would not accomodate most of my users. Would you?

Finally, you mention running data as well as phone over the same link, how is this an improvment over packet? Right now we have packet server/stations that do store and forward email even over satalite (pardon my spelling).

I saw Icoms presentation here in the Seattle area, and what they were pushing is the possibility of internet access over amateur radio. I personally did not see anything that convinced me that internet access over amateur radio is necessarily a good thing. In the scenario you present, it would just be another type of phone mode. I am still wondering how it is superior to FM?

73,

Mike - K7OV

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Sep. 21 2005,12:18)]$630 is a great price for a dual bander. I think I'll run right out and buy a few.

There is already a serious lack of activity on VHF/UHF repeaters. Why would anyone spend that kind of money to talk to . . . ?

Jan, you're not a real good advertising guy, but I'll give you credit, you don't quit easily. And isn't Icom America up there in Washington? Not far from VE7 at all. I hope they're paying you well.
WA2ZDY - Christopher A. Johnson

I accept your post as a compliment. I agree there is already a serious lack of activity on VHF/UHF repeaters. In my area the VE7RVA repeater can go for hours without being used. Some of this can be attributed to the equipment problems that we have been having lately. We just changed the frequency from 146.600 MHz to 146.610 MHz. The problem was caused by a Washington repeater, on a totally different frequency, through no fault of their own. It took some thinking of a more experienced ham to figure out the problem.

No ICOM doesn’t pay me, although I wouldn’t mind if they did. A disability pension of around $630.00 a month does not go very far. If I didn’t have a good wife, (we’ve been married for over 30 years), I would be in big trouble.

[WA2ZDY]

" In my area the VE7RVA repeater can go for hours without being used." I think we're on different pages here. I am exactly midway between Philadelphia and New York City. Not exactly barren land. Here, the vast majority of 2m and 440MHz repeaters for for WEEKS without being used.

[W0LPQ]

TKO: Putting it bluntly, I could care less about what you propose! D-Star has zero interest with me and a lot of us in this area.

Me thinks that you think that D-Star will be the salvation to unused repeaters. Good luck, keep dreaming.

You will never see me on any D-Star (or whatever -25)link of any kind.

And, I agree with Chris ... no need to use your cut and paste, BUT I simply do not hear any VE7 repeater here either. Nor do I ever hear, except when we get severe weather, any overuse of ANY repeaters in this area.

FM ... any more, is a vast wasteland.

CW/SSB is active as it should be.

Bill, W0LPQ

[ND5Y]

Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 21 2005,15:53)]I was not aware of that as no one has yet made a reference to the data capability of APCO-25. I'm curious and would like to know more. Can you provide a link for more info or give a brief description of how data is sent?
Low-Speed Data With Digitized Voice

An 88.9 bit/s low-speed data channel is provided in the digitized voice frame structure. No application is currently defined. One application under discussion is to use the low-speed data channel for the transmission of accurate geographic location information.

http://www.apco911.org/frequency/project25/index.html
http://www.apco911.org/frequency/project25/information.html
http://www.project25.org

73,
Tom

[KX7ID]

Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 21 2005,11:06)]Quote[/b] (KX7ID @ Sep. 21 2005,07:59)]JARL's D-Star is an interesting concept, however it is not interoperable with Project-25. #I strongly support moving to digital but I don't have the $28K to change my repeater to a P-25 repeater as done by hams in Pasadena, California. #Apparently the D-Star protocol will not even allow putting two D-Star mobiles back to back to make a 2m or 440 repeater according to a post I received after asking the quesion on ICOM's D-Star forum.

What prevents you from connecting two D-STAR radios back to back to construct a repeater? #From what I can tell the radios have standard mic and speaker connections like any other Icom mobile. #It should be no different than say using two Icom IC-2100s. #Can you be more specific about the problem/limitation? #I am especially confused since I have seen an Amateur radio club post pictures on the web of their new D-STAR repeater that contained two ID-1s. #(http://www.ve7vic.ca/dstar_wara.htm)

Quote[/b] (KX7ID @ Sep. 21 2005,07:59)]We need (must) move to digital to save bandwidth if nothing else but we also MUST have interoperability same as our analog radios have now. #D-Star does not provide that interoperability. #Shame . . . shame . . . shame . . . in my humble opinion.

Chuck
KX7ID
I'm not sure what you mean by "interoperability". #All current D-STAR compatible radios are also capable of FM operation. #Same site linking of an FM repeater with a D-STAR repeater should be no more difficult than linking a 2 meter FM repeater with a 440MHz FM repeater, something that is done quite often already.

D-STAR is just as interoperable with FM as much as AM is interoperable with FM. #If we keep trying to maintain interoperability with the old we will never move on to the new. #I'm sure the first few that experimented with FM realized that they could not talk to people that had AM only radios. #The solution was not to abandon FM but to move the AM users to FM. #Interoperability can be done with the same site repeater linking I mentioned. #In fact if you want the APCO-25, D-STAR, and FM users to all be able to talk to each other over the same repeater then it would be possible with enough hardware at the repeater site. #Another solution is for the D-STAR and APCO-25 users to switch to FM.

In short I guess I'm trying to say I'm not quite sure what you are complaining about.
I'm not complaining, I'm just saying that I would prefer a digital standard compatible with the Project 25 First Responder standard. I know we can't talk on those frequencies but I would prefer radios that can listen on those channels same as we do now on our analog radios. And yes I know scanners are available that will monitor P-25 although not 700MHz allocations, yet.

I think the repeater you're referring to is an analog repeater, not utilizing D-Star digital. I've asked this question on the ICOM D-STAR forum to make sure I have this correct.

I accept your point on interoperability. However, my thought was radio to radio interoperabilty and not all the hardware necessary to interface it at a repeater site.

Chuck

[NH7CY]

alright.. this may be a little off the current subject but going back to one of the points that came up in the original topic..

non field programmable commercial radios.. anybody who uses a bendix king or any motorola jt1000, ht1550, etc, can beg to differ. ok soo maybe there are no field programmable digital mode radios out there but before you start bashing the comercial equipment lets look at it this way.. before i go out camping in the snow or anywhere else that would harbor some extreme conditions such as out in a storm etc, i am faced with the choice.. do i take one of my regular radios such as my yaesu or my alinco or something or do i take one of motorola radios with me.. more often than not i will take the motorola.. simply because motorola makes some of the most durable radios that i have ever used. ive been out in pretty much any type of weather you can think of and i wouldnt think of letting my alinco get wet or risk dropping it on something.. with my commercial radios i dont have to worry about any of that. not to mention, in an emergency situation if you are dealing with many operators and have to loan out radios you dont have to spend hours trying to explain to them how to use their radios. with commercial equipment it is as simple as turning the switch to on and selecting the channel. this makes for a quick and easy deployment. sure some of the yaesu, icom, alinco, and kenwood gear may have the latest and greates features but in any case, when it comes to me needing something reliable i will always turn to my commmercial radios..

___jason. nh7cy.

[AC0GT]

Quote[/b] (KX7ID @ Sep. 21 2005,19:59)]Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 21 2005,11:06)]{SNIP}
I'm not complaining, I'm just saying that I would prefer a digital standard compatible with the Project 25 First Responder standard. I know we can't talk on those frequencies but I would prefer radios that can listen on those channels same as we do now on our analog radios. And yes I know scanners are available that will monitor P-25 although not 700MHz allocations, yet.

I think the repeater you're referring to is an analog repeater, not utilizing D-Star digital. #I've asked this question on the ICOM D-STAR forum to make sure I have this correct. #

I accept your point on interoperability. #However, my thought was radio to radio interoperabilty and not all the hardware necessary to interface it at a repeater site.

Chuck
Looking again at the WARA D-STAR website the radios in the pictures are set to "DD" (digital data) for mode of TX/RX. #So they are not just doing an analog repeating. #If they were set to "DV" (digital voice) the wired connection between the two radios may have been analog, with the RF link being digital, but that does not seem to be the case. #The set up shown is likely for repeating digital data. #It may also be capable of repeating digital voice by simply treating the digitized voice stream like any other data and sending it out through the attached radio, with the D/A conversion done on the receiving end only. #I am, just like you, speculating.

If you desire to listen in on public safety traffic then APCO-25 is for you. #Also, as I said earlier, APCO-25 is likely to serve many Amateurs nicely. #It is an open standard, provides digital voice and data, can fall back to FM/simplex for backward compatibility, etc. #All these features are also available in D-STAR. #However it must be that APCO-25 doesn't fit all Amateurs' desires since someone felt the need to create D-STAR.

D-STAR has three data modes in the specification, 4.8k, 128k, and 10M. #APCO-25 has only one, 9.6k. #The data rate alone may be enough of a reason for a new standard. #D-STAR allows for an IP based network, separate from or connected to the Internet, just like 802.11b. #However 802.11b must be coerced and shoehorned into complying with Part 97 rules because it was not originally intended for such use.

It also sounds like AX.25 is in need of an updating or replacement. #D-STAR is probably just what many are looking for in a packet protocol.

I see what you are saying, it's just not for you. #If you don't want to use it then don't, no one is going to make you buy a D-STAR radio. #Many, such as yourself, scoff at it as a waste of effort, time, and money. #I see it as almost inevitable.

While most Amateurs are using 300, 1200, and maybe even those screaming fast 9600 baud packet networks, the unlicensed masses have 802.11a/b/g going as fast as 54Mbps. #It's only by shoehorning 802.11b into Part 97 did Amateurs create a standard packet protocol that reaches 11Mbps. #I can buy a Garmin Rino that is capable of sending voice and my GPS position over the radio, only recently have Amateurs seen things that compare. #No wonder fewer people see the need to get an Amateur license, unlicensed radio products are proving to be just as capable for less money.

D-STAR is a standard by Amateurs, for Amateurs. #Instead of trying to squeeze, coerce, and shoehorn things like APCO-25 and 802.11 into Part 97 the JARL created something for our needs. #If you want to keep borrowing from commercial and consumer radio then you are free to do so. #If you are not going to lead the way to something better, then at least follow. #If you don't want to follow then do Amateur radio a favor and get out of the way.

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (NH7CY @ Sep. 21 2005,23:26)]alright.. this may be a little off the current subject but going back to one of the points that came up in the original topic..

non field programmable commercial radios.. anybody who uses a bendix king or any motorola jt1000, ht1550, etc, can beg to differ. ok soo maybe there are no field programmable digital mode radios out there but before you start bashing the comercial equipment lets look at it this way.. before i go out camping in the snow or anywhere else that would harbor some extreme conditions such as out in a storm etc, i am faced with the choice.. do i take one of my regular radios such as my yaesu or my alinco or something or do i take one of motorola radios with me.. more often than not i will take the motorola.. simply because motorola makes some of the most durable radios that i have ever used. ive been out in pretty much any type of weather you can think of and i wouldnt think of letting my alinco get wet or risk dropping it on something.. with my commercial radios i dont have to worry about any of that. not to mention, in an emergency situation if you are dealing with many operators and have to loan out radios you dont have to spend hours trying to explain to them how to use their radios. with commercial equipment it is as simple as turning the switch to on and selecting the channel. this makes for a quick and easy deployment. sure some of the yaesu, icom, alinco, and kenwood gear may have the latest and greates features but in any case, when it comes to me needing something reliable i will always turn to my commmercial radios..

___jason. nh7cy.
motorola isn't the only one who builds "durable" radios anymore. in fact, their current conventional product lineup is comprised of cheap, flimsy, made in china CRAP compared to the offerings from Vertex (aka Yaesu), Kenwood and Icom.

Even Vertex (Yaesu) has mil-spec HAM portables like the FT-60, or the SUBMERSIBLE VX-6/VX-7's and the latest public safety rugged VX-170. With it's 700mw (3/4 watt AUDIO) out I dare you to tell me this radio could not hold it's own against even, dare I say, a Saber or MT1000? And unlike those, you could dunk it in water and it would keep on tickin'. The days of the past with cheap plastic junk from the big three may have been true, but just like the automotive industry is now dominated by the Japanese (sad when the best selling car in the US is a TOYOTA camry for the past 9 years in a row), they are working hard to surpass even Motorola in the conventional public service radio industry.

And just like typical American greed live for today screw tommorow mentality, Motorola gladly sells us out, firing 1/3 of it's workforce in 2001, you know, those hardworking Americans that built such profitable product lines like the Jedi, Genesis series and GP lines. Then they outsource their manufactuting to communist China, Malaysia (a hotbed for Islamic terrorists if there ever was one), Mexico and even Isreal. Yeah, good old American quality...

Which leads us back to D-Star. If there were more repeaters and equipment for the VHF and UHF bands available, it might be viable. But then it has taken the latter part of a decade for the old farts to quit moaning about using tone squelch (35 year old technology I might add). People still want to use their old Hamtronics and Cleggs in 2005. Do I see digital standard coming a reality? Not in this lifetime! Heck we can't even get hams together to agree that our service is withering away and to promote and embrace it's future! So D-Star will go the way of Kenwood's Digital Channel Link and Digital Selective Calling (wow...1984 and Kenwood HAM radios could do more than commercial radios of the day could...but just like then as now no interest), and other ideas that just weren't practical at the time or desired.

If there is an amateur service 20 years from now D-Star or P-25 phase I might have a chance of widespread acceptance in the ham community. Sad to say, listening to the deafening silence on all the repeaters of late indicates the status of our service. Some seem to work extra hard at discouraging folks from joining ham radio and doing anything that puts us in a good light (like real community service work, and not just standing around with an HT in one hand and your thumb in your orifice) yet these are the same who think they have some kind of God given right to radio spectrum. Amazing isn't it.

Why don't we work on uniting hams to promote our service first. It seems the house divided always gets into the hobby and all it does is drive everyone into seclusion.

[w7doa]

Stop feeding the trolls. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

[W9WHE]

APCO 25 radios are compatable with BOTH conventional analog AND APCO 25. D-star appears to be compliant with itself(?) on frequencies NOT invcuding VHF and UHF.

If true, this is just plain foolish.

Buy an APCO 25 compliant radio. DO NOT buy a D-Star, UNLESS you want to be an island onto yourself. D-star is an orphan, and it is just a kid!

W9WHE

[W9WHE]

One very niaeve poster writes:


"And just like typical American greed (why do you hate Americans?) live for today screw tommorow mentality, Motorola gladly sells us out, firing 1/3 of it's workforce in 2001...."

So they should continue to employ 1/3 of the people they cannot afford and go out of business, resulting in 3/3 of people being un-employed? Isn't 1/3 unemployed better then 3/3?

[W9WHE]

KB2TPP writes:

"motorola's ....current conventional product lineup is comprised of cheap, flimsy, made in china CRAP compared to the offerings from Vertex (aka Yaesu), Kenwood and Icom.

SHEER NONSENCE, unless you think its fair to compair motorola's bottom line product against Yaesu's top of the line. if you compair Yaesu's best (VX-6 or7) to Motorola's best, an XTS5000R there is simply NO compairison. Motorola's offering will go deeper, longer, take a greater beating, and do FAR FAR more then any Yaesu product.

Does ANY Yaesu, Icom or Kenwood product do APCO 25? #My XTS does!



"Even Vertex (Yaesu) has mil-spec HAM portables like the FT-60, or the SUBMERSIBLE VX-6/VX-7's and the latest public safety rugged VX-170. With it's 700mw (3/4 watt AUDIO) out I dare you to tell me this radio could not hold it's own against even, dare I say, a Saber or MT1000"


NOW THERE YOU GO AGAIN. Sabers and MT1000 radios are a 10 + year old product. Come on, be fair. #I put my XTS5000R up against ANY jap radio....and tit will outperform on any listed spec, and wayyyyyyy out performs on important capibillities like selectivity and reggedness.
There is no compairison between the Xcvr selectivity between a Saber, HT/JT/MTS or XTS and ANY jap radio. Ever been to Dayton? #Its not the Motorola HTs that squawk, squeal and howl! #

Now, if you think that submersibillity is the cat's meow.....try a Saber submersible (a 15 year old design) or if you want to compair new product to new product, look at an an XTS5000R.


W9WHE
APCO 25 compliant

[AC0GT]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 22 2005,11:40)]APCO 25 radios are compatable with BOTH conventional analog AND APCO 25. D-star appears to be compliant with itself(?) on frequencies NOT invcuding VHF and UHF.

If true, this is just plain foolish.

Buy an APCO 25 compliant radio. DO NOT buy a D-Star, UNLESS you want to be an island onto yourself. D-star is an orphan, and it is just a kid!

W9WHE
I don't know if it is part of the D-STAR spec or not but all Icom radios with D-STAR capability include analog FM voice capability. #D-STAR radios are available for 2 meter, 440MHz, and 1.2GHz. #I believe that all the Icom D-STAR capable radios are FM to start with and need an add on option to get the digital voice and data capability, excepting the ID-1 which has the D-STAR capability as standard equipment.

The D-STAR capable FM HTs and mobiles are price competitive with any other FM radio with similar features. #Adding the D-STAR module to the radio costs about as much as adding a TNC.

I wouldn't call investing in D-STAR foolish. #The ID-1 may be expensive by most standards but the other Icom D-STAR radios are not. #I imagine much of the expense in the ID-1 is because of its frequency, there just isn't the demand for 1.2GHz radios so economies of scale aren't there, and because of its capability, I would imagine the creation of a modem with 128k bandwidth isn't quite a science yet.

Like I said in another post D-STAR didn't appear out of a vacuum, it was created to fit a specific desire. #Amateurs are looking for a standard means of sending digital voice and packet data. #802.11b access points and network cards are being modified for Amateur use. #Likewise for APCO-25. #There is the new G4GUO digital voice/data/image standard, which was designed to fit a similar need but on HF.

D-STAR was created with Amateurs in mind, unlike APCO-25 and 802.11b. #G4GUO was created for Amateurs but it was made with the bandwidth constraints of HF in mind. #D-STAR was made with the higher data capacity of microwave bands in mind.

Is D-STAR an orphan? #Only if we let it become one.

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 22 2005,12:18)]KB2TPP writes:

"motorola's ....current conventional product lineup is comprised of cheap, flimsy, made in china CRAP compared to the offerings from Vertex (aka Yaesu), Kenwood and Icom.

SHEER NONSENCE, unless you think its fair to compair motorola's bottom line product against Yaesu's top of the line. if you compair Yaesu's best (VX-6 or7) to Motorola's best, an XTS5000R there is simply NO compairison. Motorola's offering will go deeper, longer, take a greater beating, and do FAR FAR more then any Yaesu product.

Does ANY Yaesu, Icom or Kenwood product do APCO 25? #My XTS does!



"Even Vertex (Yaesu) has mil-spec HAM portables like the FT-60, or the SUBMERSIBLE VX-6/VX-7's and the latest public safety rugged VX-170. With it's 700mw (3/4 watt AUDIO) out I dare you to tell me this radio could not hold it's own against even, dare I say, a Saber or MT1000"


NOW THERE YOU GO AGAIN. Sabers and MT1000 radios are a 10 + year old product. Come on, be fair. #I put my XTS5000R up against ANY jap radio....and tit will outperform on any listed spec, and wayyyyyyy out performs on important capibillities like selectivity and reggedness.
There is no compairison between the Xcvr selectivity between a Saber, HT/JT/MTS or XTS and ANY jap radio. Ever been to Dayton? #Its not the Motorola HTs that squawk, squeal and howl! #

Now, if you think that submersibillity is the cat's meow.....try a Saber submersible (a 15 year old design) or if you want to compair new product to new product, look at an an XTS5000R.


W9WHE
APCO 25 compliant
uhm, hey buddy, Kenwood has P25 portables...ever heard of the TK-5210? Full encryption capability too.
Icom has both P25 mobiles and portables as well.
Maybe you should spend a little time on their respective web pages downloading their spec sheets before making yourself look stupid to the world. the US Forest Service has been buying P25 TK-5210's for over a year, and they love them. Take a look at the TSA's latest bid, they bought both Icom and Kenwood P25 portables. Why? Because it's a better use of OUR tax money. They can get just as good (if not better) product for less, this means more radios for more responders. The list price of an XTS5000 is a *RIPOFF* 5 grand with P25 and trunking.
The same radio from Kenwood is only 2295. Do the math.

Brand loyalty among hams: anothe reason we further have less credibility with the rest of the world. At one time we led and others followed. Now we are way behind in the crowd.

By the way W9WHE, I am glad you have the 5 grand to afford the Motorola XTS series radios you claim to have, and you have the 600 dollar smart RIB, the 280 dollar factory cable as well as the 400 dollar CPS software (with license you signed of course) and don't forget your 1000 dollar laptop to PROGRAM that XTS5K!

With what you spent on your setup, one could buy a completely field programmable HF-UHF setup, complete with antenna tuner and multi-band antenna, and talk anywhere, anytime anyplace while your overpriced XTS would make a nice wheel chock or paperweight. You know, kinda like the Lousiana State APCO P25 TRS went out during Katrina. Yeah, what saved the day? HAM RADIO GOT RIGHT THROUGH. And Motorola had the audacity to bash us hams when WE BUSTED OUR BUTTS to make it happen. Remember, it was THEIR OVERPRICED UNRELIABLE POS TRUNKING SYSTEM THAT FAILED. They should be held accountable. No wait, they'll just sell them more radios!

Happy HAMMING!

and the call here is KB4TPP! 73!

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 22 2005,11:45)]One very niaeve poster writes:


"And just like typical American greed (why do you hate Americans?) live for today screw tommorow mentality, Motorola gladly sells us out, firing 1/3 of it's workforce in 2001...."

So they should continue to employ 1/3 of the people they cannot afford and go out of business, resulting in 3/3 of people being un-employed? #Isn't 1/3 unemployed better then 3/3?
here's an idea, quit giving underperforming CEO's and CFO's record profit, sell reliable products and not try to screw everyone then you dont have to layoff the hardworking Americans who actually do the real actual work of making your company profitable.

It is the workers who make the products who make a company profitable. The Japanese figured this out along time ago and that is why they are kicking our butts. But our fat, lazy greedy elitist pigs have yet to learn they are only screwing themselves out of business when they screw over their workforce.

[kc8ycz]

Well let me just say this. Some people complained about Echolink when it was new others complained about IRLP and some complained about the code/no code issues. In the end it will come whether we like it or not. Its like the movie Field of Dreams. "If you build it, they will come".

73
Reggie
KC8YCZ

[k2jsv]

To add to the list of Field Programmable Motorola Portables.

XTS5000, field programmable, APCO25, data capable and now has an option and accesories to allow accurate location information.

So much for D-Star

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (KC2KIT @ Sep. 22 2005,18:17)]To add to the list of Field Programmable Motorola Portables.

XTS5000, field programmable, APCO25, data capable and now has an option and accesories to allow accurate location information.

So much for D-Star
So what, the XTS5000 can do basic aGPS with a 381.00 speaker mike. Keep in mind, it is ONLY EFFECTIVE when the user has a clear view of the sky to pick up aGPS signals. It is about as useful (or useless) as aGPS in CDMA celphones. I wouldn't be my life on it.

Besides, Kenwood's FleetSync has offered AVL since it's introduction in 1998. It doesn't require a 5000 dollar radio or a proprietary trunking system to work and can function on both trunked and conventional modes.

Big deal, we can all play "I can whiz farther than yours" all day long like 15 year olds with their cheap car stereos. The bottom line is, no digital air interface will make it in the ham world until:

1)- it is offered in abundance by the major HAM manufacturers or can be had cheaply by commercial radio manufacturers as CHEAP SURPLUS.

2)-there is widespread demand for it. By listening to the deafening silence and stagnant colostomy bag convo on local repeaters lately, this is hardly the case.

3)-there is affordable infrastructure available, albeit either from the big three or the LMR guys, and available on practical VHF/UHF bands (sorry, 1.2Ghz can't cut it).

Whatever digital CAI (that's Common Air Interface) is favored, how about some support by our supposed leadership? Where is the ARRL on these issues? The public service crowd has APCO and they started on the digital path over 15 years ago. Meanwhile in Newington, nothing but silence like the local repeaters around town.

[KB1DIW]

The IMBE codec is APCO approved form of digital modulation. APCO is not a government body, but tends to be heard by all the players. Similar to what NFPA is to the fire service and building codes.

If you look close at the requirements of DStar, the backhaul stuff requires quite a bit of bandwidth to work at its potentinal.

The problem with DStar, as much as it has a nice "cool" potentinal is that its not as an open standard as the IMBE codec is. You can buy any P25 radio and it will worth with another. Moto to Kenwood to Icom to whatever.

Busniesses, public safety to the town dump is using this standard.

Commerical radios generally are not field programmable as stated due to FCC requirements. Motorola, Kenwood and the big makers do make field programmable digital radios.

HOWEVER

That option is usually limited to the wildland's fire services where its legitimetly needed. Most manufactures restrict this option to quilified buyers.

Those of you who feel the need to modify your radios to talk to the cops in an "emergency" because the rules say so, need your head examine and then shot. Lets use some common sense here.

AVL has been around for a very long time. Moto has had it for quite some time, just as much as Kenwood has. There are many 3rd party soultions. My old PD looked into it in 1989.

The reason why you cannot crossband two radios is due to the resync of the data that is needed. This is why the commerial stuff is expensive. It takes the data stream, breaks it down, reconstructs it and out it goes. Simply hooking up two radio's together does not give you a clear voice.

Either way with DStar it comes down to this:

You need the infrasture to make full use of its features. I highly doubt that many people are going to shell out a boat load of money for the repeaters and a MW backhaul between the sites.

Most of the stuff is geared towards 1.2GHz and that's not a favorable long range band to play in.

[n3jfw]

Quote[/b] (KB4TPP @ Sep. 22 2005,19:30)]By the way W9WHE, I am glad you have the 5 grand to afford the Motorola XTS series radios you claim to have, and you have the 600 dollar smart RIB, the 280 dollar factory cable as well as the 400 dollar CPS software (with license you signed of course) and don't forget your 1000 dollar laptop to PROGRAM that XTS5K!
A good used astro portable (astro sabers and xts3000s) is under 1000. With 255 modes, you don't need direct entry. Used xts5000's are showing up slowly, but they're still around 1500-2000

Also, you also don't use a srib unless doing flash upgrading.
The hln4008e rib is only $200.00

You can build a programming cable for less than 30 bucks.

CPS runs on a any modern machine, no need for a special machine.

[W9WHE]

KB4TPP writes:

"I am glad you have the 5 grand to afford the Motorola XTS series radios.... you have the 600 dollar smart RIB, the 280 dollar cable as well as the 400 dollar CPS software ..... and don't forget your 1000 dollar laptop to PROGRAM that XTS5K!"

You "ASSume" way too much, my friend. You very mis-informed. First, real hams don't buy retail. They convert used commercial gear to ham use.

Thus, if you watched E bay, you would know:

Used XTS3000 radios can go for around $500 or so for a model I, more for an XTS5000);
New aftermarket programming cables go for $39;
You don't need a laptop to program an XTS, a desktop works just fine!

Perhaps you should be more careful when you accuse people of being un-informed. But then again, as an angry liberal, you know everything and anybody that disagrees with you is #just plain stupid.

W9WHE
APCO 25 compliant.

[ka5s]

Quote[/b] (VE7TKO @ Sep. 19 2005,04:53)]Why not do APCO-25? That way we can continue in the fine tradition of using used commercial gear.
One might ask what good it would do, and what it would cost. Amateur VHF FM only became really popular in the USA some 35 years ago, and attempts in the 80's to replace it with ACSSB fell down because the cost was not worth the benefit. And how do we measure the benefit?

One problem for Amateur operation is that digital modulation potentially causes a more objectionable kind of co-channel interference, and Amateur - that is, affordable! - rigs unfortunately often have IF filters with marginal skirts. Coordinating more than a few APCO-25 repeaters would probably reduce our ability to communicate. Talk about putting the Nextels amongst the chickens!

Of course we COULD adopt Tetra (http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/2000/mayjune/jarvis.html) or GSM. (http://forums.cingular.com/cng/board/message?board.id=motorola&message.id=36501)

Heh!!


Cortland
KA5S

[KB1DIW]

Quote[/b] ]Quote (KB4TPP @ Sep. 22 2005,19:30)
By the way W9WHE, I am glad you have the 5 grand to afford the Motorola XTS series radios you claim to have, and you have the 600 dollar smart RIB, the 280 dollar factory cable as well as the 400 dollar CPS software (with license you signed of course) and don't forget your 1000 dollar laptop to PROGRAM that XTS5K!


I own 6 Astro secure radios. You just need to know where to look and when to buy. 3 VHF, 1 UHF, 2 800's. I have been told they are the most clean sounding radio's on the repeater in analog. The nice thing about the commerical stuff, you can easily maintain them with a service montior yourself, unlike most of the HAM stuff used in the VHF/UHF bands.

[AC0GT]

For people that are tearing down Icom and/or D-STAR on price here is a list of prices for Icom D-STAR handhelds and some accessories from a popular vendor.

IC-V82 (2 meter FM HT) $210
IC-U82 (440 FM HT) $210
UT-118 (D-STAR digital board) #$200
CS-V82 (programming software) $41
OPC-478 (RS-232C data cable) $46
OPC-478U (USB data cable) $61

Looks to me to be on the same price range as used APCO-25 equipment, but lacking the need for modification for Amateur bands. Also looks to be on the same level as any other digital mode that an Amateur might try.

If someone is complaining about the price I think it's because they are looking for something to complain about.

[KB1DIW]

Motorola doesn't "own" or P25 belongs to them. Not sure if it was a bad choice of words or not.

DVSI wrote the codec and it was chosen by APCO. Motorola's own codec (VSLEP) lost to DVSI.

Motorola did quickly pick up the ball and run with it, as they were the only vendor that had digital gear in operation, but evey major vendor out there now has IMBE products, all paying licensing fees to DVSI.

Commerical Kenwood has a lot of neat stuff coming out, and we shall see what happens. Unfortunatly, MA/COM decided to do their own thing. Even though they have an IMBE option out there, it is not P25 compliant.

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Sep. 23 2005,17:44)]For people that are tearing down Icom and/or D-STAR on price here is a list of prices for Icom D-STAR handhelds and some accessories from a popular vendor.

IC-V82 (2 meter FM HT) $210
IC-U82 (440 FM HT) $210
UT-118 (D-STAR digital board) #$200
CS-V82 (programming software) $41
OPC-478 (RS-232C data cable) $46
OPC-478U (USB data cable) $61

Looks to me to be on the same price range as used APCO-25 equipment, but lacking the need for modification for Amateur bands. #Also looks to be on the same level as any other digital mode that an Amateur might try.

If someone is complaining about the price I think it's because they are looking for something to complain about.
There is nothing to complain about for price?

Did you actually add this up?

It's only $500 for an equipped HT!! For a HT fer pete's sake!

For that price I can go to the local dealer and get 5 - count-em...5..., T2h handhelds!

I can go to Goodyear and get four new tires - installed!!!

That's the house payment for a month!!

That's the car payment for 2 months!!

That's half the price for my high schooler to take the week-long end-of-year trip with the school orchestra!!!

It's round-trip plane fare for two to Disneyworld in Florida!!!

That's gasoline money for the household for six weeks!!

I wonder just how many hams Icom really thinks have $500 just burning a hole in their pocket that they will drop on something like this?

tim ab0wr

[VE7TKO]

Quote[/b] (W2NJS @ Sep. 23 2005,15:28)].......But getting back to the digital stuff, what got under my skin about all the D-star hoopla was the fact that here comes Icom
with a NEW, DIGITAL handheld radio for $200+. Not bad,
huh, for a DIGITAL radio? Wrong! To make this whatever-
it-is radio into a REAL DIGITAL radio costs you another $200+, for the required card
which to me is a cheap shot marketing gimmick, and as much as I like Icom's stuff (and I own several units, including a 706), I won't go near this digital equipment unless and until they stop with the sneaky marketing tactics and price things realistically. It's the same crap that Uniden tried to pull with the first P25/LTR trunking scanners; buy the radio, then fork over an additional $200+ for the card to make the radio actually do what they say it will do in the advertising.

W2NJS
Thomas W. Donohoe - W2NJS

ICOM is 100% honest in their advertising of the IC-V82/U82 transceivers. On the front of the brochure, the first thing listed is the “OPTIONAL DIGITAL UNIT, UT-118”. On the back of the brochure, under the “OPTIONS” list is shown “UT-118 DIGITAL UNIT”. It says in clear English, “The board is a option”. I bought the ID-V82 without the board, and two weeks later ordered the board. I did not feel cheated. There are a few IC-V82 radios in our club, and the members are all happy with them. They are holding back on purchasing the boards because they said wait and see if it is widely accepted by others. They said that the radio at the prices they paid is a good deal.

What I do find dishonest is when people try to compare well-used equipment prices to brand new equipment prices. Maybe you know a new car dealer who is willing to sell me a new vehicle for the price of a 15-year-old car. I don’t expect it to happen, but apparently you do. I will be picking up my new ID-800H next week, but I expect to pay the price of a new radio.

Some of the people who are knocking D-STAR prices paid much more for their used P-25 radio than what I have paid for my new D-STAR ham radios. The D-STAR name says it all; "Digital Smart Technologies for Amateur Radio". Notice those last two words; “Amateur Radio”?

My Rescue Technology chest pack holds two radios. One D-STAR 2-meter, dual mode HT, and one HT from the organization that I am assisting. In my area there is not yet the need for the P-25 standard, but it is probably coming. At that time, I might invest in one. It will be either a new ICOM P-25 radio, or whatever good used deal I can find.

[n3jfw]

chevettes and corvettes bro

[n4xts]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 23 2005,08:06)]KB4TPP writes:

"I am glad you have the 5 grand to afford the Motorola XTS series radios.... you have the 600 dollar smart RIB, the 280 dollar cable as well as the 400 dollar CPS software ..... and don't forget your 1000 dollar laptop to PROGRAM that XTS5K!"

You "ASSume" way too much, my friend. You very mis-informed. First, real hams don't buy retail. They convert used commercial gear to ham use.

Thus, if you watched E bay, you would know:

Used XTS3000 radios can go for around $500 or so for a model I, more for an XTS5000);
New aftermarket programming cables go for $39;
You don't need a laptop to program an XTS, a desktop works just fine!

Perhaps you should be more careful when you accuse people of being un-informed. But then again, as an angry liberal, you know everything and anybody that disagrees with you is #just plain stupid.

W9WHE
APCO 25 compliant.
let's see...I own:

System Saber III VHF, Saber II VHF, Saber I UHF
MTS2000 UHF and HT1K VHF. Have owned and serviced most of the radios you have. BFD. Who cares.

I have complete service manuals on all the above as well as other Genesis radios (HT600, MT1000, P200, etc).
Spent more time building and rebuilding these radios out of high school into my 20's.

So tell me, how much did you license for you CPS and RSS cost you? Last I checked, the license for Astro CPS was close to 400 bucks. Of course it supports portable and mobiles.

And to those who buy used Astros off Ebay, how many of them are legit radios? Did not Motorola raise a big stink with a certain man out west who was building such great deal "100 percent Motorola parts" Astro and XTS series radios? Radios with bogus flashcodes, stolen intellectual property, and questionable performance issues. Please, do a little research before having diareeah of the mouth.

No thanks. I would much rather spend my money on a NEW WITH WARRANTY LEGIT radio. Unlike Motorola, Kenwood, Icom and Vertex don't sell their software for exhorbitant prices, nor do they make you sign an EULA and get approval before selling it to you.

did I mention a HAM radio needs no RSS/CPS, RIB, cables, EULA, etc to be on freq anytime, anyplace, anywhere?

I have to ask W9WHE, are you the type who totes your XTS5000 programmed to police frequencies/trunking systems and shows up in coffee shops etc blaring loud? Newsflash: no one cares. You think at hamfests people look and go "ooh wow...he's got a MOTOROLA", again, even most hams could care less about your APCO 25, digital blah blah. The average CDMA celphone/PDA has more technology and capability than our overpriced Astro radios. A Treo650 is a fine example. So tell me, WHO REALLY CARES?

When it comes down to it, the "real hams" are the ones who can show up in places like New Orleans where those great digital P25 Astro Smartzone trunking systems go offline and can take their measly 1000 dollar 706 MK IIG's and FT-897's and get traffic flowing. The real hams are the ones who can adapt and overcome and don't rely on proprietary commercial radios or systems to pass traffic. Real hams serve their community by doing real work like public service events and training.

And they don't need some cop radio to do it either. At the end of the day it is the SKILL of the operator not the appliance that seperates the MEN from the BOYS.

[N2MWE]

Are you for real? Everything will be D-Star compliant. What about Alinco? What about people who DO have Motorola radios AND have the software to program them?
Like ECI asked...how much did Icom pay you to do the commercial on QRZ?

[KB1DIW]

Quote[/b] (KB4TPP @ Sep. 23 2005,20:27)][quote=KB4TPP] writes:
System Saber III VHF, Saber II VHF, Saber I UHF
MTS2000 UHF and HT1K VHF. Have owned and serviced most of the radios you have. BFD. Who cares.

I have complete service manuals on all the above as well as other Genesis radios (HT600, MT1000, P200, etc).
Spent more time building and rebuilding these radios out of high school into my 20's.

So tell me, how much did you license for you CPS and RSS cost you? Last I checked, the license for Astro CPS was close to 400 bucks. Of course it supports portable and mobiles.

And to those who buy used Astros off Ebay, how many of them are legit radios? Did not Motorola raise a big stink with a certain man out west who was building such great deal "100 percent Motorola parts" Astro and XTS series radios? #Radios with bogus flashcodes, stolen intellectual property, and questionable performance issues. Please, do a little research before having diareeah of the mouth.

No thanks. I would much rather spend my money on a NEW WITH WARRANTY LEGIT radio. Unlike Motorola, Kenwood, Icom and Vertex don't sell their software for exhorbitant prices, nor do they make you sign an EU