Kenwood TS-990

[W3WN]

The FCC does not test nor certificate such gear. The only thing a new transceiver must "pass" is 47 CFR Part 15 for radiated and conducted emissions, and that's primarily because it has oscillators that operate on multiple frequencies and the receivers are capable of scanning. There is no Part 97 requirement for certification of ham equipment other than amplifiers. < snip >

Steve, I don't dispute a word you say. I'm simple relaying what the Kenwood rep said when he was asked about it. (This was on Saturday morning, when I went back to get a picture of the rig at NB3C's request) He also talked extensively about their "clean room" used for testing & that they had the exact same equipment for testing that the FCC used for type acceptance.

No, I don't know who the gentleman was, he wasn't wearing a name tag that I could see when I heard this line of... dialog. For all I know, he was someone from the commercial side who was pressed into service and mistakenly thinking that amateur gear had to undergo the same testing procedures as the commercial stuff. (He was wearing a Kenwood shirt and a Kenwood lanyard was flapping around on his neck, so I think we can presume with reasonable certainty that he was a Kenwood employee... at least at the time)

He also waffled on the final cost of the rig. And when he was asked how the 990 compared to other manufacturer's offerings, he concentrated on Yaesu's and did not mention anything else.

So if we ever figure out who this guy was, you can tell him he was incorrect on type acceptance. I'm just telling you what he said. If it was BS, then it was BS, but don't shoot the messenger.

Oh, one interesting tidbit... when I first stopped at Kenwood's booth late Friday morning, a different rep pointed to an empty display area and told someone that they were waiting for the TS-990 to be delivered, and were expecting it on Saturday. Yet at the same time, there was the 990 under plexiglass directly opposite him. Didn't make sense at the time, but considering the alleged video that was mentioned in another post... possibly (and I'm just guessing here) the prototype or mock-up was under plexiglass for display, and they were waiting for a "real one" for people to play with... which didn't arrive in time.

[K0BG]

It seems (from the posts) everyone got about the same story I did. No pricing. No specs. No touch. No timeframe for delivery. No talk about reprogramming. No answer to interface capabilities. I can't remember any Kenwood introduction like this one. Makes me wonder.

[N8YX]

I'll stick with Ten-tec (older or newer), my DDS-equipped Drake 7-line...and a K3 or two if I want bleeding-edge performance. What's really going to set this radio apart and make it worth $7-8k? For starters, how about including all bands through 1.2GHz (including 222 and 902MHz). Should Kenwood do that, mark me down for one...or two.

[AC0H]

It seems (from the posts) everyone got about the same story I did. No pricing. No specs. No touch. No timeframe for delivery. No talk about reprogramming. No answer to interface capabilities. I can't remember any Kenwood introduction like this one. Makes me wonder.

We deal with this all the time in the IT realm....
It's called "vaporware".

[N8YX]

We deal with this all the time in the IT realm....
It's called "vaporware".

Loosely translated, that means "Our customers will be our beta testers".

[AC0H]

Loosely translated, that means "Our customers will be our beta testers".

that's one interpretation.
In this instance Kenwood didn't even bring a working prototype, couldn't/wouldn't answer any questions about performance, features, availabilty or a ballpark guestimate of price.
At this point it's a rumor and nothing more.

[WB2WIK]

Loosely translated, that means "Our customers will be our beta testers".

If that's the case, I volunteer to lead that group as the Master Beta.

[WB2WIK]

Steve, I don't dispute a word you say. I'm simple relaying what the Kenwood rep said when he was asked about it. (This was on Saturday morning, when I went back to get a picture of the rig at NB3C's request) He also talked extensively about their "clean room" used for testing & that they had the exact same equipment for testing that the FCC used for type acceptance.

That wouldn't be a "clean room," that would be a "screen room," and normally that wouldn't be sufficient to test for Part 15 compatibility: Labs use semi-anechoic chambers, which are not only 100% shielded but also free of reflections over the frequency range for testing. Sounds to me like whoever it was didn't have the faintest idea what he was talking about.

[WA9SVD]

It seems (from the posts) everyone got about the same story I did. No pricing. No specs. No touch. No timeframe for delivery. No talk about reprogramming. No answer to interface capabilities. I can't remember any Kenwood introduction like this one. Makes me wonder.

That's about the way Kenwood "introduced" the TS-590 a couple of years ago. They were STILL "fine tuning" everything. While it MAY take a few more months before actual release (I hope Santa Claus thinks I've been good) I could see it's presented for sale before the end of the year.
Like ANY manufacturer recently, Kenwood isn't about to pre-release a radio model that's simply nearing completion in reality. I'd rather they get all things RIGHT, than to see things to market early, and then have recalls or significant "updates" of features and corrections to the firmware to allow for proper operation. They have to test the firmware and make it fool proof it (I VLOUNTEER to be a test operator!) as much as possible, before revisions are released.

[KD2L]

It sounds to me as if they are being careful. FCC rules don't allow it to be sold or offered for sale until it has their blessing. So that means they cannot talk price. Since they are talking late 2012 availability I'm sure there is still lots of fine tuning needing to be done. I'm more comfortable believing that I am not Kenwood beta tester than I am believing I'm not Microsofts alpha tester for new operating systems.