ad: Schulman-1

Yaesu's Newest Transceiver The FTdx3000

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by W4CLM, May 19, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
  1. K8WHB

    K8WHB Ham Member QRZ Page

    You HAVE to see that Flex 6000 in person to really appreciate it. I was stunned by both the construction of the radio and what it will do. Had a long discussion with one of the Flex engineers where he went over in quite a bit of detail of the design concept and how it was executed. Also (but I think not immediately) Flex will have a receive-only version available as well (the way that radio's hardware is constructed looks like it makes doing a receive only version actually quite easy).

    To answer another question that was posted, the Flex radios are, like Elecraft, DZKit and Ten-Tec, made in the good ole USA (in the case of Flex, in Texas).

    I personally don't own a Flex right now (though I know numerous folks that do, both 3000s and 5000s) but after using the Kachina 505DSP I have, which in some ways was the grandfather of the Flex, I'm convinced digital signal processing is the way to go. With the 6000, Flex puts the digital right at the antenna connector on RX and the only thing between the digital & the antenna jack on the TX side is the PA (and I'm still waiting for someone to come out with a commercial transmitter that does Class H at 100W - Gates is doing it with commercial AM BCB transmitters at 50KW, but for many 100s of kilobucks).
     
  2. W4AMP

    W4AMP Ham Member QRZ Page

    Nothing has flexibility for connections like the new Kenwood ts990. It has a black sheet of paper on the back, you just plug anything you want into it. : )

    I have a FTDX5000MP, and I don't think any rig mentioned in this thread can compete with that model.
     
  3. KB5UBI

    KB5UBI Ham Member QRZ Page

    I presently own a FT-920 and a FT-950 so those are what I will use as a comparison. The 920 was easy to use with all the knobs; the menu items were secondary. The 950's receiver is already 2 S units stronger than 100 watts will support. I can copy stations 100% that can't even hear 100 watts. Other than the spectral display, the IF out and the USB interface, I do not see what the FT-3000 has to offer over the FT-950. In fact, the FT-3000's front panel is a step backwards with too many knobs wasted for the DSP adjustments. The DSP controls on the FT-950 are simple and very effective. Yes, there is a learning curve for the 950 and will be for the 3000. For example, I have found two ways on the 950 to use a separate receive antenna and the 950's DSP works flawlessly if you know how to use it.

    In review, the FT-3000's spectral display and IF out are a plus, but the rest is a step backwards.

    If Yaesu wants to improve an under two thousand dollar rig, add a 500 watt final, a 50 cent IF OUT jack and a real balanced mic input to the 950.
     
  4. KM6CQ

    KM6CQ XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Flex has some the very best audio I have ever heard on HF. It seems as if they understand a few things.
    I use PWR SDR/IF with my panadapter. It works very well.

    Dan
     
  5. N9WW

    N9WW Ham Member QRZ Page

    They may do audio well (if being 6+khz wide is considered "good audio"), but not CW.
    Jim
     
  6. KB2NHW

    KB2NHW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Wow!!! Its the Icom IC-718 Deluxe!!!

    Thats what it looks like to me. By initial looks alone in the only picture ive seen, id pay about $900 for an FT-3000.

    Looks cheapish.
     
  7. ZL1NZ

    ZL1NZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why does the FCC have to approve this radio for sale? Or is that only for lower level licensees? I would have thought US hams, at least the higher level licences, could design and build their own gear. Just curious.
     
  8. KT1F

    KT1F Ham Member QRZ Page

    Anyone with any level license can do homebrew here but the FCC imposes emission specs on equipment that is commercially sold.

    Edit: After a bit of reading, I'm not really sure if HF transceivers really require certification or just power amplifiers.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2012
  9. W7ARX

    W7ARX Guest

    Frankly, I find some of the older radios just as "functional" and with HRD or IF Stage SDR you can make your own band scope which is much easier to see....I prefer having some functions external to the radio front panel for real time receive audio evaluation (i.e. width, shift, contour, etc.) vs menus. Adding more eye candy does do much for me....

    If the numbers are really stellar, then perhaps, but I bet they aren't....

    One think I cannot understand about the major radio manufacturers:

    1. Standardize the mic jacks and preamp voltages.
    2. Standardize the headphone and key jacks to be the same size (i.e. 1/4 inch vs mini plug).
    3. Standardize the Amp Keying jacks (RCA vs DIN Plug, etc.)
    4. Why not have true stereo receive in your headsets like the dual watch on the FT-1000 series.
    5. Stanardize Up/Down on the radio (i.e. you get to your band, hit up/down and the radio steps up the band (or down) a preset amount on khz, vs using memories or twirling the knob.

    The basic list goes on. Instead, they add lots of knobs you never use, eye candy that really doesn't tell you much, etc.

    I would like to see HF Radios with OPTIONAL antenna tuners. At 3K and up, who is going to take theirs portable, mobile, field day, etc.?
    Adds weight and heat to the radio, not to mention cost. Would like to see a separate Band Scope "monitor" option instead of automatically placing a tiny display on the radio just to add "attractiveness".

    Will see what the jury says on this unit as well as the Kenwood....


    GL to all...
     
  10. K0RO

    K0RO Guest

    Many seem to knock the rig down, price-point, due to lack of two receivers.

    That does not mean it doesn't have dual-watch capability. Icom has had that with the 756 Pro and 7600 for years with a single receiver.

    I see this as competing against the IC-7600, but with a receiver nearly as good as that in the FTDX5000, which would come in really handy for contests and other crowded band conditions. The up-conversion and 3khz roofing filter in the 7600 cannot compete with the 5000, the Orion II, the K3 or even the TS-590s when it comes to handling strong signals on a crowded band without creating mixing products that can be heard.

    So I am expecting a list price in the mid $3,000 range, with a street price around $3,000. If Yaesu has also gotten rid of the power spike on transmit and the tendency to create clicks, it'll be a contender when someone is looking at an IC-7600. I don't expect it to be a $1500 to $2000 rig, and don't think it should be. A single-RX but equipped K3 is about $3,000, and I expect that is where, or a bit below, this will be.

    Funny how people dog it on looks, etc. Might not be for everyone, but the real key will be how good the RX is (and the FTDX5000 is good) and how clean the transmit is.

    73
    Art, K0RO
     
  11. M5FRA

    M5FRA Ham Member QRZ Page

    Before you do look at the TS-590S, I traded my 7200 for one.
     
  12. KA5KKT

    KA5KKT Ham Member QRZ Page

    I haven't read all of the thread. Given it's 9 MHz IF Output, the FTDX-3000 ought to work well with N8LP's LP-Pan module. This allows output of panadaptor features to a computer via the IF Out from some radios. Check it out at telepostinc.com. Larry Phipps has done some good work with the LP-Pan. Software from Pete, F5VNB is currently working well. That software is named, NaP3.
     
  13. K8WHB

    K8WHB Ham Member QRZ Page

    Even a non-licensed person can construct a transmitter - they just can't put it on the air. The only thing a non-ham is forbidden to construct specifically in the FCC rules is a stand-alone power amplifier.

    The FCC does have spurious emisson specs that all radio transmitters must meet (even home-brew ones - though we home brewers "self certify" our gear), plus the Part 15 broadband spurious emission rules. In addition, any radio that has any kind of a scanning feature (and nearly all amateur receivers for at least 2 decades have had at least a memory scan feature) is subject to the constraints of the Telecom Act of 1996 that prohibited scanning receivers that could receive cellular telephone transmissions, so the manufacturers have to certify that the radios do not receive that range nor can they be easily modified to receive in that range.

    One thing that is much different than decades ago is that the testing is NOT done by the FCC itself any more. The manufacturers have to get the testing done by a 3rd party testing lab, which has to be on the FCC's approved testing lab list, then submit the data to the FCC for review. The FCC can then come back and ask for additional data if the OET is not satisfied (I went through that routine a couple of times while I was at Mitsubishi). Most of those labs are up to their eyeballs in work (remember, they not only test ham gear but every TV, cell phone, computer peripheral, you name it that uses RF frequencies has to undergo testing). One of the most fun things about being a manufacturer is trying to schedule production of prototypes, get the testing lined up, get all the data in the format the FCC wants and all the other "grunt" work it takes to get a piece of equipment to market. You've heard that old joke "The job ain't done 'till the paperwork is finished"? It is SOOOO true when dealing with the government, including the FCC.
     
  14. W7ARX

    W7ARX Guest

    I can tell you from experience, with my older FT-1000MPMK5, with two receivers, in Dual Watch even on the same frequency on both VFOs, the receive capability far beats what I had in the IC-756PRO, FT-2000 and even the K3 (single receiver also). I can hear much better as I have diversity reception and one being analog and the other digital allows me to hear totally differently, weak signals that I could not pull out with either of the aforementioned radios. That isn't to say they aren't good receivers, or good in crowded band conditions (with the exception of the 2000), but for weak signal work, having real time manual adjustable controls vs menu driven, made the difference for me in hearing weak, buried signals.

    A better antenna system however, is the key.
     
  15. K6OK

    K6OK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Your well-reasoned post raised good points supporting your $3000 prediction, but you didn't mention the Kenwood TS-590. If one thinks the TS-990 will be positioned in the market against the FTDX-5000, then one would think Yaesu needs a midrange rig to counter the TS-590 with something of similar performance and price. I don't believe the FT-950 is that rig as the rcvr numbers are just not there. Perhaps Yaesu is willing to take fewer sales of the FTDX3000 and fatter margins at $3k and cede the $1600 bracket to Kenwood... ultimately I see the FTDX3000 as a TS-590 plus an LCD spectrum scope, and thus ought to be in the low $2k range if Yaesu wants a lot of midrange sales in this economy. But what do I know? :) 73 Jim K6OK
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: UR5CDX-1