IC-2400 dual-bander
Harold Winard
ICOM IC-2400 dual-band transceiver? I'm
looking for comments pro or con about the
performance of the rig. I'd also like to
know if anyone has information on extending
the rig's receive range up to 460 or 470 MHz.
Thanks and 73,
Harold
KB2M
h...@pyuxz.bellcore.com
com...@silver.bacs.indiana.edu
I haven't actually seen an IC-2400 but the Nov/Dec 1989 _Icom
Newsletter_ from International Radio and Computers, Inc. [ 751 S.
Macedo Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34983 (407)878-8856 ] describes
mods for IC-2400 which expand UHF coverage 400-479 MHz and VHF 138-174
MHz. There is also a 300 MHz mod, and a crossband repeater mod. Does
anyone know if the IC-2400 in repeater mode will do offsets??
Same issue of Icom Newsletter has out-of-band mod for IC-2GAT (add a
diode, no retuning). A friend did this and his rig now transmits
138-178 MHz.
--
Frank W9MKV re...@gold.bacs.indiana.edu
ph...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
> I haven't actually seen an IC-2400 but the Nov/Dec 1989 _Icom
> Newsletter_ from International Radio and Computers, Inc. [ 751 S.
> Macedo Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34983 (407)878-8856 ] describes
> mods for IC-2400 which expand UHF coverage 400-479 MHz and VHF 138-174
> MHz. There is also a 300 MHz mod, and a crossband repeater mod. Does
> anyone know if the IC-2400 in repeater mode will do offsets??
Is the Icom Newsletter any good? Has the IC-3210A been covered in any
back issues? I talked to them on the phone (and I believe they even have
an 800 number) and asked them about mods for the IC-3210A (was referred
there Icom) and they said they had none. I then asked about the IC-2GAT
(which is one I knew then exists, because I had it) and they said that
all they have are mods for IC-2AT and IC-02AT for out of band receive
(in the latter) and more audio power. It SEEMED they were really a way
behind type of operation.
Now my question, to someone who reads the Icom Newsletter, did they
publish mods for the IC-3210A or the IC-2GAT? It would seem odd that
they would for the IC-2400A and not the others. If so, I guess the
person I talked to on the phone did not know anything, or really did
not want to bother looking (they sure turned me off of ever subscribing).
> Same issue of Icom Newsletter has out-of-band mod for IC-2GAT (add a
> diode, no retuning). A friend did this and his rig now transmits
> 138-178 MHz.
This is also in the Service Manual for the IC-2GAT. Look at the specs
and the diode matrix for the Italian version of the radio. Find the
diode that exists in the Italian version and NO OTHER.
--Phil Howard, KA9WGN--
<ph...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
com...@silver.bacs.indiana.edu
>>... the Nov/Dec 1989 _Icom Newsletter_ from International Radio and
>>Computers, Inc. [ 751 S. Macedo Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34983
>>(407)878-8856 ] describes mods for IC-2400 which expand UHF
>>coverage 400-479 MHz and VHF 138-174 MHz. There is also a 300 MHz
>>mod, and a crossband repeater mod. Does anyone know if the IC-2400
>>in repeater mode will do offsets??
>Is the Icom Newsletter any good?...
Frankly, not very. But it has no competition; it's the best source of
collected mods I know (they also publish Yaesu and Kenwood
newsletters). Their published instructions for mods are often
abbreviated and ambiguous (but all I have tried have worked). They
claim copyright on info taken verbatim from this newsgroup (I know
because I discovered some of my own writing in the Icom Newsletter).
>Has the IC-3210A been covered in any back issues?...
I don't have a complete set. The 1989 index does list out-of-band and
crossband repeater mods for IC-3210A.
>It SEEMED they were really a way behind type of operation... they
>sure turned me off of ever subscribing).... --Phil Howard, KA9WGN--
I get the impression from reading their catalog that they sell lots of
ham equipment to non-hams. I'm not sure I like being on their mailing
list.
--
Frank W9MKV re...@gold.bacs.indiana.edu
Usenet file owner
>>>... the Nov/Dec 1989 _Icom Newsletter_ from International Radio and
>>>Computers, Inc. [ 751 S. Macedo Blvd., Port St. Lucie, FL 34983
>>>(407)878-8856 ] describes mods for IC-2400 which expand UHF
>>>coverage 400-479 MHz and VHF 138-174 MHz. There is also a 300 MHz
>>>mod, and a crossband repeater mod. Does anyone know if the IC-2400
>>>in repeater mode will do offsets??
>>Is the Icom Newsletter any good?...
>Frankly, not very. But it has no competition; it's the best source of
>collected mods I know (they also publish Yaesu and Kenwood
>newsletters). Their published instructions for mods are often
>abbreviated and ambiguous (but all I have tried have worked). They
>claim copyright on info taken verbatim from this newsgroup (I know
>because I discovered some of my own writing in the Icom Newsletter).
Do they charge for subscriptions? If they do, this would really piss me
off. I have posted mods here, and I am about to post another one in the
next couple of days. If somebody is taking this information that I have
written, claiming a copyright on it, and SELLING it, they are obviously
doing something immoral and possibly illegal. I am tempted to
subscribe before I post my next mod, and then prosecute them to the
maximum extent possible if they do this with something that I have
posted into the public domain.
Corollary: These guys that go to hamfests, and charge $50+ to modify
radios, really bother me. They refuse to tell you exactly what the
modification is, because this would of course hurt their "business." If
somebody wants to pay them to work on their radio, that's acceptable to
me. If people pay them because the information is not available to them
about how to do it themselves, this really bothers me. Capitalizing on
peoples ignorance is immoral. Keeping people ignorant by not revealing
public information, just so you can take their money, is worse. (Note:
This does not apply to businesses keeping trade secrets that they
developed themselves. The key here is that the information is not
public, and is still the intellectual property of the owner.)
In the rare case that original ideas Kenneth J. Hendrickson N8DGN
are found here, I am responsible. Owen W328, E. Lansing, MI 48825
Internet: k...@pollux.usc.edu UUCP: ...!uunet!pollux!kjh
Chuq Von Rospach
>written, claiming a copyright on it, and SELLING it, they are obviously
>doing something immoral and possibly illegal. I am tempted to
>subscribe before I post my next mod, and then prosecute them to the
>maximum extent possible if they do this with something that I have
>posted into the public domain.
Not necessarily. Especially with the term 'public domain' -- which implies
that there are *no* rights to the work at all. If something is in the public
domain, it is free and clear, meaning they have the same moral, ethical and
legal rights as the author, since the author, by putting it in the public
domain, has relinquished rights to it.
An argument could be made under current copyright law that there's an
implicit copyright on the material; for postings on the net, I personally
doubt that'd stick up in court. Unless you explicitly copyright a posting,
you should assume it's public domain, and once it's public domain, someone
can do *anything* they want with it. If you care about it, copyright it.
>Corollary: These guys that go to hamfests, and charge $50+ to modify
>radios, really bother me. They refuse to tell you exactly what the
>modification is, because this would of course hurt their "business."
It *is* their business. If you don't like it, there's no reason why you
can't come up with your own patch. They're under no obligation to give away
the results of their work -- and you're under no obligation to buy it.
They're not keeping you from figuring out the fixes for yourself, after all.
--
Chuq Von Rospach <+> ch...@apple.com <+> [This is myself speaking]
When it comes to matters ourside your specialties, you are consistently and
brilliantly stupid [....] with respect to matters you haven't studied and
have had no experience basing your opinions on casual gossip [....] and
plain misinformation -- unsuspected because you haven't attempted to verify it.
-- Robert Heinlein to J.W. Campbell, Jr. 1941