Anyone using an Icom IC-T8E ???
Ian Wade
I'm thinking of getting an Icom IC-T8E. Experiences anyone?
73
Ian, G3NRW
Peter Kay
I bought one on December 18 1997 and find it excellant.
The only thing at fault, like all handhelds is pager breakthrough on 2M when
used with a 'proper' antenna near pager transmitters.
Peter, G0KUX.
Ian Wade wrote in message ...
William Rothwell
Sorry - I should have said squelch and band to wideband RX it....
Apologies, Bill G0VDE
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOSPAM in operation.
Reply to bill.r...@btinternet.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Rothwell
Hi,
Got one in December - brilliant little rig. Press sql + tone on power up to
wideband it.
You will find you can switch between FM and WFM in some frequency ranges -
470 to 800 in particular - and RX TV sound (if you ....really want to....)
Also can switch between AM and FM from 300 to 400 - covers part of mil air
band. These appear as extra options in the set menu.
Finally, holding down the 1 MHz step button a second time enables 10 MHz
steps....
Just a few little tips I hope may be useful.
As I said, a super rig and good value for money - especially with the extra
undocumented features above.
Breakthru on a 'good' antenna - well, what do you expect with wide band rx -
can't have everything....
Cheers, Bill G0VDE.
Andrew Marshall
In article <69pu4m$4mr$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, William Rothwell
<Bill.R...@nospam.btinternet.com> writes
>
>As I said, a super rig and good value for money - especially with the extra
>undocumented features above.
I'm also considering getting one, and would be very interested to know
what the 6m performance is like - also whether the CTCSS encode
*and decode* performance is compatible with 10- and 12.5KHz-spacing
specification repeaters. (Many current rigs cannot decode 250Hz CTCSS
deviation, forcing the use of encode-only settings; with the
ever-rising levels of urban VHF/UHF RF pollution, this is an
increasingly irritating failing).
>Breakthru on a 'good' antenna - well, what do you expect with wide band rx -
>can't have everything....
This is somewhat of a downside, but with rigs expected to work as
surrogate scanners these days, sadly there's no getting away from it
except by using a good external bandpass filter between rig and antenna.
73,
Andrew G8BUR.
--
Andrew Marshall.
Unsolicited advertising matter unwelcome. Offenders may be blacklisted.
Stefan Kowal
I have one of these radios.
I am happy to answer questions on it.
I am very disappointed that the mode is not switchable across the
whole rx range. It is odd that Icom have permitted am/fm
switchable between 300 and 400 mHz but not elsewhere.
An early Waters & Stanton ad suggested 70mHz tx but this is not
possible.
An undocumented feature is 'listen on input'. Just press the
squelch button. let it go to resume normal rx.
Regards,
Stefan Kowal G0BJW
Bill Rothwell
Interesting comment - the dev at 50MHz is 5kHz, at 145MHz is either 2.5
or 5 MHz and at 433 MHz is 5 MHz. Not sure how good the CTCSS decode
is....
As you say, many modern rigs find 250Hz too low....but the dev ...may...
be upped a bit in future to solve this very problem.
Cheers, Bill
Andrew Marshall wrote:
>
> In article <69pu4m$4mr$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, William Rothwell
> <Bill.R...@nospam.btinternet.com> writes
> >
> >As I said, a super rig and good value for money - especially with the extra
> >undocumented features above.
>
> I'm also considering getting one, and would be very interested to know
> what the 6m performance is like - also whether the CTCSS encode
> *and decode* performance is compatible with 10- and 12.5KHz-spacing
> specification repeaters. (Many current rigs cannot decode 250Hz CTCSS
> deviation, forcing the use of encode-only settings; with the
> ever-rising levels of urban VHF/UHF RF pollution, this is an
> increasingly irritating failing).
> Andrew G8BUR.
Ian Wade
In article <34C343...@nospam.btinternet.com>, Bill Rothwell
<bill.r...@nospam.btinternet.com> writes
>Interesting comment - the dev at 50MHz is 5kHz, at 145MHz is either 2.5
>or 5 MHz and at 433 MHz is 5 MHz. Not sure how good the CTCSS decode
>is....
>As you say, many modern rigs find 250Hz too low....but the dev ...may...
>be upped a bit in future to solve this very problem.
>
Does the radio work OK through the UK's 6m repeaters? I believe they
will only accept 2.5kHz deviation -- if the voice deviation is reducable
from the default 5kHz, is the CTCSS tone deviation reduced in
proportion?
73
Ian, G3NRW
Andrew Marshall
>Interesting comment - the dev at 50MHz is 5kHz
Ahhh --- then it'll need turning down to 2 - 2.5KHz max. for 10KHz-spec
repeaters, as had to be done with my KH6. I wonder how many have had to
have this done?
>, at 145MHz is either 2.5
>or 5 MHz
That'll do fine; just what's needed. Pity they didn't put this function
on all the bands.
> and at 433 MHz is 5 MHz.
prolly OK for all but a few future 'total 12.5 spec' repeater RXs.
> Not sure how good the CTCSS decode
>is....
I hope it's better than my TM741E which is very 'tone-deaf<tm>'.
>As you say, many modern rigs find 250Hz too low....but the dev ...may...
>be upped a bit in future to solve this very problem.
Excellent - I don't see that it can do any harm, and it'll avoid having
to use ordinary squelch and listen to all the rubbish and b***** beacon
callsigns. Now we only need to take the CTCSS off the beacon callsigns
on some repeaters (why on earth they encode on beacon c/s, and stop one
screening them out, I can't imagine).
Thanks for the info, Bill.
73,
Peter Kay
My 2 1/2p worth.
I use the Farnem and Amersham boxes with my T8 without getting the
'deviation High' warning tone blips back on a off the shelf T8.
Peter, G0KUX
Andrew Marshall wrote in message ...
Bill Rothwell
Hi,
I did some dev measurements on 50, 144 and 433 MHz.
If you try hard, you get max. dev of 5 kHz at 50 MHz (ie shout loudly
into the mike at point blank range). However, speak at a sensible
distance of about 4 inches (which is what the manual actually suggests
inside the front cover) and dev peaks around 2.5 to 3 kHz. Therefore, it
should work OK thru all 6 M repeaters. Actually, it works OK thru GB3EF
at Ipswich - which is rather fussy regarding overdeviation....
Therefore in theory the dev should be turned down, but in reality it is
not worth the effort. Using a speaker mike, I find audio characteristics
are better - and it is difficult to 'clip out' of the repeater even if
you try.
Leving the dev alone is better if you ....ever.... work simplex on
50MHz.
So yet again experiment triumphs over theory....
Cheers, Bill G0VDE.
Andrew Marshall
In article <34C5BC...@nospam.btinternet.com>, Bill Rothwell
<bill.r...@nospam.btinternet.com> writes
>If you try hard, you get max. dev of 5 kHz at 50 MHz (ie shout loudly
>into the mike at point blank range). However, speak at a sensible
>distance of about 4 inches (which is what the manual actually suggests
>inside the front cover) and dev peaks around 2.5 to 3 kHz.
Hmmm - interesting. Seems as if the mic gain is (perhaps deliberately?)
set somewhat low. I wonder what the talk power is like at the 2.5KHz
peak dev. level - perhaps not all that great. As I tend to speak very
close to the mike anyway, I'd possibly be better off with reduced peak
dev. and increased mike gain to compensate.
> Therefore, it
>should work OK thru all 6 M repeaters. Actually, it works OK thru GB3EF
>at Ipswich - which is rather fussy regarding overdeviation....
Will it decode EF's CTCSS?
BTW, I tried to get in from Kelsale last September, using my KH-6 plus
FT-690R four-foot loaded whip - perhaps 1w ERP from that combination -
but couldn't. The radio was set up for 10KHz operation and accesses 'AM
OK. What does EF require (and send) in respect of CTCSS and voice dev?
(is there a website with this info?).
> Using a speaker mike, I find audio characteristics
>are better
I'd certainly use one, if only to be able to hold the radio in the best
position to get into the box, instead of against my face.
>Leving the dev alone is better if you ....ever.... work simplex on
>50MHz.
Oh, I do, now and then..... It does seem a little odd that all 6m FM
operation wasn't changed to 10KHz spacing when the repeaters arrived
(though I do wish it had been at 12.5KHz spacing in the first place,
like 4m and now 2m - it would have been much easier for transverting).
Stefan Kowal
I'm using an IC-T8E. I have been able to access the Huddersfield
50mHz repeater using CTCSS without difficulty. I have found that
the set's antenna is fussy at 50. It is little better than a
dummy load. At first I thought that the set was deaf. I connected
it up to a friend's external ant and found that it worked fine
and was comparable to his 690.
One thing that does detract,in my view, from the set is the
inablity to change mode across its rx range. For some odd reason
you can switch between FM and AM between 300 and 400 mHz but not
elsewhere. It would be good to be able to rx AM on 4 meters but,
as far as I am aware, this is not possible. I contacted Icom UK
who were unable to assist.
Stefan Kowal
G0BJW
William Rothwell
Hi,
Your comment abt the antenna being 'little more than a dummy load'
illustrates one of the problems 6 metre repeaters have to contend with - the
users .....must.... realise even 1/4 wave at 6 m is ....1.5 metres.
Therefore antenna efficiency is much reduced compared to 2m and 70 cms....
Please bear that in mind when you comment on lack of sensitivity either of
rigs or antennas....
Cheers, Bill G0VDE.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOSPAM in operation.
Reply to bill.r...@btinternet.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stefan Kowal <10062...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message ...
Ian Wade
In article <6acjuv$akl$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>, William Rothwell
<Bill.R...@nospam.btinternet.com> writes
>Your comment abt the antenna being 'little more than a dummy load'
>illustrates one of the problems 6 metre repeaters have to contend with - the
>users .....must.... realise even 1/4 wave at 6 m is ....1.5 metres.
>Therefore antenna efficiency is much reduced compared to 2m and 70 cms....
>
>Please bear that in mind when you comment on lack of sensitivity either of
>rigs or antennas....
>
But shouldn't this be taken into account in the design of 6m repeaters,
as they are intended primarily for mobile users with poor antennas?
73
Ian, G3NRW
Iain Philipps
In article <e3zvFBAb...@dowrmain.demon.co.uk>, Ian Wade
<i...@dowrmain.demon.co.uk> writes
How do you "take into account" that someone is going to choose to use a
less efficient antenna?
In the case of "I can't hear the repeater very well" you *could*
increase the ERP from the repeater site, but that would just cause
unjustifiable pollution.
In the case of "I'm not getting in with my 3 watts and damp string
setup", I don't know *what* you do. GB3AM, for instance, has a receiver
which delivers 12 dB SINAD with 0.13 uV injected at the duplexer common
port with the repeater transmitter running.
I rather suspect that the responsibility (certainly in the case of
GB3AM) rests squarely with the users!
--
Iain Philipps