Handheld Radios

jsstevens said:
From those who have and use them, which ones do you like? Sporty's SP 400 looks nice. But what about ICOM and Yaesu? I'm thinking about asking for one as a Christmas gift. I like the ones with nav & comm capability and thinking this makes a good item to have in my bag as I'm starting IR in earnest.

Thoughts?
John
Click to expand...
I have s 10 year old Yaesu, it's basically the 2 meter ham radio they've been building forever. Yaesu has been in the ham business for years, good stuff. Forget the bells and whistles you'll never use them.
 
denverpilot said:
30 miles in the air over no terrain, I’m amazed you can’t hear it with a rubber dummy load (otherwise known as “the antenna that came with the radio”). On the ground, different story.

...

What have you tried? Take the HT to the attic and see what it hears, that won’t cost a penny.
Click to expand...

ATIS at class C nor AWOS at home airport broke through. From there tried CTAF at home airport and approach for class C. Heard nothing. That's ~35' AGL (which at my house means ~38' MSL).
 
Palmpilot said:
Did you try opening the squelch?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I realize it was poorly phrased when I say break through, I meant broke through the static. Was wide open.

Though it didn't take much squelch to cut the static, so is that in indicator that there isn't a bunch of "noise"?
 
SaltH2OHokie said:
ATIS at class C nor AWOS at home airport broke through. From there tried CTAF at home airport and approach for class C. Heard nothing. That's ~35' AGL (which at my house means ~38' MSL).
Click to expand...

Not sure what that means... are you saying you knew there was traffic in both patterns but didn’t hear any of it? Or just that there was no traffic at either airport?

If you’re heading the ATIS fairly well on the rubber duck, you can use it as a guide to how well any different antenna works... when you swap antennas... it should sound better. Make sense?
 
denverpilot said:
Not sure what that means... are you saying you knew there was traffic in both patterns but didn’t hear any of it? Or just that there was no traffic at either airport?

If you’re heading the ATIS fairly well on the rubber duck, you can use it as a guide to how well any different antenna works... when you swap antennas... it should sound better. Make sense?
Click to expand...


I'm saying I heard nothing. Which could be because there was no traffic at either airport...so I've not really proven anything there. But definitely couldn't get ATIS/AWOS which I know should be broadcasting, just don't know that I am capable, or even should be capable, of receiving it with my handheld, at my location.
 
SaltH2OHokie said:
I'm saying I heard nothing. Which could be because there was no traffic at either airport...so I've not really proven anything there. But definitely couldn't get ATIS/AWOS which I know should be broadcasting, just don't know that I am capable, or even should be capable, of receiving it with my handheld, at my location.
Click to expand...

Roger. :)
 
SaltH2OHokie said:
But with a better antenna...assumption be that I should be able to hear traffic/ATIS/AWOS from my house?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. We’d have to look up the power of the other ATIS/AWOS station. To see if it’s operating well you could drive closer to it and see if you’re just out of range or the ATIS is weak. But you mentioned there’s mostly water between your home and there.

As for traffic, yes you should hear some. I hear some on a rubber dummy load antenna at my house from DEN at roughly the same distance. I won’t hear stuff airborne to the far north of the airport because I’m south of it, and I won’t hear landing or ground traffic.

At 30 miles you won’t hear everything.

Also if you’re not hearing the ATIS that’s a pretty good indication you won’t hear the controllers either... the antennas are often co-located on their end. Not always, but enough to mention it.
 
Yep, wood and asphalt shingles are pretty much transparent at the frequencies we're concerned about. I've had TV antennas in the attic for years.
 
PIREP time, Friday.
I have a new Yaesu FTA-750 "Spirit" (hmmmm I hope that isn't prophetic.)
I'm scheduled in the Cub on Friday.
It's supposed to be below 0, so whether I fly or not is up in the air. (sorry, I couldn't help it)
The plan is to fly from GBR to 44N using the VOR nav function and the PWL VOR.
At 44N I pick up a Safety Pilot, put on the foggles, and fly the GPS approach to KPOU, then the localizer to runway 06, and test the glide scope.
That should age us both a few more years. Hopefully I will have a report that afternoon.
 
Shepherd said:
PIREP time, Friday.
I have a new Yaesu FTA-750 "Spirit" (hmmmm I hope that isn't prophetic.)
I'm scheduled in the Cub on Friday.
It's supposed to be below 0, so whether I fly or not is up in the air. (sorry, I couldn't help it)
The plan is to fly from GBR to 44N using the VOR nav function and the PWL VOR.
At 44N I pick up a Safety Pilot, put on the foggles, and fly the GPS approach to KPOU, then the localizer to runway 06, and test the glide scope.
That should age us both a few more years. Hopefully I will have a report that afternoon.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to your report. There’s a recent YouTube video saying that the Sporty’s glideslope works, which is a very old design, so presumably the Yaesu’s will too.
 
The VHF frequencies of all this are pretty much line-of-sight. Earth's curvature would seriously affect transmission/reception distances - especially if one of the antennas is close to the ground. The transmitting antenna would have to be almost 900 ft to be theoretically line-of-sight for an absolute ground level antenna 30 miles away. Raising the receiving antenna by even a few ft though would greatly reduce the necessary transmitter height for line-of sight transmission. Jim Weir would know infinitely more about this limitation. My ancient math skills can't work these approximations anymore. But the point is that a little bit of receiver antenna height really helps

Paging Jim Weir --- HELP!
 
nrpetersen said:
The VHF frequencies of all this are pretty much line-of-sight. Earth's curvature would seriously affect transmission/reception distances - especially if one of the antennas is close to the ground. The transmitting antenna would have to be almost 900 ft to be theoretically line-of-sight for an absolute ground level antenna 30 miles away. Raising the receiving antenna by even a few ft though would greatly reduce the necessary transmitter height for line-of sight transmission. Jim Weir would know infinitely more about this limitation. My ancient math skills can't work these approximations anymore. But the point is that a little bit of receiver antenna height really helps

Paging Jim Weir --- HELP!
Click to expand...

900’ is pattern altitude. Roughly. We’re talking airplanes here. That’s why I said hearing the controller likely wouldn’t work at that distance.

To do the path gain and loss math properly you need:

Transmitter power
Line losses
Antenna gain
Distance between antennas
Height Over Average Terrain
Frequency used
Receiver sensitivity

Weak signal VHF+ is my fun. This definitely ain’t my first rodeo. Which is why I removed a number of those items above by using pragmatism...

“Take the radio to attic and see what you hear” and “drive closer to the airport to see how close you have to be to hear what you want to hear”.

Those methods give you a nice “big picture” without delving into the RF path engineering or needing to know anything about the selectivity and sensitivity of the receiver, which will usually just scare someone away.
 
A couple of items pertaining to the Yaesu FTA-750L:

If you have ever been a database manager, it will help. Group names, etc,etc. I am currently grouping by State.
There are a lot of things that are not intuitive, and the documentation does not give clear or real world examples.
Selecting a format for Latitude and Longitude is definitely NOT intuitive and they don't give examples.
Use the airport location coordinates (not runway) for GPS.
Use the runway coordinates (not location) for ILS nav entries.
I still haven't figured out if I need to do "Split" frequencies for ILS or is it automatic.
The programming function is limited to Windows machines.
The programming application is easy to install and use. And tedious to use. Typing, typing, typing.
But not nearly as tedious as doing it on the radio itself.
I need write something to pull the info from an existing FAA database and just plug it in for me.
I think I will experiment with "Trip" lists. Program in every station (plus alternates and nav frequencies) in the order of use then just step through as required.
When you are programming the radio, it must be in CP Mode. Easy to do. Plug in the USB cable Hold "Menu" and push the power on button, then release "Menu".
When you are doing Firmware Upgrades you do not use CP Mode. Just plug in the USB cable and turn on the radio. Run UPCHK. exe to make sure you actually need the upgrade. Weird.
There is no Yaesu users group, which really surprises me. Yaesu is missing an opportunity here.
 
Shepherd said:
A couple of items pertaining to the Yaesu FTA-750L:

If you have ever been a database manager, it will help. Group names, etc,etc. I am currently grouping by State.
There are a lot of things that are not intuitive, and the documentation does not give clear or real world examples.
Selecting a format for Latitude and Longitude is definitely NOT intuitive and they don't give examples.
Use the airport location coordinates (not runway) for GPS.
Use the runway coordinates (not location) for ILS nav entries.
I still haven't figured out if I need to do "Split" frequencies for ILS or is it automatic.
The programming function is limited to Windows machines.
The programming application is easy to install and use. And tedious to use. Typing, typing, typing.
But not nearly as tedious as doing it on the radio itself.
I need write something to pull the info from an existing FAA database and just plug it in for me.
I think I will experiment with "Trip" lists. Program in every station (plus alternates and nav frequencies) in the order of use then just step through as required.
When you are programming the radio, it must be in CP Mode. Easy to do. Plug in the USB cable Hold "Menu" and push the power on button, then release "Menu".
When you are doing Firmware Upgrades you do not use CP Mode. Just plug in the USB cable and turn on the radio. Run UPCHK. exe to make sure you actually need the upgrade. Weird.
There is no Yaesu users group, which really surprises me. Yaesu is missing an opportunity here.
Click to expand...

I doubt they’ve got support for the Aviation radios, but if the open source CHIRP software does support that rig, it’s my go-to for programming these days, mostly because it supports so much gear that I can keep my programming databases all in one piece of software for any rig type.

The oddities you described about how they handle the USB and firmware vs programming are really common on most rigs today.

User group... background... Yaesu is part/same as Vertex and both are owned by Motorola these days. Their “consumer” devices act more like commercial radios which in general are programmed by someone else for you, unless you’re the fleet radio engineer, and the user doesn’t change anything on the rig. Therefore, user interfaces for things like Aviation where the user operates their own radio settings, kinda naturally blow chunks... compared to any rig that is designed as a user-operated rig.

They probably have zero interest in user groups or social media, because they’re usually forcing contact with them through the “authorized” radio managers or a dealer for 99% of their product line. Aviation and dealing directly with the radio users, is probably just a minor annoyance to them. Amateur which is a much larger piece of their product line is still dwarfed by commercial and public safety, and the support isn’t great there, either.

This is Mother M after all, who’s idea of “great support” is charging $250 a year for their programming software (that looks and operates no better than the stuff you’re using for free on consumer products) in 1000 radio public safety deployments... or a single user deployment. They’re not jerks, but their usual customer is a fleet, so they just don’t care. Which...

Is driving the move to $30 cheap Chinese radios in the Amateur world. Why buy a decent built rig from Japan, when the support just isn’t there. Might as well buy a throwaway.

The Aviation market hasn’t seen those cheap rigs yet. Not enough volume.
 
I would go minimalist on extra features. I have an IC-A23. I don't mind the interface because all I need to know how to do is change comm frequencies, adjust the volume and adjust the squelch, which is easy enough.

I agree that nav features are mostly unnecessary and usually aren't worth the trouble anyway. An iPhone or iPad with Foreflight is a much better tool to use for emergency navigation than half-assing it with a handheld transceiver, dealing with a weak VOR signal.

It's just something to use in the event you lose power or a radio for some reason, and need to establish communication.
 
denverpilot said:
I doubt they’ve got support for the Aviation radios, but if the open source CHIRP software does support that rig, it’s my go-to for programming these days, mostly because it supports so much gear that I can keep my programming databases all in one piece of software for any rig type.

User group... background... Yaesu is part/same as Vertex and both are owned by Motorola these days. Their “consumer” devices act more like commercial radios which in general are programmed by someone else for you, unless you’re the fleet radio engineer, and the user doesn’t change anything on the rig. Therefore, user interfaces for things like Aviation where the user operates their own radio settings, kinda naturally blow chunks... compared to any rig that is designed as a user-operated rig.

They probably have zero interest in user groups or social media, because they’re usually forcing contact with them through the “authorized” radio managers or a dealer for 99% of their product line. Aviation and dealing directly with the radio users, is probably just a minor annoyance to them. Amateur which is a much larger piece of their product line is still dwarfed by commercial and public safety, and the support isn’t great there, either.
Click to expand...
Motorola: "Let us screw that pooch for you, then dump the product."
I was think more along the lines of : Open a space on their website, let people post there, and use a volunteer moderator. Have someone from Motorola (or whoever) look in from time to time with answers to the actual tech questions. It could save them a pile of money.
Just my delusion of the day.
 
I have the Yaesu 550 and it has served it's purpose however, I just wish it was easier to change frequencies.
 
Timbeck2 said:
I have the Yaesu 550 and it has served it's purpose however, I just wish it was easier to change frequencies.
Click to expand...
I have the same radio. Figuring out how to program the thing is... Challenging. But I like the radio, overall.
 
Ryan F. said:
I would go minimalist on extra features. I have an IC-A23. I don't mind the interface because all I need to know how to do is change comm frequencies, adjust the volume and adjust the squelch, which is easy enough.
Click to expand...

That’s all I really want out of an Aviation handheld radio, too. It’s all the panel radio does. If I can’t pick it up and set those basic settings without reading the manual, the UI was built by a moron who’s never been in a cockpit, and it needs to be thrown in a trash can somewhere.

Memory channels are (mostly) useless if you ever go anywhere. I think there’s six in my Icom and it’s for scanning at OSH. LOL.
 
Pirep for the FTA-750L has been postponed.
The airport called.
All flying canceled because of sub-zero temperatures predicted for overnight into tomorrow morning.
 
Ryan F. said:
I agree that nav features are mostly unnecessary and usually aren't worth the trouble anyway.
Click to expand...

I want my GPS position in the event of a forced landing. My iPhone is one source, but I like having it on the radio. I also like the Bluetooth functionality that comes with the new Icom radio, nav version.
 
Rory said:
I want my GPS position in the event of a forced landing. My iPhone is one source, but I like having it on the radio. I also like the Bluetooth functionality that comes with the new Icom radio, nav version.
Click to expand...

You should already have that on your phone or iPad, or even your panel.

The GPS will just drain the radio for its best use anyway, which is to be a radio. Why combine a GPS and a radio? Makes no sense.
 
Ryan F. said:
You should already have that on your phone or iPad, or even your panel.
Click to expand...

If you read my second sentence, you’ll see that I said that the iPhone is a GPS source.
 
Rory said:
If you read my second sentence, you’ll see that I said that the iPhone is a GPS source.
Click to expand...

The bluetooth feature would be nice, I'll grant you that. No more messing with cables and whatnot to use it in the airplane.
 
The Bluetooth is great for pre-flight and transferring data between the radio and the iOS/Android app.

In flight, options would appear to be limited. I need to confirm this, but my understanding is that the main headsets with Bluetooth can receive via Bluetooth but may not transmit. If that’s so, it’s because none of the panel radios work with Bluetooth ... yet.
 
Last edited:
I just bought a Yaesu FTA-450L for my Pitts and J-3. It is so good I bought another just to have at the airport. I can easily make calls 20 miles out in my J-3 and I am using the standard rubber antenna. Real easy to use and go through the settings. The little screen helps a bunch. I have my airport and awos set in the memory so easy to just flip plop back and forth. I had several other handhelds and just sold them all after using this radio.
 
denverpilot said:
I missed that, but sounds like that was just the Amateur gear division, not the Vertex commercial side, and I don’t know which side builds the Aviation rigs. Hmm.

Must have been one hell of a culture clash.
Click to expand...

According to the press releases, the aviation side appears to have gone with Yaesu.
 
Rory said:
According to the press releases, the aviation side appears to have gone with Yaesu.
Click to expand...

Makes sense I guess. Low volume and not a commercial fleet.

I must be more disconnected from the radio stuff since I don’t have to deal with engineering repeaters much right now. Haven’t had time.

I miss out on all the scuttlebutt from the folks who do it daily for a paycheck. The Moto/ Vertex merger was a “Big Deal” and lots of twitterpation back when it happened.

Guess that’s over with. :)
 
Well, the anti-Sporty’s reports came a little late for me. I’d handed off the info. I got an SP-400 for Christmas. I’ll post my opinions & pirep after I get some time on it.
 
Any updated PIREPS on these?
I'm getting a $300 gift from my place of employment for 30 year anniversary.
I'd like to get one of these two models: Yaesu 550L or ICOM IC-A24
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top