Another "problem" is the general lack of repeater equipment to extend the
range of 220 mobiles. At least in rural areas, generating interest in a new
band / frequency is tied to the operation of a repeater. Then as previously
mentioned user / operators are focused on multi - band HTs and mobiles or
very inexpensive single band transceivers. Been there, done that.... trying
to get new repeaters / digi-peaters on and used since 1975!
Best regards,
CSM(r) Gary Huber - AB9M
9679 Heron Bay Rd
Bloomington, IL 61705
(309-662-0604)
www.csm-gh-com
glhuber@msn.com
gary.huber@us.army.mil
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ken Brown" <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 4:30 PM
To: "John Vickers" <wa4tt@nlamerica.com>; "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment"
<tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Serious market overlooked by ham manufacturers
> Yes the numbers do speak. Very few people have 222 MHz capability. I
> think for a 222 MHz radio to sell many units, it has to be a mobile,
> with a bit a power capability. Alinco makes one and I guess for a while
> Kenwood did. A single band 222 MHz radio may not sell well, because no
> one wants a rig that only works on a band that has very few people to
> work. A few manufacturers include 222 MHz TX capability in a multiband
> handheld, but as far as I know none do in a mobile unit. (I think
> Kenwood used to make a mobile that could be configured for several
> bands, possibly including 222, but it was a rather "high end" unit) If
> people could easily buy a mobile unit that included 2 meters, 70 cm AND
> 1.25 meters they would buy it, knowing that if there is no activity
> found on 222, the radio will still be useful on the other two bands. If
> there were more rigs like this out there, eventually 222 would become
> active. I don't think handhelds including 222 will accomplish that,
> mobiles might.
>
> DE N6KB
>
>>> In a recent ARRL 6/27/08 web survey the question was ask, do you operate
>>> the 220 mhz band?
>>> Of 2991 responses the results were as follows:
>>>
>>> Frequently 5.9%
>>> Occasionally 10.7%
>>> Rarely 12.3%
>>> Never 71.1%
>>>
>>> The numbers speak.
>>>
>>> Andy , W3LI
>>>
>>
>> Of the 71.1% that never opr the band....... how many had equipment
>> capable
>> of working 220 Mcs ???
>>
>> Perhaps the numbers do speak.
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|