Yaesu FTM-400DR Dual bander is out

[abruzzi]

It comes down to whether or not the Yaesu digital mode is worth the premium.

Not necessarily. I'm considering the radio, but have zero interest in the digital modes. There are basically two flagship APRS radios out there, this one, and the Kenwood D710. Depending on available rebates the Kenwood can be had for around $530, while the Yaesu costs $680. So the Kenwood would seem to have a $150 advantage over the Yaesu, but the Yaesu has a built in GPS, which means you don't always need to lug out the garmin/avmap every time you want to broadcast location.

I understand some will consider the Yaesu for its digital modes, and in that case the lack of infrastructure and other users is a real drawback. I'm looking solely at the APRS capabilities, and in that case it fares reasonably well.

Geof

 

[DaveInDenver]

Geof, I agree with your assessment. When you add a Greenlight Lab GPS-710 the FTM-400 vs. TM-D710 is very close. The IC-2820 + UT-123 (digital/GPS card) + TinyTrak4 would be the closest to the FTM-400 (neglecting that the digital modes are different protocols, just both would be configured for some sort of digital mode) ends up about $65 more than FTM-400.

The ICOM would have an APRS beacon but no interface at that point, so you'd have to add a tablet or computer to get messaging and a display. If you eliminate the UT-123 (which is $200), a IC-2820 + TNC + GPS puck is $50 to $100 less than an FTM-400. But in either case the implementations are nowhere near as clean by a long shot. With a full blown interface on the ICOM with APRSdroid, etc., you'd have more information available, though.

It boils down that the FTM-400 isn't a bad value but could be a touch cheaper. I said it recently that if Kenwood came out with a TM-D720 that had the GPS integrated, modernized screen and had a slot to install an optional digital mode card (so that Kenwood or a third party could develop cards for all the different protocols) that was $100 less than a FTM-400, it would own the market.

APRS-only hams wouldn't be paying for a digital mode, digital people could hack to their heart's desire. They'd sell a ton of them.

 

[abruzzi]

Yup. Kenwood has the history with APRS that I trust them more than Yaesu to build a good APRS rig. I like the fact that both can recieve and interpret APRS packets, and allow you to view that info without additional hardware. Using other hardware with a TT4 doesn't give you that option. The built in GPS of the Yaesu takes that a step further, allowing me to broadcast position info without plugging in extra hardware.

My understanding is the Kenwood is pretty old at this point, so there is a good chance we'll see new hardware in a couple of years, and GPS chips are getting cheap and ubiquitous, so I'll be surprised if the hypothetical D720 doesn't have one. At that point you only have to plug in the external device if you want to see a map, and it doesn't even have to have GPS hardware. I'm imagining a NMEA compatible iPad app on a wifi mini acting solely as a map display for the radio.

Fortunately, I'm currently saving up for a HF setup, so the APRS setup will be at least a year away. Time for the price on the Yaesu to drop a bit, and maybe time for Kenwood to replace the 710.

Edit: I'll also add, why is everyone trying to push voice codecs that are copyright/patent encumbered? I haven't looked at the different digital voice specs, but there should be enough open technology to build an entire protocol stack openly. Many years ago (late 90s), I used to play with using the GSM audio codec to do live internet streaming. That was voice optimized, low bandwidth.

Geof

 

[DaveInDenver]

It's not so much pushing more that the IMBE and AMBE codecs have been around for a long time and when D-STAR as well as the commercial options, P25, MotoTRBO, etc. were developed there really wasn't anything available, forget better, that was not covered by the DVSI patents. There has been a couple of attempts in the open source world, Speex and Codec2. Speex is fine but assumes a VoIP link, which has a lot less drop-outs and interference than an RF link, so yields poor results. Codec2 shows a lot of promise and achieves better fidelity with lower bit rates than AMBE+2 even. Problem is there is no interoperability between the two, so to keep current standard and compatibility with existing infrastructure you must keep DVSI vocoders, thus codec royalties. Yaesu could have won a MAJOR one if they'd just spec'd Codec2, even with being FDMA and single slot. The radios would be flying out the door. But alas, nope. A ham-centric TDMA protocol using Codec2 would be cool and popular beyond Yaesu's wildest dreams.