KD4TTC
| Joined: | Sat, Apr 4th 1998, 00:00 | Roles: | N/A | Moderates: | N/A |
Latest Topics
| Topic | Created | Posts | Views | Last Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How much better is the FT-DX10 than the FT-991A in actual usage? | Aug 3rd 2021, 18:27 | 2 | 7,003 | on 4/8/21 |
Latest Posts
| Topic | Author | Posted On |
|---|---|---|
| How much better is the FT-DX10 than the FT-991A in actual usage? | KD4TTC | on 3/8/21 |
| I’m looking at the waterfall displays on the HF newer radios and it looks like a great aid to finding stations to communicate with. The station in a box would give me VHF and UHF, so it would be a real value to me. However, the Sherwood Engineering ratings puts the 991 much lower on close in signal separation than the well regarded FT-DX10. I’ll just be running into a 1/4 wave vertical or a dipole on HF. I might be able to get a yagi up. I do have an antenna tuner. I might want to try working satellites. I’m in Illinois near Chicago. I am not interested in contesting. Mr. Sherwood points out his measurements at this point are making distinctions with little practical import because the equipment is so good among the top rated transceivers. However, the 991A is out of the top 50 on his list. So, for a modest station is HF good enough on the 991A for casual contacts on HF? Does the DX-10 offer additional performance that I would notice it in my modest station? Is the 991A adequate for satellite work? If I ask about Digital modes with the 991A will I start a flame war? |
||
