For better results, keep the antennas all vertical. Tipping one antenna 90 degrees to the other will degrade the signal by as much as 20 db. You were not consistent with your antenna position. Try testing with the antenna in various inclinations. Makes a huge difference. You can also estimate the skill of the operator by watching how they hold the radio.
We will definitely be sure to do that for the next test and if the results are drastically different we will revisit this testing…… 24 years of public safety has certainly led to some laziness…. Thanks for pointing that out, great observation
Having used portable radios in very challenging conditions of distance, I disagree slightly. First, one should not hold the radio directly in front of one's mouth--holding the radio with the mic somewhat horizontally parallel with one's mouth will give better audio results. Second, if one holds the antenna perfectly vertical, one's head can almost completely block the signal if one's head is between the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna. Holding the radio with the radio slightly (maybe 10°-20°) off from vertical will allow some of the signal pass by one's head. Finally, the video does not mention the very real difference in reception capability between analog and digital. Actual reception capability of an analog signal degrades in a fairly uncurved downward line with distance. Digital signal reception capability remains at nearly a straight horizontal line until one reaches near the end of the radio's reception range, then "falls off of a cliff." I characterize digital reception as, "You will hear me clearly almost right up to the point that you don't hear me at all." The hazard of digital radios is that the audio reception quality of the radio will often give the user almost no warning that he/she is reaching the very end of the radio's reception (or transmit) range. Yes, having an antenna tuned for the frequencies being used is very important. By the way, a lot of my experience with digital is with NXDN, a digital platform with which not a lot of people have experience--it worked very well for us.
The most critical aspect of using the right antenna is when you transmit. It is important that it is designed to work on the frequency you are using. Length is not the major consideration, design is. Receive is less critical but important. So many people experiment with the receive capabilities of their radio and the antenna length they over look it's efficiency on transmit. A badly matched antenna could damage your transmitter. Ideally antennas would be cut and tuned to a specific frequency or range. With multiband radios antennas are a compromise so they will work on all bands. This is the reason so many of the OEM wide band antennas are so long.
It’s in the works, we will certainly conduct it in the 70cm ham band, so thanks for that and we are also going to showcase the propagation maps with it as well to gauge how accurate they can be.
They’re called SMA not SWA, this and your incorrect naming of Saber, Astro Saber, System Saber causes concern considering you said in another video you plan to train people… please learn first before training others your mistakes.
Well aware that they are SMA connectors, sorry for the mis pronunciation… what was named incorrectly??? As far as the training goes, the training is not in communications, it’s in tactical medicine. This channel is meant completely to be for the free sharing of information, so please feel free to make any corrections here in the comments for us all to take advantage of and learn from.
I think that your tests were very scientific. You used standardized distances and conditions. This makes me realize that moving GMRS to digital might be a great idea.
Well, next on the list is to compare that APX style antenna vs a UHF whip…. We are also going to put the winner of that against a 7550 to also compare DMR vs P25. Appreciate the comment!
I do, sometimes I will use my radio and just FPP it for the fire. The last fire I was on I was issued a BXR5000 and, yea, did they purposely make that as obnoxiously large as possible? I'm wasn't a fan.
For better results, keep the antennas all vertical. Tipping one antenna 90 degrees to the other will degrade the signal by as much as 20 db. You were not consistent with your antenna position. Try testing with the antenna in various inclinations. Makes a huge difference. You can also estimate the skill of the operator by watching how they hold the radio.
We will definitely be sure to do that for the next test and if the results are drastically different we will revisit this testing…… 24 years of public safety has certainly led to some laziness…. Thanks for pointing that out, great observation
I was going to post the same thing.
Having used portable radios in very challenging conditions of distance, I disagree slightly. First, one should not hold the radio directly in front of one's mouth--holding the radio with the mic somewhat horizontally parallel with one's mouth will give better audio results. Second, if one holds the antenna perfectly vertical, one's head can almost completely block the signal if one's head is between the transmitting antenna and the receiving antenna. Holding the radio with the radio slightly (maybe 10°-20°) off from vertical will allow some of the signal pass by one's head. Finally, the video does not mention the very real difference in reception capability between analog and digital. Actual reception capability of an analog signal degrades in a fairly uncurved downward line with distance. Digital signal reception capability remains at nearly a straight horizontal line until one reaches near the end of the radio's reception range, then "falls off of a cliff." I characterize digital reception as, "You will hear me clearly almost right up to the point that you don't hear me at all." The hazard of digital radios is that the audio reception quality of the radio will often give the user almost no warning that he/she is reaching the very end of the radio's reception (or transmit) range. Yes, having an antenna tuned for the frequencies being used is very important. By the way, a lot of my experience with digital is with NXDN, a digital platform with which not a lot of people have experience--it worked very well for us.
Excellent video
Thank you! Welcome to the channel
Enjoyed the video
Thanks! Lots more to come
The most critical aspect of using the right antenna is when you transmit. It is important that it is designed to work on the frequency you are using. Length is not the major consideration, design is. Receive is less critical but important. So many people experiment with the receive capabilities of their radio and the antenna length they over look it's efficiency on transmit. A badly matched antenna could damage your transmitter. Ideally antennas would be cut and tuned to a specific frequency or range. With multiband radios antennas are a compromise so they will work on all bands. This is the reason so many of the OEM wide band antennas are so long.
Nailed it!! 💯
Good test. Would love more antennas tests on different ham frequencies
It’s in the works, we will certainly conduct it in the 70cm ham band, so thanks for that and we are also going to showcase the propagation maps with it as well to gauge how accurate they can be.
Not 'scientific', but noticeable results. Appreciate the video.
Use the side cove that covering mic jack all the time. Wet hand - water can course some issues.
They’re called SMA not SWA, this and your incorrect naming of Saber, Astro Saber, System Saber causes concern considering you said in another video you plan to train people… please learn first before training others your mistakes.
Well aware that they are SMA connectors, sorry for the mis pronunciation… what was named incorrectly??? As far as the training goes, the training is not in communications, it’s in tactical medicine.
This channel is meant completely to be for the free sharing of information, so please feel free to make any corrections here in the comments for us all to take advantage of and learn from.
I think that your tests were very scientific. You used standardized distances and conditions. This makes me realize that moving GMRS to digital might be a great idea.
Well, next on the list is to compare that APX style antenna vs a UHF whip…. We are also going to put the winner of that against a 7550 to also compare DMR vs P25. Appreciate the comment!
I added a stubby antenna to my kit just to cut range down. Figured always good to not transmit far in some cases.
Absolutely, and some range testing with it so you can have a general idea of how far is going to push out 👍
@@RANTStrategies indeed
Yea more radio videos 😊
Is there an adapter to go from motorola to standard connector?
@@orpheusepiphanes2797 you mean for antenna purposes? And what are you referring to as standard? SMA M, SMA F?
Do you also have a vhf hat for wildland fire?
I do, sometimes I will use my radio and just FPP it for the fire. The last fire I was on I was issued a BXR5000 and, yea, did they purposely make that as obnoxiously large as possible? I'm wasn't a fan.