I have to challenge your statement that "an HF Man-Pack is designed for short-range (Infantry to Tanks) and does the job well".
That may very commonly be the role for a manpack, but I'm not aware of any military user who would routinely use an HF one, this being very much the primary role of low-VHF radios, manpack or otherwise.
I don't really understand your last paragraph, since I think it will be the benefit of portability that attracts most purchasers. I don't understand your offence at the term "manpack" being associated with it?
Bob, G8IYK
On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 22:31, ve3ega
<ve3ega@...> wrote:
I agree with Randy!
As a TX500 user (almost exclusively for Digital Modes - which it excels) but like others I cannot, see the Marketing push, offering the MP as a 'seudo-tactical-manpack' - just about any radio can deliver this appearance and functionality with a custom-frame, battery pack and nice "camo" bag - I have two gorgeous looking FT818's which feed this (I got over it!) ham-fetish!
In reality, 'Manpacks' and Manpack-operation is really 'something else' - You remember the weird-guys wandering around Dayton with Racal, Harris or similar rigs plus 8ft Whips - probably talking to their buddies in the Beer-Tent - looking like they just come off a movie-set as extras - complete with camo-hats, pants and jackets? Well, if this turns your crank - go for it!
I mean come on, an HF Man-Pack is designed for short-range (Infantry to Tanks) and does the job well...
I used to own a "You-Kits" TJ-2B and it performed reasonably well on 40m SSB with an EFLW and 64:1 balun.. Was it portable - YES - Do I miss it - NO!
The main advantage with the "MP" is going to be portability and NOT Man-Pack!
Let's see how the cards fall??
73
Terry
