# SSB radios



## PorFin (Sep 10, 2007)

A previous discussion's got me thinking and challenging my assumptions (which is a good thing - usually...)

Although clearly useful if already mounted on a cruising boat, I left wondering about the utility of purchasing and installing an SSB on a boat without one.

It seems that as sat phones and services become more robust and less expensive, the relative value of SSB to cruisers will fall.

What do you smarter folks think -- has the SSB become the nautical equivalent of the six-button AM dash radio?


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

I could not justify the cost of a SSB. I did buy a SSB receiver so I can listen into the cruiser nets. Satellite phones have come a long way in the past year and prices have dropped radically.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

Why would someone buy an SSB and not a 12volt ham radio? An SSB is three times as expensive, and is more limited in bands than a ham.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Can a HAM setup pick up those frequencies used for mail while out?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

First, to use a Ham you need a license which requires a test.  Many are not willing to do that or can't find somewhere to get tested. The RRO license for an SSB doesn't require one. Second, most SSB radios, at least the good ones, are as capable as any ham unit.


Sapperwhite said:


> Why would someone buy an SSB and not a 12volt ham radio? An SSB is three times as expensive, and is more limited in bands than a ham.


----------



## Robby Barlow (Apr 23, 2006)

Where with the SSB you can pick up the mike and ask if anybody is listening, I think that would be rather hard to do with a sat phone. Apart from that there are other advantages to SSB, but if they justify the cost of installation I think is a personal decision depending a lot on the cruising area and length of absence from more normal sources of communication.
Ah, and Jody - I don't think so.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

In an emergency, SSB radios are more useful, since they are broadcast devices, and many more people may hear and respond to a MAYDAY call for assistance, where a Satellite Phone is a point-to-point device, and if no one answers, you're gonna get screwed. Also, the on-going costs of a satellite phone are fairly high. The ham radio and SSB radio don't really have much in the way of costs, outside of the initial investment in equipment. 

You can do e-mail on either Ham or SSB radio. WinMail is free via Ham, Sailmail via SSB has a nominal annual fee.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> Also, the on-going costs of a satellite phone are fairly high. The ham radio and SSB radio don't really have much in the way of costs, outside of the initial investment in equipment.


I agree. We rented an Iridium phone for our last voyage and also bought a "like new" (and it really was) Icom IC718 with tuner and antenna which I installed myself.

The Iridium cost us (rental and calls) about US$1800 for the voyage and we had to give it back. The entire radio setup cost about US$1100 and we still have it 

And the other point is also really valid. When you are 2500 miles from land and something serious goes wrong, try switching on the Iridium and shouting into it "CALLING ALL SHIPS"  Or try to get daily weather advice.

I'd like to have an Iridium on board but there is no way I'd swap it for my SSB.

Andre


----------



## Robby Barlow (Apr 23, 2006)

A little confused by your terminology - isn't Ham the same as CB?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

NO... very different things entirely. Different range, different frequency, different radios, different regulations.

CB radio is unlicensed, only has 40 channels, a much more limited range of frequencies covered in the 11-meter bands (27 mhz) and much more limited distance range. In the US, trying to communicate on CB radio at a range over 150 miles is illegal IIRC.

Ham radio generally has much greater range and requires a FCC issued license.



Robby Barlow said:


> A little confused by your terminology - isn't Ham the same as CB?


----------



## Robby Barlow (Apr 23, 2006)

SD,

THX for clarifying.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

But with the proper license level you can use CB and SSB freqs with a ham rig.

Edit: in emergency only , thanks for the clarification btrayfors


----------



## Robby Barlow (Apr 23, 2006)

Sap,
just what I wanted to know - think I'll just stick with the bongos!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sapper-

I believe you'd need two licenses... one for the SSB frequencies and one for the Ham and CB usage.


Sapperwhite said:


> But with the proper license level you can use CB and SSB freqs with a ham rig.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

The subject of marine SSB vs. ham (amateur radio) has been covered exhaustively on other boards, including the SSCA board.

A few pertinent facts (not opinions):

1. you cannot legally use a ham radio on marine SSB frequencies or CB or anything other than ham-allocated frequencies for which you are licensed *except* in an extreme (life-threatening) emergency;

2. most modern ham rigs can be made to work on virtually any HF frequency, including marine SSB frequencies (but, as noted in #1 above) it is illegal to use them there unless in an extreme emergency;

3. ham radio transceivers are also SSB, that is, they use single sideband emissions just as do marine SSB transceivers. It's just that in the common parlance, "SSB" has come to mean "marine SSB";

4. a ham license authorizes you to operate on the allocated ham bands according to the class of license you have, *and nowhere else*;

5. a marine radio license (station license for the boat plus an operator's license for each person operating the radio) authorizes you to use a type-accepted marine radio (not a ham radio) *on the authorized marine channels only*, and nowhere else;

6. modern ham rigs are often more flexible than marine rigs, having much more frequency agility and many more controls including DSP, IF shift, noise blankers, bandpass adjustments, etc., etc.; and

7. VHF and HF radios transmit signals which can be heard by *many stations*, including nearby boats. Satphones can contact only the person(s) called, therefore limiting their effectiveness in many emergency situations.

Now for the opinions:

1. For the far-ranging cruising sailor, many experienced sailors believe firmly that an SSB -- marine or ham -- is an essential piece of equipment; and

2. A satellite phone is not an acceptable substitute, since you are limited to point-to-point communications as per #7 above.

Bill
S/V Born Free
WA6CCA


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Btrayfors, correct me if I've got this wrong, but to clarify-*If you have a Marine SSB license and a Ship's Station License and Restricted Radio Operator's License, as well as a Ham License, you can use the Marine SSB Radio to broadcast on Ham frequencies, as well as Marine SSB frequencies, since the SSB radio is type accepted for Marine SSB use, but you can't use a Ham Radio on Marine SSB frequencies, even if you have the appropriate licenses because the radio itself is not type accepted for Marine SSB use.*


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

Sat phone is to SSB/Ham radio as cell phones are to VHF radio. One is point to point telephone, the other is a true "radio".

If you have a Ham radio that can receive outside the Ham bands, provided you have a ham license, that is all you need. The radio will get all the wx stuff and you can call for help/send email/do phone patches etc on the Ham radio. One of the few advantages of an SSB would be for commercial traffic. In the Ham radio world there are always thousands of folks hovering over radios and listening, guaranteed.

VE7GJD


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

There are others here that probably have actual and good experience to answer this better than I (I am particularly interested in what Cam has to say). I have an SSB and use it, but mostly for fun.

I think that in relatively short order, satphones will become as prevalent as cell phones, and once that happens SSB will become antiquated (dare I say it). Sort of like Loran and GPS. One of the things you'll get with good reliable satphone service is Internet access. Once you have that, you have access to weather and obviously all the information you possibly can handle on any topic, not to mention actual videophone capability (it's there now with Skype). That's more than you ever can hope to have with SSB.

As to the point about "broadcasting," don't forget, with a satphone you can call 911 (literally), and the Coast Guard always answers the phone. Also, to the point someone made about there needing to be someone to answer the phone when you call, the same is true on SSB; someone needs to be listening to the channel you are broadcasting on. Granted, there are emergency channels, but users do not monitor these constantly just because they have an SSB onboard.

Another comparison to make too is VHF and cell phones. VHF still is used, but it's used a whole lot less because of cell phones. Indeed, radio the coast guard today, and the first question you get is whether you have a cell phone on board that can be used to call them or they you. That tells the whole story right there.

For the immediate time, however, satphone service all at the same time is (i) too unreliable, (ii) not fast enough for Internet, and (iii) too expensive to replace SSB just yet. But that day is coming, and with very few exceptions I bet just about everyone on this board will live to see it. Just my opinion.


----------



## speciald (Mar 27, 2007)

Ham general class license is now much easier to get - no code requirement. The questions are published - memorize the answers to about 300 questions and you are in. Although I have SSB on the boat, I rarely use it except for nets and communication during a rally. I use my Globalstar for e-mail and weather gribs when off-shore as it is much faster than Winlink. For safety, the SSB distress broadcast is good to use in addition to VHF DSC.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dog,

*For marine SSB*, there are only two licenses, not three. These are:

1. the ships station license; and
2. the operator's license (either restricted or higher).

The ships license is the same one used for all onboard transmitting equipment when you go foreign, or for commercial use.

The operators license comes in different flavors, from the lowest restricted license to the general license (GROL). There are several varieties, but for most people its just the Restricted License which is needed.

Yes, you can use a marine radio on the ham bands IF you have the proper ham license. The reverse is not true, however: you cannot legally use a ham radio on any band other than the ham bands *even if you hold licenses for other services* (marine, aircraft, etc.). Radios are "type-accepted" by the FCC for specific usage, and no ham radio is type-accepted for marine use.

The use of a non-ham radio (e.g., marine, commercial, military) on the ham bands is generally accepted practice because a licensed ham operator can build his own radio or modify other radios to work on the ham bands.

Note, however, that the reverse is not necessarily true. If you modify a type-accepted radio in most any way, it will nullify the type-acceptance for use on the originally intended band.

Plumper,

You can use a ham radio or any other radio to *receive* anywhere -- at least in the U.S.. But, you cannot use it to *transmit* anywhere except on the portions of the ham bands for which you hold a valid license.

What does this mean, in practice?

1. Anyone, licensed or not, can purchase and install a ham transceiver and can use it to *listen* on any band/frequency desired. This includes ham, marine, aircraft, weather fax, etc., etc.

2. You cannot use this radio to *transmit*, however, except on the portions of the ham bands for which you are licensed.

3. In an *extreme emergency* you can use *any means* to attract attention and call for help. You might have to fight with the FCC or other authority later on, but if it's a bonafide emergency and you have no other legitimate means of getting help, you'll likely be in a good position.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dan,

Satphones cannot and will not *ever* replace SSB. It's not a question of technology, i.e., reliability or cost or coverage or access to the Internet. It's a question of typology.

Satphones are *point-to-point*. They connect you with ONE OTHER point.

Radios are *point-to-multiple point*. There are over 1,000,000 licensed hams in the world and they are located all over the world. When you pick up the mic on a ham radio, you have the potential of talking to, and/or being heard or overheard by many, many stations. Ditto for marine SSB, though the community is much smaller.

You have only to do some active cruising with a SSB or a ham radio to know. Or, if you're landbound, listen into the marine SSB and the ham SSB nets: the Waterway Net on 7268LSB daily at 0745 EDT; the Cruisheimer's Net daily on 6227USB at 0830EDT; the Maritime Mobile Net daily on 14300USB noon to 9PM; etc., etc.

On these nets, boats check in to report their positions; learn where other boats are; hook up with them; obtain the latest weather reports; obtain help when they are in difficulty; talk to the Coast Guard in real emergencies (yes, the Coast Guard comes up on the ham nets); check propagation; get info on just about anything imaginable; etc., etc.

On a given day, some 50 or so cruising boats will check in on Cruiseheimers'; about 20 or more will check in on the Waterway Net; many others will check in on the MM Net, the Hurricane Net, the Safety and Security Net in the Caribbean, the NW Caribbean Net, the Pacific Seafarers Net, the Southeast Asian Net, and many, many others.

You can't do any of this with a satphone.

And, despite advances in technology, you never will be able to.

Bill


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

So, I can transmit from a marine SSB transceiver on ham bands if I have the proper class ham license? That is, if the radio can operate on ham bands (and I already have my ships station license, and the SSB operator's license), can I also have a ham license (proper class for said ham band) and use the SSB rig on those ham bands it can pick up? 

Is a good marine SSB type accepted for ham use also is what I'm getting at (provided you are ham licensed)

Thanks in advance btrayfors, I'm sure you've said it a thousand times already


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sapper-

I don't believe the FCC requires Ham Radio gear to be Type Accepted like the Marine SSB does, since Ham radio operator's often build their own equipment. Bill will correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

btrayfors, I take your points, and I didn't mean to sugges that SSB's all will get thrown in the garbage within the next 6 months are anything like that. But, whereas historically an SSB has been pretty much required gear for bluewater trips or long distance cruising, I believe that will change.

Every single thing you mentioned in fact can be done via satphone and/or the Internet. You say that 50 to 100 cruisers check in on netsn every day; I'm sure you're right. But that exact same thing can be done via an Internet board. Right this very moment cruisers can use a satellite tracking device so that their positions are tracked on the Internet, updated hourly (check out www.iboattrack.com). That kind of thing will become more prevalent, and when it does the need to check in with SSB nets will be diminshed, if not eliminated. Same holds true for weather routing and anything else that you can think of for which you would need an SSB net.

Likewise, there are party lines for phones, conference call capabilities, IM, chat rooms for real time multi-party discussions, and the list goes on and on. While SSB's remain incredibly useful today, I believe that really will change. There is a social aspect of cruisers' nets right now, but that really can be replicated with phone calls. It may even get more social with conference videocalls via Skype or another provider.

I'm really not kidding. Just a few short years ago the only way to coordinate with friends, clubs, events, etc. on the water was to schedule times to connect via VHF. Now, you hardly ever use the VHF; you just flip open your cell phone. That's exactly the same situation that you have on the high seas now with SSB, and that's only because satphone technology and cost (and they go hand in hand) just haven't gotten there yet.

Again, I mean no disrespect, and we're all just prognosticating here so who knows what the future will hold, but I think the SSB radio has seen its xenith and is on the backside of its useful lifespan as a technology.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Sapper-
> 
> I don't believe the FCC requires Ham Radio gear to be Type Accepted like the Marine SSB does, since Ham radio operator's often build their own equipment. Bill will correct me if I'm wrong.


I got that from earlier. I'm asking if you can use a marine SSB rig to transmit on the ham nets that the marine ssb rig can pick up, provided you are fully licensed to do so (holding ship station, marine ssb, and proper class level ham license).

If yes, do you use your ham call sign when on the ham bands, but using the marine SSB rig? (that could get confusing)


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Sapperwhite,

Yes. You can use the marine rig on the ham bands, if you have a ham license.

Most marine rigs -- in fact, all of them that I know about -- are capable of operating on the ham bands as well as the marine bands, though some may require special "programming".

The problem is, most marine SSBs although capable of operating on the ham bands are not very convenient. They don't have the frequency agility of ham rigs, with a few exceptions. The Icom 802 which is often advertised as being capable of both marine and ham operation indeed has a VFO which allows you to tune the bands, but it has detents and the architecture of the radio just isn't very intuitive to my mind. Many folks find it OK, though. It's probably what you're used to.

I routinely use an older marine SSB on the ham bands...a little-known Kenwood TKM-707. Great little rig. And, I choose to do so despite having at any time more than 20 other options: ham rigs, marine rigs, commercial rigs, and military rigs! I just love the 707.

On my boat, I have another little-know marine SSB: the Yaesu FT-600 alongside my Yaesu FT-900AT ham rig. It's also a fine little rig. See pic here: Gallery :: Miscellaneous 2007 :: NavStn_0140

Bill


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

Thanks Bill, just what I needed to know. 

One other thing, I have limited space and can't have both rigs aboard. Say I get an Icom 802 and learn to live with its function on ham bands. I would have to use my ham call sign while on those ham bands correct?


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Yes, that's correct.

While it does seem a bit complicated in the beginning, think of it this way.

A *marine license* allows you to transmit on the *marine bands only*.

A *ham license *allows you to transmit on the *ham bands only*.

You can *listen *anywhere.

You can use *any radio on the ham bands*.

On the *marine bands*, you can only legally use a radio which has been type-accepted for use on the marine bands.

In an *extreme emergency*, you can use any radio on any band to attract attention and get needed help.

Many sailors routinely use ham radios on the marine bands (illegally). They may or may not get away with it over time.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Daniel,

I take your points, but find it just a little sad.

I guess it boils down to whether or not you believe that texting via the Internet is somehow better or more desirable or more fun than actually communicating directly with someone.

Maybe it's a generational thing. Hmmm....would I rather talk to someone in the flesh or on the phone, or should I just text him/her? Damn...my thumbs are getting sore, guess I'll have to resort to the old technology and make a call 

NB: not every vessel afloat has a computer. Or a text screen. Or connection to the Internet. Or, thank god, wants to.

But almost all have a VHF. And, long-distance cruisers have a SSB which they can switch on in the morning and listen to while they're making breakfast, fixing a piece of broken gear, herding the kids, looking over new charts, or eating some papaya with lime juice. Try that while you're glued to the keyboard 

Bill


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

danielgoldberg said:


> Another comparison to make too is VHF and cell phones. VHF still is used, but it's used a whole lot less because of cell phones. Indeed, radio the coast guard today, and the first question you get is whether you have a cell phone on board that can be used to call them or they you. That tells the whole story right there.


This assumption is incorrect. The reason the Coast Guard pushes most non life threatening emergencies (in cell areas) over to a cell phone is to keep the radio frequencies clear for the critical emergencies. You are also being very myopic in your view. There is more to the world than US coastal waters and cell phones. In most of the world, dialing 911 on a sat phone won't get you jack.


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

sailingdog said:


> Sapper-
> 
> I don't believe the FCC requires Ham Radio gear to be Type Accepted like the Marine SSB does, since Ham radio operator's often build their own equipment. Bill will correct me if I'm wrong.


The answer to this will vary with radio authorities around the world. Here in Canada, a Hams radio station is called an experimental radio station and with the advanced license building gear is encouraged.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dog,

Yes, Plumper is correct. It will vary from country to country.

In the U.S., Amateur Radio transmitters do not require *type acceptance *although external HF power amplifiers and kits do require type acceptance.

However, as in all things where the government has a hand, it's not quite so simple.

All RF-emitting devices require FCC "approval" or "certification" in some form or other. This is to ensure that they don't create unwanted interference with other devices. There's a certification procedure, a notification procedure, a verification procedure, a declaration of conformity, etc., etc. The type-acceptance procedure generally pertains to radios used in the various licensed services: marine, aircraft, police, land mobile, etc. (but not, as stated above, to ham radios except for amplifiers).

You can read all about it here: ARRLWeb: FCC Part-15 Rules: Unlicensed RF Devices

Bill


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

Touche (can't figure out how to get the accent)! I concede defeat on those points, that's for sure.


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

btrayfors
I'm guessing you are a Ham. What is your C/S? I'm VE7GJD.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Hi, Gary...

Guilty, as charged 

My call is WA6CCA. Been licensed since 1966.

Have done a fair amount of QRP, too, but mostly CW with wire antennas. Prefer vertical dipoles...very low vertical takeoff angle...dynamite for DX. Worked about 100 countries in a few weeks with a K2 and vertical dipoles...10 watts! 

73,

Bill


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Well...I've been off line for a few hours and coome back to find this very good thread! I will defer to Trayfors on matters technical as there are few better sources on line than Bill on this subject. 
I would like to comment on some of the issues Daniel raises and the current choices for cruisers which to some extent are economic as well as practical issues. 
My own equipment on our cruising was BOTH an SSB (Icom802) w/Pactor modem and sailmail e-mail access AND a globalstar satphone which provided access in the Caraibbean to N. America for about 25 cents a minute under the plan we subscribed to. Our SSB/Pactor system ran around $5000 to install completely and the satphone was bought for around $750. We used the SSB for the "chatty" functions Bill speaks of as well as for our subscription weather service with Chris Parker which was personalized voice communication each AM for our position AND daily e-mail through the Pactor. Our use of the SatPhone was for point to point land communication for personal and business needs AND after hurricane Ivan in Grenada...it became our lifeline to help as well as a lifeline for other cruisers. (The SSB came down with the mast and in any event would not have been much use given our need for point to point conversations). 

With that background...what has changed since 2005 and what would I do if outfitting a boat today? 
The things that have changed are:
1. A degradation in Globalstar service quality (which made many drop the service) but which may be improving a bit now and the pricing is MUCH better to entice customers back. Iridium continues to be quite reliable AN D expensive. 
2. Much growth in Wifi accessibility along the coast with cellphone PC cards and most marinas offering service as well. this includes the populated areas of the Bahamas as well. This allows frequent access to e-mail, the web, and phone through Skype. 

Conclusion: For voyaging along the US coast and the Bahamas...an VHF radio, an air card and a wifi equipped PC can handle all communication needs and a cheap shortwave radio receiver can keep you up with the Cruisheimers chat and weather broadcasts. SSB/ham is a nice to have but not needed $5k expense. Sat phones are really only necessary if you MUST have a way to call out AND be reached 24x7. Globalstar is unreliable in terms of ALWAYS making a connection but from recent reports...if you can wait 10 minutes...you can get a connection. Iridium remains the reliable and pricey companion...but G-star is so damn cheap it is hard to resist taking one along. Out side of the US/Caribe...I think the Iridium is the only safe choice.
*********
Crossing oceans or going far afield, I think it is still an SSB world. Someone is always listening on the distress frequencies and pactor/sailmail remains an excellent way to get your weather and other needs. If possible an Iridium phone remains a great thing to have...(Beth Leonard & Evans Starzinger use one for all of their needs)...but if I had to choose i would choose the SSB. 

Daniel may be right about the future of SSB and evolving technology...but I am not holding my breath. The markets are not focusing on those of us who would like cheap internet access at sea. The sat phone companies are struggling to survive and without the Pentagon...probably even Iridium would be in trouble. I think it will work a lot like satellite TV. Satellite based 2 way internet will evolve for land based opportunities...and the resulting coverage will enable cheap satellite internet for those at sea within the "shadow" of that coverage. 
The technology is possible today...but there is no market that would justify the investment. 

The one other thing I would add is to echo Bill's comments. When you are out cruising...the nets on the vHF and the SSB allow you to share experiences, connect with old friends, make group plans, share warnings and just plain BE a cruising community. If SSB's were cheaper...everyone would have one for this alone. Maybe that is where we'll see some progress as there is really no excuse for the prices we pay for this equipment relative to the worth of the individual components.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Amen, Cam. I think most folks pay entirely too much for their SSB setups.

*Which is why I've stressed that you don't need to pay an arm and a leg for worldwide SSB communications capability.*

See, e.g., this thread on the SSCA Board:
SSCA Discussion Board :: View topic - SERIOUS HAM SSB SETUP ON THE CHEAP

If you're a ham
and
If you're a bit inventive 
and
If you're prudent
then....
You, too, can have a wonderful SSB setup aboard for as little as $300-500.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Why does this damned Board keep changing URL's?????

The proper one is this...I hope:

SSCA Discussion Board :: View topic - SERIOUS HAM SSB SETUP ON THE CHEAP


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Jeez....this is really maddening...

Just search the SSCA Board for "Serious SSB Setup".

Really annoying.

B.


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

btrayfors said:


> Hi, Gary...
> 
> Guilty, as charged
> 
> ...


Bill,
You are way ahead of me. I got my license a couple years ago just so I could run a radio on my boat. Here in the PNW there are a couple great nets that keep track of everyone from Mexico to Alaska. Inside vancouver island it is run on VHF repeaters that run the length of the island but north or south of the Island it is on 40 meters at the crack of dawn. It is a great service and keeps everyone in touch. My little FT 817 with an end fed wire run up on a halyard keeps me in touch most of the time. Total cost was less than $600.

Hope to hear you on the air.

73

Gary


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Gary:

True 817 story.

A few years ago I was at a lovely Caribbean anchorage, enjoying a couple of sundowners with two sailing friends. Relaxing in the cockpit with a Mt. Gay and Coke in hand, I had my 817 on my chest. Internal batteries only, so 2.5 watts. Antenna was a vertical dipole on the foredeck (my mainstay DX antenna), with coax led back to the 817. Got the picture?

Between delicious sips, I was tuning the tiny rig on 20 meters SSB. I'm not making this up...I have witnesses.

First contact: an EK in Armenia! Gave me a 58 report. I was blown away, so a few more sips put me in the mood.

Second contact: a ZL in New Zealand. Gave me a 57 report.

Who says QRP is for sissies ? 

73,

Bill


----------



## billyruffn (Sep 21, 2004)

Bill,

Another propagation 'war story' -- 

One night on the way to Hawaii from Costa Rica -- say we're about 1200 miles east of Hilo and 1200 +/- miles SW of San Diego -- all of a sudden, clear as a bell over the VHF Ch 16 comes "United States Coast Guard San Diego Group" (or something like that) and they're talking to a boat in trouble off a breakwater somewhere. We only heard one side of the conversation, the CG side, but it was loud and clear. Within 15 - 20 minutes whatever atmospheric condition that permitted VHF to 'bend' to our location was over and the VHF again went silent.

I often wondered whether the USCG-San Diego would have heard us if we'd called them with the high power, 25W.

Any idea what was going on in the atmosphere?

Scott (KB1KZH)


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

btrayfors said:


> Gary:
> 
> True 817 story.
> 
> ...


Good story! It is amazing what a couple watts will do. I always get a rise out of some of the folks I talk to when I tell them I'm running 5 watts. I find it difficult here in the city and mostly use PSK31 but on the water I use voice exclusively and get great results. I like the low power because I don't have to worry about my batteries onboard at all with 5 watts output.


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

billyruffn said:


> Bill,
> 
> Another propagation 'war story' --
> 
> ...


Sounds like ducting. It is an infrequent condition where you get extreme ranges on higher frequencies than normal. I think it happens more often over the poles.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Hi, Scott...

Probably it was tropo ducting, a well known phenomenon wherein VHF signals are carried within layers created by strong temperature inversions. It often occurs over water, and is pretty common between California and Hawaii.

While posted in Morocco, we used to work into Portugal and Europe with VHF using tropo.

I believe the distance record is about 3,000 miles for VHF signals via tropo ducting. Great for VHF and TV DX signal chasers!

Bill


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

btrayfors said:


> Why does this damned Board keep changing URL's?????
> 
> The proper one is this...I hope:
> 
> SSCA Discussion Board :: View topic - SERIOUS HAM SSB SETUP ON THE CHEAP


Bill, clicking on the word "ssb" above worked fine. It's an interesting thread. I have a steel boat (one giant ground plane) and am leaning toward the "stock solution" of a Icom M-802 plus AT-140 tuner plus Pactor III modem, because a lot of people know how to deal with it, and because I intend to rely heavily on SailMail for work and dealing with my child's school while we're away. Mind you, I did seriously look at a Kenwood TS-50S at a friend's recommendation (Ken Goodings, a veteran radio guy about to head south...don't recall his call sign).

The antenna I haven't quite sussed out. I figured I would put the rig and the tuner in the aft cabin "office", and put the antenna through a gland in the deck, and then I would hoist an antenna between the two stern quarter backstays using the topping lift or a new rigged line to the mast top. A vertical dipole would work as well.

Frankly, I haven't thought much about this stuff since I played with CBs as a teenager 30 years ago and erected my own directional antenna tower, but I think I still grasp the concepts.

Good thread. We will definitely have the SSB for the community aspect and for the very simple reason that I can work the ship from the pilothouse while talking and listening on SSB... I can't do that while typing on a keyboard. Also, I find the economy of getting weatherfaxes and GRIB files and other radio-received data appealing. Naturally, when in the anchorage or when running coastal, it might be possible to use cell phones, but in my mind they are differently purposed technologies.

Lastly, having a sat phone/cell phone/WiFi card plus an SSB follows the same logic that rejects a single screen radar/chartplotter/AIS/depthfinder, etc. You want, to a degree, options on a boat, and if I dropped the satphone...that would be it until I got within 15 miles of land and could use VHF...assuming I have international frequencies!


----------



## mjrogers (Oct 31, 2007)

Btrayfors, 
What kind of vertical dipole do you use? I have an FT817 as well and usually use a 40m wire dipole with a BLT tuner. Works well in the field but not a good idea for a boat. I'll probably use a tuner and the backstay and keep a Buddipole for a backup. You may be interested in these:
HF Packer-Amp
N4MJR here, liscensed in 1992 as KD4JSG. I imagine there are quite a few hams on this board. 
Michael


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

mjrogers said:


> I imagine there are quite a few hams on this board.


We have a member here, Sailhog -- a real swine and quite a ham too. 

P.S. Great, informative thread! Thanks to all that shared their knowledge.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Valiente,

In general, I like your thinking, especially the part about redundancy. Always a good idea on a seagoing vessel.

The 802/140 tuner with a backstay isn't a bad choice. It wouldn't be mine because I really don't like the 802 and the 140 tuner is a meagre implementation of what a real marine tuner ought to be. It's capable as far as it goes, but IMHO it just doesn't go far enough (only 45 'time limited' memories, for one thing).

I'm not bashing Icom; I just think they could have done better. And, the 700Pro and 710 are terrific bullet-proof radios.

Along with redundancy, I believe flexibility is important. Why buy a tuner which will only work well with one line of radios? What if you decide to add a second, maybe ham radio later on? Why not pick a tuner which will work with ANY HF radio? And which has lots of non-volatile memories for near instant return to favorite frequencies?

The TS-50S is a great little rig, but it's not a 1st choice for packet; a bit awkward.

With a steel vessel, you won't have to worry about an RF ground  

Happy sailing.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Hi, Michael...

Understand that the vertical dipoles I'm talking about are *single-band, tuned dipoles fed with coax*. I carry aboard single-band marinized dipoles for 15m, 20m, 30m, and 8mHz. This spring, I intend to experiment with a 40m dipole with the lower leg bent back just above the deck.

You may be interested in this info re: constructing a marine dipole, and the ideas for connecting GTO-15 feedline to a backstay antenna. There's also a spreadsheet comparing options for marine antennas. Click twice on each pic for full resolution: Gallery :: Constructing a Marine Dipole Antenna

Thanks for the reference to the backpacker amp...I hadn't seen one of these before. I have a commercial version of a QRP amp...the Tokyo Hy-Power...which also works very well.

73,

Bill


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

okay .. so i just got my amateur's general with hopes to install my icom 718 (isolated backstay) .. blah blah blah..

anyway, i have a question about emailing from foreign ports. i memorized all the required answers for the tests, but something i learned sticks in my brain about foreign countries and third part messages.. and i haven't re-cracked the books to investigate, and hoping someone here will have a clear concise answer. 

i remember reading that some countries do not allow third party messages (you > another ham > a non ham) and it seems that is exactly what one does with winlink. if i am remembering this correctly, what is the real world implications, and or workarounds, and if i am misinterpreting this or just imagining it up out of whole cloth can someone tell me?


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

rrgane said:


> okay .. so i just got my amateur's general with hopes to install my icom 718 (isolated backstay) .. blah blah blah..
> 
> anyway, i have a question about emailing from foreign ports. i memorized all the required answers for the tests, but something i learned sticks in my brain about foreign countries and third part messages.. and i haven't re-cracked the books to investigate, and hoping someone here will have a clear concise answer.
> 
> i remember reading that some countries do not allow third party messages (you > another ham > a non ham) and it seems that is exactly what one does with winlink. if i am remembering this correctly, what is the real world implications, and or workarounds, and if i am misinterpreting this or just imagining it up out of whole cloth can someone tell me?


I don't think that applies here in Canada. Many hams provide the service of taking the email from the radio world to the computer world. It wouldn't be much of a service otherwise.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

rrgane,

You remember pretty well 

Yes, amateurs have to be wary of third-party traffic (i.e., traffic other than that between licensed amateurs). Many countries have 3rd party agreements; many others do not. You can read all about them here: ARRLWeb: International Third Party Traffic

With regard to WinLink, however, thus far countries have pretty much ignored the 3rd party stuff via WinLink and the Internet.

However, you still need to have a reciprocal license to transmit on ham radio even to other amateurs while in the territorial waters of a foreign country, unless that country has some sort of *reciprocal operating agreement* (which is different from a 3rd party agreement).

Before you go foreign, it's a good idea to check the latest situation on the ARRL website and/or ask the net controls who operate international nets (like the MM Net or the Waterway Net).

Bill


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

*Because of all yooze guys ...*

I went down to the boat to mess around with my SSB. OK, I give in. It's a lot of fun messin' around with those boxes. I still think they're going the way of the dinosaur before too long, but it's still fun.

I'm on the hard, so I couldn't transmit or anything of course, but I still could play around to receive some BBC stuff, not to mention getting a sports update on the WFAN here in New York!


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

WFAN, it's super bowl Sunday and the Giants are playing the Jets and we're talking baseball ! If you listen, you know it's true ......


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dan,

Good for you!

By the way, just because you're 'on the hard' doesn't mean you can't transmit.

Depends very much on your RF ground and type of antenna. Simplest, of course, is just a monoband dipole; rig it vertically on the foredeck, run the coax to your rig, and you're up and running on whatever band it's cut for.

If you already have a backstay antenna, tuner, and RF ground system it can also work, depending on the ground setup. One way to be sure is just to take along some insulated wire of any kind, cut to 1/4 wave at the desired frequency (e.g., 16.5' long for the 20m amateur band). Clip one end of that wire onto the ground lug on the tuner, spread the wire around either on deck or belowdecks, and you're good to go on 20m. This is called a "1/4-wave radial". It makes the tuner very happy. Just be sure the other end is insulated and doesn't touch anything...it's HOT when transmitting. No connection to the water needed.

Have fun. Now that you've broken the ice, I think you're gonna become a convert.

By the way, some great nets to listen to are included in this list: East Coast Cruising Nets

Bill


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Bill, thanks for the comments. I have in no way committed to the set-up I mentioned, but acknowledge it's likely the most idiot-proof in terms of the number of people using it and the number of solutions to connect PC to rig to d/l grib files, weather maps, e-mails, NAVTEX, etc. The "talking to others" part will not be the primary use of this, but will be a component, of course. _Listening _will be a big deal, and getting time checks, etc., but I'm looking for a way to keep the bytes flowing, however slowly, between boat and Ontario (oh, yeah, if Herb H. is still doing his weather routing, we'll want to keep in touch with him).

So, given those parameters and the fact I can't take a vast number of tests in the next 18 months, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the ideal SSB set-up.

I already own a steel boat, so heresy is no stranger to me...


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

OK, I understood about 30% of what you wrote.  

Here's what I've got: an older SEA 322 150 watt unit; Shakespeare wip antenna (we have a Freedom, and it's a freestanding mast, so no rigging at all); and tuner (brand/model is escaping me at the moment). As to counterpoise, we have copper strapping all around the interior of the hull. With that, should it work our of the water?

Also, is the wire you're referencing to create an antenna, or for a ground/counterpoise (demonstrating my ignorance here in terms of building radios)? 

I'm tempted to say we should pick a time and frequency and try it out.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

*What Constitutes an "Ideal SSB Setup"?*

Valiente,

Wow...you've thrown me a curve ball! It's really a trick question, because IMHO there is no "ideal" SSB setup.

A SSB installation must be matched to:

1. the intended use;
2. the boat;
3. the budget; and
4. the knowledge and skills of the operator.

What constitutes an "ideal SSB setup" for me isn't necessarily the best setup for you. So, while I can't specify a generic "ideal setup", I think it is possible to talk about the *essential components* of such a setup.

To my mind, the elements of an ideal SSB setup for any boat include:

1. a capable and flexible marine SSB radio;
2. a good marinized antenna system, including RF ground; 
3. a first-class tuner/coupler; 
4. a source of sufficient clean power to the radio and tuner; and
5. an in-line power/swr meter to monitor performance.

For an experienced ham, I would add the following components:

6. a second, highly capable and flexible ham radio; and
7. at least one and preferably more marinized vertical dipoles tuned for favorite bands.

Both of these latter items provide redundancy which I believe to be important in a seagoing vessel.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dan,

Sounds like you're good to go as it is. You should have no trouble transmitting either in or out of the water. The copper strapping inside the hull will serve as the counterpoise for your whip antenna.

The radial wires I was talking about are for an RF ground...pseudo ground, really. You already have effectively the same thing with the copper strapping.

Bill


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

Bill, then what's all the hullabaloo about needing to be in the water to transmit _because_ of the counterpoise? Urban legend or is my understanding of the ground situation even worse than I had assumed?


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Maybe a bit of both 

Most "authorities" love to tout the "perfect ground" characteristics of seawater, and most references attempt to "couple" the ground side of a marine antenna system to that "perfect ground".

The truth is, there are several ways to create a good RF ground. One of them has little to do with the water. It is to use a system of "radials" or other things acting essentially as "radials" to provide the return path for RF.

In your case, you said you have "copper strapping all around the interior of the hull". That should serve as an effective counterpoise, quite independent of seawater.

Try it on one band to see how your tuner achieves a tune. Should work with no problem.

Bill


----------



## danielgoldberg (Feb 9, 2008)

The unit definitely indicates that we're "tuned." I know that cause it says "TUNED" right across the screen once it locks in on a frequency. My powers of deductive reasoning know no bounds. 

I'm occupied with Sunday evening kid stuff, so I can't get to the boat tonight, but I'm going to shoot you a message at some point to schedule a time to talk via SSB, if you're willing. Just curious to check it out. Likely to be one night during the week, or next weekend, if any of that works for you (not sure if you're on your boat, near your boat, or whether you have a home-based station, which is what I suspect).


----------



## billyruffn (Sep 21, 2004)

I've got a question for the experts who are hanging out in this thread -- it may be somewhat 'off thread' in which case I beg forgiveness, but here goes.

Billy Ruff'n is a steel boat. I bought her from a guy who was both a EE PhD and a HAM. He had an IC 707 installed using an insulated back stay as the antenna. He had installed a big dynaplate and had the radio grounded to it via a large round battery cable. 

Because I wanted to assure my wife that 'help was always at hand' I replaced the 707 with an IC 802 linked to the GPS, so that with a push of the big red button she (alone) could tell the world we needed help. While installing the 802 w/ AT 140 tuner I decided, based on my reading, that neither the round ground wire nor dynaplate were optimal. Because everyone says a steel boat is a great ground plane, I grounded the tuner to the hull by sanding paint off a nearby frame and bolting a 8" cable from turner to the frame. It worked OK, but not great. Other boats told me my signal was not very good. (As I wan't a ham at that point, my only signal reports came from boats that were within a few hundred miles.)

Later I someone convince me that grounding the radio to the hull was inappropriate. His logic --- and this gets to the question I have --- his logic was the following: the antenna (backstay) is 'insulated' from the rest of the boat. Why then did I have the ground electrically connected to the rest of the boat up to and including the parts of the backstay that were not 'insulated'. His point seemed correct -- grounding the radio to a steel hull that is electrically connected to the rig is the same thing as grounding to everything but the antenna itself. Being too dumb to argue, I rewired the tuner ground to the dynaplate, but this time I used a 3" wide copper ribbon (wrapped in tape to prevent it from grounding to the hull on its way to the dynaplate). Voila, I instantaneously got much clearer transmissions and very good (4000 nm plus) DX comms.

So, what happened? Why was grounding to the hull of a steel boat a bad idea?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Billyruffn-

You may have a case of coincidence here. If you used a 8" cable for the first connection, that may have been the cause of the bad signal. SSB radio antenna connection really should be made using copper ribbon, as you did in the second case, and that may be the reason for the improvement. You changed TWO variables... the counter poise itself and the method of connection to the counter poise. My guess is that the hull of your steel beastie would be an even better counterpoise than the dynaplate, but _needed to be connected via ribbon rather than cable._


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Gremlins at work 

Could be several explanations. One which does NOT explain this is that somehow the dynaplate is a better RF ground than the steel hull of the boat!

I'd suspect first the connection between the tuner and the hull. The correct way to connect to a steel hull is to use a wide copper strap, clean the protective covering off a small portion of the hull, and bolt the ground strap securely to the hull, then cover it with a protective coating.

It is important to clean the hull section first, since virtually all steel hulls -- mild steel, corten steel, etc. -- have (or should have) protective coverings on both sides.

Another thing to consider is poor connections and surface corrosion. When you changed the ground, you could very well have replaced bad connections with better ones.

I don't really understand your "friend's" logic. Surely the ground plate is attached to the hull which is attached to everything else except the insulated backstay? Even if the ground plate were to be isolated from the hull...which would seem to be impossibly convoluted...they're both sitting in the same medium...saltwater, so the "isolation" wouldn't account for much, would it?

Next, I'd suspect the propagation conditions. They have been pretty horrible lately as we're near the bottom of the sunspot cycle. Occasionally, even in these conditions, there are days or hours during the day when propagation is pretty good -- even excellent. Without a side-by-side simultaneous comparison, it would be impossible to conclude that one is necessarily better than the other. 

The importance of this factor (propagation) cannot be overestimated. I'm on the radio everyday, and listening on the HF bands almost all day. For many years. I participate in several nets, including the WaterWay net in the mornings. One day I might be able to hear a station in Charleston with an extremely strong signal. Ten minutes earlier, however, that same station was not copyable. Propagation changes. Chuck, ND7K, runs a LOT of power from his land-based station in the Florida Keys. He has an excellent antenna setup as well. Usually, he's VERY strong. However, sometimes even during the course of the 45-minute net his signal fades to the point of being almost gone completely. Propagation changes. I run 500 watts into an excellent antenna system from my home QTH. Usually I receive very strong signal reports from stations on the Net. But, occasionally, I don't. Propagation changes, from minute-to-minute, hour-to-hour, and day-to-day.

Finally, the 802 is known to be quirky and to have relatively low average power output or "talk power". Gordon West and others have commented on this. The radio usually ships from the factory with the speech compression turned off, and only a technician can turn it on. Thus a combination of propagation conditions, relatively low power output, and timing could well have given the impression that somehow the ground plate is better.

Not!



Bill


----------



## thekeip (Aug 8, 2007)

I've stated my position on the use of Dynaplates in this thread before. I'm an advocate for them and that position hasn't changed...grows stronger every day in fact, and so I'm not surprised that good results were realized... that's the way it should be. I would have expected better from the steel hull though, although it would be wrong to conclude that the Dynaplate was 'better', or the steel 'worse'...just 'different' on that particular day, that particular hour. That's just the way it is.
I should say that it's not particularly the performance of the Dynaplate that grabs me, but the relative ease of achieving a predictably good result compared to that of a poorly installed copper sheathing, which is usually the case....but I digress...
HowardKeiper
Sea Quest
Berkeley


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Hmmm....let's see.

The attenuation of RF signals in seawater at the HF frequencies used for marine radio is on the order of *70-80db per foot*.

Most dynaplates are installed on sailboats some 3' or more underwater.

Perhaps someone can explain to me what they do?

Because if they are able to "couple to seawater" at that depth, what happens to the RF energy injected so far underwater?

Maybe submarines should reconsider the use of RF communications underwater, since obviously the dynaplate folks have discovered an anomalous physical science phenomenon 

Guess it's just magical ....

Bill


----------



## billyruffn (Sep 21, 2004)

Given the shape of the hull and the location of the Dynaplate, my guess is that it's no more than 8-10 inches underwater -- but you guys are way beyond me here. I'll let this sleeping dog lie -- the radio works great, which in the end is all that matters.

Another perhaps slightly afield question -- but one related to the earlier discussion of Marine HF vs Ham radios as modern means of communications.

When I was in the process of deciding to replace the POs IC 707, I spoke with Icom tech people and they said one reason to replace it was that (let me see if I can explain this correctly) -- that the 707 wasn't really designed as a email compatible radio. Apparently, email modem transmissions are off and on, no power and full power with nothing in between. The ham radios ae built for voice and CW, but apparently the CW signal doesn't stress the system the way an email transmission would. The Icom guys indicated that using the 707 for heavy duty email correspondence might shorten it's useful life. (I hope I represented their perspective correctly, but that's basically what I took away from the conversation).

Any thoughts on this? Are Ham radios of pre-email vintage engineered to handle the full power burst of data transmissions? Same for Marine SSBs of the same vintage? If not, does this mean that people using the HF radio for email need to use only the more modern models??


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

The 707 is one of the most beautiful ham radios ever designed but, unfortunately, it also was plagued with problems. IMO, you're lucky to be rid of it. OOPS....MY BAD. I thought you were referring to the older Yaesu 707. The Icom 707 is a different animal completely. Forget this paragraph!

One problem is switching speed....some of the older marine and ham rigs have problems switching from transmit to receive fast enough to accommodate the higher packet data speeds, esp. Pactor III. Sometimes there are work-arounds, sometimes not.

Another problem is the higher AVERAGE power output required of, e.g., Pactor transmissions. Voice transmission over SSB has peaks and valleys. On voice peaks you put out near full power, while at other times you put out much less than that and sometimes near nothing. On CW, there are breaks as well. But some modern data protocols place a higher demand on the transmitter to put out near constant power during exchanges.

Some ham rigs will take it just fine; others require setting their output power back a bit. Ditto for some older marine rigs. And, like in most things, there's a fair amount of erroneous lore out there. For example, you can see on the SAILMAIL site the statement that the Kenwood TKM-707 marine rig must be run at reduced power, but some have found that's not true at all. 

Either way, power output isn't likely to be a problem, since you can make excellent data connections with very low power anyway. And the new protocols are so good they can make connections even when you can't tell there's a station at the other end! Quite amazing, really.

And, yes, if you're gonna have a dynaplate it's probably best to have it installed near the waterline. But why anyone would do this on a steel or aluminum boat escapes me completely 

Bill


----------



## thekeip (Aug 8, 2007)

There are no empirical data that I'm aware of that attempt to correlate the efficiency of grounding devices...keel, engine, through-hulls, coppercoating or Dynaplate, etc to the depth they happen to be at. Engines and (sailboat) keels are usually way deeper than where one would find a Dynaplate.(s). It's RF coupling to the water that's critical.
Howard Keiper
Sea Quest
Berkeley


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Howard,

It's a deep and complex subject (no pun intended).

And, as you say, empirical data are hard to come by. But, evidence-based experience isn't. There's tons of that around. And, the science is pretty good re: attenuation of RF signals in various mediums, including salt water.

Here are a few "facts", followed by some experience-based opinion.

*Facts*

1. Attenuation of RF signals in seawater is acute...on the order of 70-80db per foot at the HF frequencies used for marine SSB.

2. Therefore, you *cannot* communicate from one station to another by sending RF signals through seawater.

3. RF energy pumped into seawater at depths greater than a foot or so is almost entirely consumed by heating the surrounding water.

4. There's little if any basis in fact to support the notion of "100 square feet of copper" to form a good RF ground, however much it's been touted by "authoritative" sources including engineers, radio consultants, authors, and manufacturers. Even Gordon West now says you don't need that; he recommends just running a wide strap to the nearest bronze thru-hull and forget it. And Stan Honey says much the same thing about RF grounds in his piece for West Marine.

5. You don't necessarily need to couple an antenna system on a boat to the seawater in order to have an efficient radiator of RF energy. If you don't believe this, consider the lowly dipole...especially the vertical dipole. You will look long and hard to find a more effective antenna, and it works well with NO separate RF ground, NO connection to seawater, NO connection to the hull or tanks or engine or keel, etc.

6. There are several ways to create an effective RF ground on a boat. Among these are the traditional "coupling to seawater" route...with it's many variants...and, just as effective, the "pseudo-ground", e.g., radials...tuned or not.

*Opinions*

1. It may well be that the apparent efficiency of dynaplates, engine connections, tanks, keel, etc. comes not from the contact with water or even necessarily from the proximity and capacitative coupling to water, but rather from the copper strips and heavy wires used in such connections actually *acting as radials*.

2. The "seawater as the perfect ground" statement is often misinterpreted and/or misrepresented. In fact, the *reflective quality of the surface of seawater* is what's most important, to serve as a springboard for the RF emissions as they take off for the ionosphere and "hop" to their destination.

3. Mobile installations aboard aircraft, in vehicles, and fixed installations ashore can be very efficient without bonding to seawater. *There are lots of ways to construct a suitable counterpoise*.

4. *The best antenna system* is one which works well on *your* boat, and may take a variety of forms depending on the boat, the rigging and equipment, and other factors.

Bill


----------



## thekeip (Aug 8, 2007)

Bill
I don't have the in depth (ha ha) of knowledge or experience that you do. What experience I do have is largely gleaned from others. I install this stuff... according to the recipes derived from their collective experiences. I think I said in an earlier response to something or other in this thread that the installations I do have to produce not just good results some of the time, but predictably good, measurable results all the time. I was a copper strap guy for ages...and still could be swayed, having done it that way for a long time, if I were sure that the end justified the means. As an independent contractor...a technical gypsy, so to say, (and a good one, I might add), mistakes, in the form of poor or disappointing performance come back to haunt me.
I accept all and everything you say about most everything you say. Given my 'druthers however, left to my own devices, the skipper who's got to have his boat ready and certified for The Pac Cup in a couple of months will on doubt get the Keiper special...the subtleties of a discussion such as this forgotten before he gets to the Gate. That is, of course assuming that the performance is at least equal to that of a first-rate strapping job...radials...ok.
Howard


----------



## thekeip (Aug 8, 2007)

Please overlook the spelling errors.
Howard


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

It is indeed a complex subject..

Since the Marine HF SSB frequency band is so wide (anywhere between 2182kHz and 12365kHz for typical voice calls) all of the marine installations I have ever seen are compromises limited mainly by the length of the backstay.

Certainly, a good antenna tuner can help but you can't get away from the fact that the antenna will be optimal ("tuned") around one particular frequency (usually a distress frequency) and less than optimal on the others. This is made worse when you consider that marine SSB transmissions are either vertically- or horizontally-polarised and the backstay isn't either! 



btrayfors said:


> 5. You don't necessarily need to couple an antenna system on a boat to the seawater in order to have an efficient radiator of RF energy. If you don't believe this, consider the lowly dipole...especially the vertical dipole. You will look long and hard to find a more effective antenna, and it works well with NO separate RF ground, NO connection to seawater, NO connection to the hull or tanks or engine or keel, etc.


True, you could build a vertical dipole - but it would need to be blooming huge to work properly on 2182.. bigger than most people's yachts..

..but that doesn't mean it will necessarily work better than a properly-tuned SSB antenna up the backstay that uses the entire boat as the ground.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Howard,

I'm with you, guy! If you want to install something that works reasonably well and is very simple, just follow Gordon West's advice and connect a copper ground strap from the tuner ground lug to the nearest bronze thru hull. No question, this is a simple, straightforward way to go. It will produce acceptable results, and most any owner or installer can do it without screwing up too badly.

But for better results, you gotta build a better RF ground, IMHO.

Hartley18,

Yes, a dipole for 2mHz would be a pretty big beastie...suitable only for large ships! But if I were there in Aussie land and wanted to contact someone in North America or Europe, say, I'd build a vertical dipole for 20 meters. That's only 33' long. I keep one mounted on my boat all the time.

And, sorry, you can't compare the performance of a backstay antenna....any backstay antenna with any conceivable/practical RF ground....with that of a vertical dipole properly tuned and rigged. The dipole will outperform the backstay most every time. The reason has to do with vertical angle of radiation....a vertical dipole puts most of its energy out very near to the horizon, which is exactly where you want it for DX (long distance) communication. Radiation from a backstay antenna will be at higher angles, depending on the frequency.

On the other hand, when you need to transmit on lower bands you can't build a practical dipole...they're too long, traps are problematic, etc., etc.

That's why I believe that the traditional *backstay antenna* -- or an 'alternative backstay' equivalent -- *belongs on all boats with ham or SSB communications aboard*. It's flexibility is unparalleled, even if its performance isn't 

Bill


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

btrayfors said:


> Yes, a dipole for 2mHz would be a pretty big beastie...suitable only for large ships! But if I were there in Aussie land and wanted to contact someone in North America or Europe, say, I'd build a vertical dipole for 20 meters. That's only 33' long. I keep one mounted on my boat all the time.
> 
> And, sorry, you can't compare the performance of a backstay antenna....any backstay antenna with any conceivable/practical RF ground....with that of a vertical dipole properly tuned and rigged. The dipole will outperform the backstay most every time. The reason has to do with vertical angle of radiation....a vertical dipole puts most of its energy out very near to the horizon, which is exactly where you want it for DX (long distance) communication. Radiation from a backstay antenna will be at higher angles, depending on the frequency.
> 
> On the other hand, when you need to transmit on lower bands you can't build a practical dipole...they're too long, traps are problematic, etc., etc.


Bill, I was talking about *practical* installations and used the same reasoning you use above. On marine SSB bands a dipole antenna might be possible on shore, but is not practical on a typical yacht simply because it would be too big.. so big even ships can't use them! On a higher band it's a different story. 

BTW, I'm not convinced that the angle of polarisation has as much of an effect as physical size (ie. gain) and suspect that a large, properly grounded, backstay antenna on a large yacht would have a greater gain than a 1/4-wave dipole, offsetting any losses due to backstay angle... but I'm too lazy to do the calcs!! 



btrayfors said:


> That's why I believe that the traditional *backstay antenna* -- or an 'alternative backstay' equivalent -- *belongs on all boats with ham or SSB communications aboard*. It's flexibility is unparalleled, even if its performance isn't


Agreed 100%.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Cameron,

You don't need to "do the calcs". The exceptional performance of 1/2-wave (not 1/4-wave) vertical dipoles when rigged near the ground or water has been documented in lots of places, including the ARRL antenna handbook. It is the choice of well-funded DX-peditions which can afford any kind of equipment; some have documented "gain" as high as 18-20db due to the very low angle of radiation and consequent number of reduced hops.

On my boat, I've been using both a well-installed backstay antenna with a first-class antenna coupler, and vertical dipoles on the foredeck for many years. Have been using and writing about the properties of vertical dipoles for over 30 years. Those who have paid attention, and have bothered not only to "do the research" but to actually build and try one out have found -- as I and many others have found -- that they are dynamite antennas. On bands for which you can physically carry them, they outperform the backstay antenna hands-down.

Re: size, obviously how large a dipole you can erect depends on the height of your mast. On my 42' sloop, I am able to comfortably erect vertical dipoles for the 8mHz marine band and all bands at higher frequencies: 10, 14, 21 mHz ham bands and 12, 16, 22 mHz marine bands. In a week or so, I intend to try out an idea for rigging a vertical dipole for 40 meters with a bent back portion of the lower leg. I hope to be able to compare it on-the-air with my backstay antenna on 40-meter nets.

Bill


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

btrayfors said:


> Re: size, obviously how large a dipole you can erect depends on the height of your mast. On my 42' sloop, I am able to comfortably erect vertical dipoles for the 8mHz marine band and all bands at higher frequencies: 10, 14, 21 mHz ham bands and 12, 16, 22 mHz marine bands.


So Bill, 42' sloop but you didn't tell us the height of your mast!

Also, some questions: why do you use vinyl-coated SS lifeline wire rather than plain uncoated SS wire to make up your marine dipoles? Is there anything special about the wire diameter (e.g. 1/8" or perhaps even smaller?) or construction (1x19, 7x7, etc?)? Could I use the same kind of wire as above for making an "alternate backstay" antenna? Would this just be a length of wire with an eye nicro-pressed onto each end, suspended from rope leaders (acting as insulators), with some sort of tensioning (e.g spare halyard or topping lift), with the GTO-15 from the antenna tuner attached to the lower nicro-press?

Thanks,

Tim


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

Reluctantly, I write this only to lend some objectivity to the discussion - i say reluctantly as the last time I tried, it was not well received...

A vertical dipole has been around for ever and is nothing special in terms of it's radiation effectiveness or it's practical use aboard a boat. Virtually every ham contester, as an example of people who have tried every conceivable form of antenna to gain an advantage, much perfer either sloper antennas or phased quater wave verticals. As the latter is impractical on a boat, the conventional wisdom is the sloper fed against the mast represents to all around better compromise. The major problem wuth a vertical dipole is it's design requirement that it be fed in the middle such that the feed coax is parallel to the antenna thereby inducing both pattern distrubance and radiation analomies on the feed.

This is largely an academic exercise since all antennas practical for a boat are a compromise of some sort and it's not my intent or desire to argue academic issues; only to point out that one not need to get too wrapped up in any one design as they all work fairly well if fed properly.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Tim,

Mast height is 64' plus. Forestay length is about 55'.

Re: insulated s/s lifeline, I use it because it's very easy to handle and, possibly, the insulation helps reduce noise during precipitation events. Can't swear to that, but many have found it so. Thus all my vertical dipoles -- on the boat and at home -- use insulated wire.

Size is relatively unimportant, though larger diameters may have a slight edge. Stainless steel doesn't conduct as well as copper, and RF travels almost exclusively on the surface, so the more the merrier. However, everything's a compromise.

Yes, just form the ends into loops. I've written and posted pix extensively on the SSCA website and others on dipole construction and tuning.

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

K1VSK...

Donald,

Nice try, again, but no cigar. There really IS something about vertical dipoles which sets them apart from most other antennas you can rig on a sailboat. It's not academic; it's well proven both in theory and practice.

Yes, vertical dipoles have been around a long time. Most folks don't use them ashore because they don't have the means to hoist them high enough. And, a sloping end-fed antenna "played against a tower" is not the same thing at all. Nor is an inverted-vee dipole, which has a much higher average vertical angle of radiation.

A sloper, i.e., a sloping dipole is/can be a very effective antenna, too. I have one at my house on 40 meters and if you want to hear it just tune into the WaterWay Net any morning on 7268 at 0800.

As previously stated, DX-ers have discovered vertical dipoles and often prefer them over even yagis for DX-peditions. They like the all-round pattern of radiation and, especially, the very low vertical takeoff angles obtainable.

I certainly agree that any antenna you can rig on a boat is a compromise, and there's enough variation in floating platforms that, as the car manufacturers say, "your mileage will vary". 

Still, after playing with antennas on sailboats for the past 35 years or so and after trying just about any type and combination of antenna systems imaginable, and after talking to literally hundreds of vessels on the high seas there's no doubt in my mind whatsoever that a vertical dipole will outperform most any practical antenna you can rig on a seagoing vessel.

Bill


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

Bill,

I've seen dipole antennas strung up the backstay (not terribly vertical, I'll admit) and they didn't work so well there for most of the reasons aforementioned. Perhaps that's why people gave up.  

Do you know if anyone has come up with a reasonable Yagi for marine SSB - or is the world still stuck on long-line backstay antennas??


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Cameron,

Just about every antenna imaginable has been tried on boats and ships. While in Morocco many years ago, I used to talk regularly with the radio op on a ship who had brought his own 5-element monoband yagis aboard for 15m and 20m. After the captain made him take them down, they ended up atop my house in Rabat...but that's a long story 

At dockside or in an anchorage it is possible, of course, to mount just about anything. I've even talked to sailboats which had yagi's atop the mainmast. But, clearly they weren't sailing with those in place!

To me, a *practical* marine antenna has to be one which will be suitable for real ocean sailing, not just one you can rig while dockside. Thus it has to be very strong and built of materials which will withstand the rigors of the marine environment, including storm-force winds and high seas. That's why I favor marinized vertical dipoles -- in addition to the traditional backstay, of course -- and have posted details of their construction here:
Gallery :: Constructing a Marine Dipole Antenna
(click twice on each pic for full resolution)

and details on how to tune a marine dipole here:
SSCA Discussion Board :: View topic - How to Tune a Marine Dipole Antenna

The major limitation of these dipoles is that they are single-band only. That's fine if you mainly use one band, e.g., 20 meters, for long-distance communication.

I've explored the many ways of building multi-band vertical dipoles, but none of them meet my criteria of being truly seagoing. At dockside, of course, you could build such an antenna and it might outperform the backstay on several bands.

Bill


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

I don't smoke cigars Bill but I do have decades of experience in working with virtually all types of antennas, both ashore and on boats from 26 ft to 409 ft so I'd appreciate a little less of a condescending response. 

I have no problem with folks who have strong opinions but when they voice them in such declarative ways so as to dismiss the experience and expertise of others, it doesn't foster constructive debate. 

My expereince is that here is no such thing as one single best antenna for a boat and if there is, it has yet to be invented. There are far too many parasitically influenced metallic objects in the field of a dipole on a boat to not cause significant pattern degredation far worse than other type antennas.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Don,

Sorry, I certainly didn't mean to be condescending or to denegrate your experience. Truth is, we all have different life experiences which affect our outlook and belief system.

You, sir, made the declarative statement: "A vertical dipole has been around for ever and is nothing special in terms of it's radiation effectiveness or it's practical use aboard a boat."

My point is, respectfully, that this statement is erroneous, both in theory and in practice. Indeed, there is something special about vertical dipoles on boats. If you don't believe this, I suggest -- respectfully -- that you build a simple one for 20m, rig it on the foredeck with the lower insulator near the deck or lifelines, and give it a real try over a few weeks. I'll wager if you do that you'll be impressed with the signal reports you get and, if you switch rapidly between the backstay antenna and the vertical dipole, you'll get reports at the other end which will be as much as 2-3 S-units in favor of the dipole.

Again, my apologies if I sounded condescending. It wasn't my intention...just trying to inject a bit of humor.

Bill


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

Lets see!? The vessels that I have worked on have had Long wire and whip antennas. But they still needed the antenna coupler/tuner for the SSB to work properly. I found that the long wire can be directional, especially if you are in the Bering Sea and trying to get the High Seas Operator at Pt Reyes Calif. The whip antenna wasn't quite so directional. But still the position it had on the pilot house top played into the directionality often. But wasn't as bad as the long wire. 
Haven't worked with the back stay antenna yet. But am sure that it will have its own foibles with directionality also.

So far I prefer the whip antenna. But where to plant it on a sailboat is another question. _(off a mast spreader?)_

No antenna that I have worked with is truely omni-directional. Placement always plays into this.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Boasun,

Absolutely right!

Of course, antennas on a ship are different from those on a sailboat, because you have a lot more room to play with AND you have a wonderful RF ground in the form of a steel hull and decks!

It is true, of course, that all the standing rigging on a sailboat will affect both the azimuthal and the elevation radiation pattern, so that a perfect omnidirectional pattern at HF frequencies is highly unlikely (though the VHF antenna atop the mast is pretty much omnidirectional).

Whip antennas on sailboats work well, and some experienced hams prefer them. You have to have a good RF ground system to work them against, of course, and if you're going to go to sea you need to be mindful of the whipping action of a long antenna. Mostly, these are attached on the transom, with some support at the level of the pushpit. Still, they can be a real bear in a seaway 

I actually carry three types of HF antennas aboard...have done so for years.

*The first type* is the "alternative backstay", similar to the traditional insulated backstay, but rigged separately with a good autocoupler at it's base. This antenna is very versatile and can tune any marine, ham, or other HF frequency. As I've said before, it's a good antenna, but not a great antenna!

*The second type* is the monoband vertical dipole: I carry several for different bands, and can rig up to two simultaneously on the foredeck. These dipoles give me a great advantage over the backstay antenna on long DX paths but, of course, they're only for the high bands (8 mHz and above) since I only have a 64' mast!

*The third type* is a mobile whip...the popular Hustler center-loaded mobile antenna, with changeable resonators for different bands. This is rigged on the pushpit and is really there as a backup, e.g., in the event of a dismasting. A full-size vertical would do better, of course, but the Hustler does a credible job when called upon. I had a friend on a Valiant 40 who used the Hustler as his only HF antenna, and we remained in contact during his voyages in the Caribbean, Bermuda, and the entire East Coast of the U.S.

Bill


----------



## Paolaa (Oct 1, 2006)

*SSB receiver*



Freesail99 said:


> I could not justify the cost of a SSB. I did buy a SSB receiver so I can listen into the cruiser nets. Satellite phones have come a long way in the past year and prices have dropped radically.


Could you tell me which SSB receiver do you have?
And which antenna?

Thanks

Paola


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

I have the Kaito KA1103. I have used the antenna that came with it and it works ok not great, and I also made one from wire and a dipole which also worked.


----------

