[CQ-Contest] FD Experience with Mk V -- FT1000MP

[W1HIJCW at aol.com]

Howdy all,

Just after Dayton, I had the opportunity to spend some time with the then new 
MkV from Yaesu. I posted a short "impressions" review on eHam.com and 
promised that since I (along with two other people) would have the chance to 
use the MkV at FD, I'd pass along my reactions after using it in a "contest" 
environment. Here are the results.

K7JA, N6HC, and myself were responsible for operating a two transceiver 
station which covered 15CW, 40CW, and 10CW. The two transceivers initially 
were an FT1000D and the MkV. Without going into details, we had a total of 5 
antennas for the 3 bands (2 for 40, 2 for 15, and 1 for 10). Results on the 
three bands were about 1450 Q's total (40=710, 15=660, and 10=80) in 22 hours 
of real operating time.

My impressions in summary were that the MkV is an 85 to 90 (where the FT1000D 
= 100). For comparison, the "old" MP I would rate at a 70 to 75. We did 
replace the "D" with a regular MP for a few hours so there was an opportunity 
for a side by side comparison of those as well.

Specific comparisons:

While nothing can quite match the "D" running with a 250 Hz bandwidth and 
using the continuously variable APF for tuning, the MkV did an admirable job 
of coming very close. (BTW, the MkV had no optional filters). Performance of 
the MkV after selecting "narrow 2" bandwidth was superb. If one really needed 
a truly narrow bandpass, selection of the 120 or 60 Hz APF (which is linked 
to the CW pitch setting) by one or two button pushes made for truly "single 
signal" reception.

Perceived signal to noise ratio with the MkV was almost as good as with the D 
and definitely better than the original MP. While I don't pretend to 
understand all the details of the matching of DSP and discrete filter 
bandwidths, this advance seems to make a very significant difference.

One of things I have always appreciated about the "D" is that it is a good 
"late night" radio, meaning that after 24 hours without sleep it seems to be 
good at protecting the operator from stupid mistakes (or at least some of the 
consequences). I never felt that way about the MP, and having done a couple 
of ARRL DX tests as a single op with the MP, I was somewhat nervous about 
screwing up. The MkV, mostly because of control changes in layout and 
function, has replicated the "D's" advantage in this realm.

Because of some AC power distribution issues, we traded the "D" for an MP 
that had been running at another station. One of the unintended consequences 
was the ability to compare performance directly among the three. For what 
it's worth, the MkV was the only one of the three which NEVER suffered any 
glitches as a result of RFI or power spikes. While the MP would occasionally 
decide to reset itself in the middle of a QSO because of RFI, the MkV rode 
along for 24 hours without so much as a hiccup.

So the bottom line:

The MkV is a definite improvement over the MP (even when the MP is filled up 
with optional filters). It's not quite the equal of the D for ease and 
consistency of operation, but it does add some very effective DSP 
capabilities. For my money, I'd most likely spring for the MkV.

If anyone would like to ask specific questions, you can reach me by phone at 
800-854-6046 between 0930 and 1730 at the HRO store in Anaheim.

73,

Bill, W1HIJ(/6) -- member: Southern California DX Club and
                                       Southern California Contest Club
Newport Beach, CA 
DM13bo


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com