ICOM IC-78 HF SSB RADIO

[shepaug]

Just curious. Where do you get this radio ?

It is a duplicate of the 718 BUT my thoughts are it might be better for non-amateur radio. They will guarantee specifications for certain frequency areas and if not in that area your complaints go ignored. So probably tuned/aligned better for marine frequency areas. (a pure guess)

In the USA it is not so-called FCC Certified so nobody in the USA wants to sell it. Many don't understand USA regs are just that --- only USA...

I have one 78 but was thinking of another. All I get is...we can't do that !!!

The 718 there is a simple modification allowing the radio to transmit anywhere (HF) and the 78 is made to do that already.


geeezzzz It makes no sense. Anybody with a brain has no need to 'transmit anywhere'. (worded wrong but--) All this over CB'ers ? Both radios can do CB (27 MHZ) but with the 718 it needs a simple modification and the 78 no modification.

[S/V Illusion]

Only for sale in U.S. as an export. Can be purchased from any Icom dealer in Europe, Japan, etc...

[tkeithlu]

We're back into the amateur/marine SSB conflict. The IC-718 is a ham radio, restricted to ham bands. It is easy to open, making it a IC-78, capable of transmitting across all the HF range, including the marine SSB channels. You can then set the marine SSB channels in memory, and you have a marine SSB radio for less. BUT.....

The output does not match the specifications of single side band channels. They are sloppy, noisy, etc., and will incur the wrath of purests on this forum.

Transmitting on any other frequencies is illegal unless you have a ham license, effectively at the General License level or above.

The radio itself is illegal for use in the USA.

No, I'm not totally opposed to opening a radio. On the other hand, I did not allow radios that I supervise for our local emergency management to be illegal. Outside this conflict, the most usual illegal operation is on 2 Meter ham radios, which cover the same frequencies as marine VHF and a lot more.

In both cases it is possible to totally interrupt legal radio traffic.

[tkeithlu]

Further thought. One problem is that ICOM chased everyone else out of the marine SSB radio market and then made the IC-802 too damned expensive. Of course people look for illegal but "who's going to catch you?" lower cost solutions.

[S/V Illusion]

That it is not FCC accepted for use on marine frequencies does not necessarily convert to the assumption radios such as the 718 or any other Icom ham radio doesn’t exceed requirements for spectral purity or attenuation of spurious emissions. Only that it wasn’t tested!

There is no basis for statements such as “sloppy or noisy” whatever that actually means. There is no data on which to base such assumptions.

Marketing certainly does push those assumptions so as to motivate sales of higher priced radios.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by shepaug

Just curious. Where do you get this radio ?

It is a duplicate of the 718 BUT my thoughts are it might be better for non-amateur radio. They will guarantee specifications for certain frequency areas and if not in that area your complaints go ignored. So probably tuned/aligned better for marine frequency areas. (a pure guess)

In the USA it is not so-called FCC Certified so nobody in the USA wants to sell it. Many don't understand USA regs are just that --- only USA...

I have one 78 but was thinking of another. All I get is...we can't do that !!!

The 718 there is a simple modification allowing the radio to transmit anywhere (HF) and the 78 is made to do that already.


geeezzzz It makes no sense. Anybody with a brain has no need to 'transmit anywhere'. (worded wrong but--) All this over CB'ers ? Both radios can do CB (27 MHZ) but with the 718 it needs a simple modification and the 78 no modification.

First, since you apparently are in the US, the FCC rule apply to you. If you used this radio in another country, you must adhere to the communication rules of that country (e.g. reciprocal license). If you use the radio in international waters, the rules of the country in which you are licensed apply.

If you think this only impacts the 'CB' frequencies than I suspect you are not all that familiar with HF spectrum allocations.

Modifying the IC-718 for proper operation on MARS ops or marine channels requires a bit more than simply removing a diode.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by tkeithlu

Further thought. One problem is that ICOM chased everyone else out of the marine SSB radio market and then made the IC-802 too damned expensive. Of course people look for illegal but "who's going to catch you?" lower cost solutions.

You could always buy a JRC or Furuno marine SSB radio. The base model JRC is about $5K, and the Furuno runs slightly more at $7.5K.

[Hartleyg]

If you look up the specs for the IC-78 online, it gets pretty clear that this radio isn't even compliant with the FCC regs for amateur radios, let alone Marine (Part 80) or Business/Public Safety (Part 90). It's probably marketed to things like the Australian Bush service when specs don't seem to matter.
And for those complaining about the availability of inexpensive Marine HF radios, the specs and details of being compliant with the current ITU & FCC requirements is what drives that, not manufacturers (along with rapidly declining demand, of course).


Hartley
S/V Atsa

[denverd0n]

I think it is also important to remember that just because the radio CAN transmit on marine frequencies, that does not make it legal to do so. If you are a U.S. citizen, licensed by the FCC, and you use a radio that is not FCC certified to transmit on marine frequencies, in any situation other than an emergency, then you are violating the law.


Odds of getting caught, of course, are nearly zero. And I don't judge anyone who uses one of these radios on the marine frequencies. Nonetheless, it's worthwhile to realize just what you are doing, and to understand that you are violating the law (except, as I said, in case of an emergency).

[donradcliffe]

The 78/718 radios have more frequency drift than the 802, especially as they are warming up.A good operator can overcome this.

Just remember that the ITU and FCC requirements are set with a LOT of inputs from the manufacturers. The biggest interference issues I find on SSB are the Russians and Chinese operators on non ITU frequencies.

[shepaug]

If you have an amateur license you can homebrew any radio you want and use it legally. Of coarse you are responsible for the signal it puts out and that it is within 'amateur radio frequencies'.

CB a different story. Every radio must meet FCC approval. At least to be sold by a retailer.

Go to Ebay and search amplifiers. Endless amplifiers to anybody and I believe their emissions are terrible. 10 meter export radios are made for the 10 meter amateur band (28-29 mhz) but only interest is to market to CB'ers where a simple modification gives them CB.(27 mhz)

I posted the '78' question as it seems they seem rare. AGAIN....most the earth is not within USA.... I'd guess if you bought a 78 you would not buy an 802......

Marine HF Radios do need FCC approval. (for USA sale)


Anybody can notice the price of a marine HF radio now. I guess ICOM still markets the 802 which I have seen around $1800 new.

ps...I am not pretending to be an expert !!!

[El Pinguino]

According to https://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/hamhf/1664.html

'For government
or export only!'

What is that all about? One rule for them, one for the rest of you?

[tkeithlu]

I supervise an ICOM 718 that was legally opened for MARS use, but I cannot find any on-going MARS operations. I suspect that sat phones put them out of business.

When as a beginner ham I proposed on this forum opening my IC 725 (and in that case, it is just one diode) I got pretty effectively slammed on the basis of the SSB signal (complete with oscilliscope screen shots) being sloppy (transmitting outside the frequency box) and noisy (containing excessive noise along with the carrier frequency). I think the slammers made a pretty good case. That may, indeed, be why SSB radios are more expensive than ham radios. Good discussion.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by tkeithlu

I supervise an ICOM 718 that was legally opened for MARS use, but I cannot find any on-going MARS operations. I suspect that sat phones put them out of business.

When as a beginner ham I proposed on this forum opening my IC 725 (and in that case, it is just one diode) I got pretty effectively slammed on the basis of the SSB signal (complete with oscilliscope screen shots) being sloppy (transmitting outside the frequency box) and noisy (containing excessive noise along with the carrier frequency). I think the slammers made a pretty good case. That may, indeed, be why SSB radios are more expensive than ham radios. Good discussion.

Such anecdotal stories can easily mislead the unsuspecting.

It’s meaningless to criticize the spectrum emission pattern without knowing the test conditions. Operating at a low voltage can easily lead to distortion as can overdriving the radio as well as other conditions.

Phrases like “our side the frequency box” are dubious - what is a “frequency box”? Also, “noisy” can be something as simple as ambient noise - absent objective judgment, I’d be very skeptical of such claims.

Where are the data and wave form analysis to which you refer?

One can argue legality here but the comments regarding emission purity seem questionable and unfounded.

[Hartleyg]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Such anecdotal stories can easily mislead the unsuspecting.

It’s meaningless to criticize the spectrum emission pattern without knowing the test conditions. Operating at a low voltage can easily lead to distortion as can overdriving the radio as well as other conditions.

Phrases like “our side the frequency box” are dubious - what is a “frequency box”? Also, “noisy” can be something as simple as ambient noise - absent objective judgment, I’d be very skeptical of such claims.

Where are the data and wave form analysis to which you refer?

One can argue legality here but the comments regarding emission purity seem questionable and unfounded.

The actual term is "emission mask", and the limits are expressed as suppression of signals that are outside the emissions mask. For Part 80 & 90 (and government under the NTIA) the limits are emissions outside the nominal emissions bandwidth (which can be either 2.8 kHz or 3 kHz), depending on the service involved within 1.5 kHz (26 dB) or 1.75 kHz of that edge (28 dB), and from the that edge to 3 kHz away (35 or 38 dB). Beyond the outer edge either 40+10log(Px) or 43+10log(px) is the limit. This ultimate requirement corresponds to an absolute limit of either 100 or 50 microwatts.


So when a radio expresses it's "spurious suppression" as 46 dB (like the IC-78), it clearly can't meet the 40/43 +10log(Px) requirement. As far as the close-in requirements, this is measured under specific "two tone" conditions using a spectrum analyzer.
Amateur radios don't have to meet anything but the "ultimate" requirement, and that limit is only 50 dB of suppression, so generally a radio manufactured to amateur specs won't meet those of Part 80 (Marine) or Part 90. The reason for this, of course, is that most amateur HF bands are harmonically related, so harmonic energy falls into another amateur band (and is therefore of little concern to regulators



In addition, there is an important caveat with solid-state transmitters, which is pretty much all of them nowadays. These transmitters generally use low-impedance broadband amplifiers followed by low-pass filters, and this becomes a serious problem with an amateur radio, as these filters are designed to support amateur-band operations, and may not offer sufficient performance if used outside of those bands. The spurious radiation well away from the channel in use is usually harmonic radiation, and if the transmitter filtering isn't up to it, significant interference can result.



Low-voltage operation can indeed lead to distortion and create out-of-limit sidebands close to the operating frequency, so the voltage range of an approved transmitter is important!


All these things are contained in both the FCC and ITU regulations, and I suspect most countries follow the ITU recommendations pretty closely. For US Maritime stations, 47CFR80.211 (a) is pertinent.


Hartley
S/V Atsa