So, I've read some stuff that marine VHF (150-160MHz) is only good for line-o-site. Burch says max typical line of sight is10mi. (he wasn't clear on statute or nautical). My question; Aren't those 1W max (vs 5W) handheld "waterproof" tranceivers sufficient and save $100? I'm not trying to incite a human life vs $100 debate . . . just looking for the the facts. Fred *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
Fred Brown wrote: > > So, I've read some stuff that marine VHF (150-160MHz) is only good for > line-o-site. Burch says max typical line of sight is 10mi. (he wasn't > clear on statute or nautical). My question; Aren't those 1W max (vs 5W) > handheld "waterproof" tranceivers sufficient and save $100? I think the figure you quote from Burch must be to a power boat or something much taller than another yakker on the water. I have not checked my copy of Burch, but I believe yak to yak is closer to 2-3 nautical miles MAX, with a LOT of variation, depending on the swell condition. I suspect what you are really interested in, however, is whether a 1W VHF unit will reach another similar unit at 10 miles. In my experience, if both VHF's are the typical handheld units (with rubber ducky antenna), and both TX - and RX - holders are standing at water level on the beach, somewhere around 8 - 10 miles is the limit for 3W (or 5W) units. Sometimes, I have been *unable* to make contact at a lesser distance, when there were seemingly minor obstructions between TX and RX. Confounding things further, I once made contact beach-to-beach at 4.5 - 5 miles, *over an intervening 150-foot-tall island,* certainly not line-of-sight. I have never gotten through to another handheld at 12 miles or greater, *under the conditions typical of marine VHF use.* We had a debate about VHF's on this list a couple months ago, with folks experienced in amateur radio (HAMS) attesting to much greater ranges, *but not with "off-the-shelf" equipment.* Thus, I doubt the 1W units are worth much, on the water, to summon aid. And, a 3W (or, 5W) VHF might not be successful, either, depending on how far away the RX antenna is, how far above the water it is, etc. At the end of the debate, I said I would do some systematic field testing under "battle" conditions and report back on what the practical limit was for off-the-shelf equipment, but that will have to wait for summer. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
For my 2 cents, I use VHF/UHF in a waterproof bag.. 9.99$ Range in a yak to a yak 1/2mile reliable MAX Range to Coast guard 1-15 miles depending on where their tower is!!! These Freqs 450 and 156 MHz are line-o-sight fom an object 24 - 36 inches above water, what with wave action and terrain (islands etc) you might raise a boat with an elevated antennae at 5 miles but don't bet your life on it! Robin de K3FP *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
1 w will give you even less range than "line o sight" For boat to boat in a group they be fine, anything else go for max wattage BTW. Most radios are switchable 1/5 or 6 watts to conserve batteries, and not blast everyone out around ya... Scott Just north of Cuba *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
Fred Brown wrote --- So, I've read some stuff that marine VHF (150-160MHz) is only good for line-o-site. Burch says max typical line of sight is10mi. (he wasn't clear on statute or nautical). My question; Aren't those 1W max (vs 5W) handheld "waterproof" tranceivers sufficient and save $100? I'm not trying to incite a human life vs $100 debate . . . just looking for the the facts. From my experience and understanding of these units --- and following up on the responses to your post from Scott and Dave --- there are a couple of issues you raise. But, if I read your question right, you really want to know if it's worth a $100 difference to get a little more power --- assuming power equals distance, which is not always an appropriate assumption in the world of VHF --- or to get five watts vs one watt. First --- and this does not address your question --- the "selectable" five watt/one watt radios allow you to "select" <down> from five to one in a busy harbor or other area if you're trying to communicate only with other vessels or stations close aboard. Some channels are automatically reducued to one watt for that reason, and the radio operator cannot "select" to go up to five watts --- just won't work, and shouldn't. More to your point, from a quick literature search --- catalogs, mostly --- the least expensive, non-waterproof radios I can find run around $140, although there are undoubtedly cheaper specials to be had. You get one watt TX power, a pretty weak battery, and you'll have to bag it to use it in a kayak (~$20) --- and replace the bag periodically. For about $100 more, you can buy a JIS-7 spec "submersible" --- a more demanding spec than "waterproof" (and you can probably dig out the extensive thread we had on this a while back, if you want) --- VHF with five watts power, a better battery and, depending on the brand, an automatic weather alert system. You'll get better range with the five watts, longer use with a nicad battery, and true "submersibility". (ICOM's M-15 (~$330) and Apelco's 520 (~$265) are in that category, although the M-15 does not claim the weather alert in my catalogs.) So you're not just buying "watts" with the extra $100+ --- you're getting a lot better radio that will not need further protection from the elements and --- at least with the Apelco --- the weather alert feature, which, in coastal areas subject to sudden weather changes, t-bumpers or tornadoes, would be a gotta-have in my book. So it's more than just an issue of $25 per watt, Fred. The $100 difference --- especially if you keep the radio for five years and replace the bag on a realistic annual basis --- is pretty small, and maybe approaches $0 in reality. You're probably better off with the more powerful and truly "submersible" VHF with weather alert in the long run. Joq *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
Jack_Martin_at_jtif.webfld.navy.mil wrote: > Fred Brown wrote --- > > > So, I've read some stuff that marine VHF (150-160MHz) is only good for > line-o-site. Burch says max typical line of sight is10mi. (he wasn't > clear on statute or nautical). My question; Aren't those 1W max (vs 5W) > handheld "waterproof" tranceivers sufficient and save $100? > > I'm not trying to incite a human life vs $100 debate . . . just looking > for the the facts. > > From my experience and understanding of these units --- and following > up on the responses to your post from Scott and Dave --- there are a > couple of issues you raise. But, if I read your question right, you > really want to know if it's worth a $100 difference to get a little > more power --- assuming power equals distance, which is not always an > appropriate assumption in the world of VHF --- or to get five watts vs > one watt. > > First --- and this does not address your question --- the "selectable" > five watt/one watt radios allow you to "select" <down> from five to > one in a busy harbor or other area if you're trying to communicate > only with other vessels or stations close aboard. Some channels are > automatically reducued to one watt for that reason, and the radio > operator cannot "select" to go up to five watts --- just won't work, > and shouldn't. > > More to your point, from a quick literature search --- catalogs, > mostly --- the least expensive, non-waterproof radios I can find run > around $140, although there are undoubtedly cheaper specials to be > had. You get one watt TX power, a pretty weak battery, and you'll > have to bag it to use it in a kayak (~$20) --- and replace the bag > periodically. For about $100 more, you can buy a JIS-7 spec > "submersible" --- a more demanding spec than "waterproof" (and you can > probably dig out the extensive thread we had on this a while back, if > you want) --- VHF with five watts power, a better battery and, > depending on the brand, an automatic weather alert system. You'll get > better range with the five watts, longer use with a nicad battery, and > true "submersibility". (ICOM's M-15 (~$330) and Apelco's 520 (~$265) > are in that category, although the M-15 does not claim the weather > alert in my catalogs.) So you're not just buying "watts" with the > extra $100+ --- you're getting a lot better radio that will not need > further protection from the elements and --- at least with the Apelco > --- the weather alert feature, which, in coastal areas subject to > sudden weather changes, t-bumpers or tornadoes, would be a gotta-have > in my book. > > So it's more than just an issue of $25 per watt, Fred. The $100 > difference --- especially if you keep the radio for five years and > replace the bag on a realistic annual basis --- is pretty small, and > maybe approaches $0 in reality. You're probably better off with the > more powerful and truly "submersible" VHF with weather alert in the > long run. > > Joq > ***** Actually I was comparing prices for "submersible" radios and quoted prices as such. I'm sorry I didn't state that. I'm also sorry that I missed a previous "extensive" thread. I'm a relatively new subscriber and was not aware of paddlewise faq. Maybe I should have done a Dejanews search first. I have one of those big 1/5 W that I purchased for $100. It requires bagging and doesn't have weather alert. I want something smaller, submersible for emergency contact, monitoring traffic, and getting weather reports. I'm currently not interested in chatting. In all likelyhood, I'll be getting a nice ICOM or Alpeco. I just was thinking . . .really . . .that the handheld vendors are catering to a market other than a "handfull" of kayakers. The extended altitude/range of the larger vessels may make good use of the extra 7dB of power but sitting below water surface (or swimming) may obviate the need for more power. Fred *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:32:48 PDT