The XYL and I are planning for a long road trip - winding our way north to Michigan to attend a family wedding, then wandering back down towards Atlanta and visiting family along the way (many of them helpfully live just off of I-75). Normally when we camp, ham radio is a big part of the trip. Hours and hours of tinkering and making contacts while my wife reads or naps. This trip is different. It's like a military campaign. Get to Michigan as quickly and efficiently as possible, hang out with long-lost relatives and friends, head back with stops along the way to visit other long-lost relatives. We have a 22' pull-behind camper, but our overnight stays at any one place will be brief and, again, the focus will be on visiting with relatives, not stringing wire.
And yet, ham radio must play a part, even if it's a small one. On this trip the focus will be on back-up communications. I intend to take an HF setup that is small, efficient, easy to deploy, and I know works well on Winlink. The whole package - radio, antenna, power source, cabling, etc. needs to be as small and light as possible.
The antenna decision has already been made - Chameleon Antenna's excellent Tactical Delta Loop. It's fast and easy to set up, and versatile. If there's no space for the full delta loop deployment it can be configured as a simple vertical. The back-up antenna is a Par End-Fedz trail friendly EFHW.
But the radio selection process is more involved. I have something of an embarrassment of riches when it comes to rigs. I'd normally just toss my IC-7300 into a Pelican case and be done with it, but on this trip that radio (and case) would be too big. Something smaller is in order. Here's my options:
Icom IC-705
Elecraft KX3
Elecraft KX2
Yaesu FT-818
The IC-705 would seem, to most, to be the logical choice. It may well be, but the radio with all of it's necessary out-boarded components (like the AH-705 tuner) fits into a very chunky box. I'll admit though, in that chunky box there's a LOT of capability, and the 705 is a proven performer. In past write-ups I've called it a 'digital mode beast', and it is. Once you get it set up using a wi-fi connection between the rig and your computer, the thing will loaf along all day on digital modes and get only slightly warm. Icom did a remarkable job with heat management on this rig.
Next, the KX3. This is the excellent Elecraft K3 desktop rig squeezed down into a surprisingly small package. What got left out was TX power. The KX3 puts out only 15 watts compared to the K3's 100 watts, but it retains all of the K3's world-class receiver performance. The KX3 overall is about the same size as the IC-705 but includes a built-in tuner and battery pack (although on internal batteries it only puts out between 3 - 5 watts). The radio requires an external soundcard for digital modes (I use an inexpensive Sbarent USB soundcard), but it's easy to configure and at moderate digital activity levels without getting too hot. I've installed an after-market heat sink, which helps. The KX3 with accessories fits into a Pelican case that is about 20% slimmer than the case the IC-705 fits into.
The KX2 is Elecraft's SOTA/POTA focused rig. They took the KX3, dropped 6 and 160 meter coverage, included a built-in tuner, lithium battery, internal charger, a built-in microphone and made it smaller and lighter than the KX3 by about 15%. Max output is only 10 watts, but you can actually achieve that for short periods on the internal battery. Yes the controls are cramped, but that's a reflection of the size of the radio. What Elecraft did retain from the KX3 is the large high contrast display. The display on both rigs is excellent - logically laid out, easy to read, and if you turn off the backlight, the radio sips just milliwatts on receive. No waterfalls, though. Like the KX3, this radio requires an external soundcard. The digital configuration is the same as for the KX3, but because of the smaller size of the KX2 it doesn't handle digital modes quite as well - it can get hot. But, for emergency Winlink use it's just fine. The KX2 doesn't get transported in a hard case. It travels around in a small soft bag.
OK, the Yaesu FT-818 is not a serious contender for this trip, but it IS available if I'm thinking of something for a back-up rig. My 818 has the Windcamp lithium battery mod, and that turns the radio into a viable emergency use rig. Plus, the little thing is so easy to use - it's probably the last honest radio Yaesu released, honest from the perspective that all the controls are logically laid out, the small display shows you everything you need to know, and not a pixel more, it's easy to configure, doesn't throw any surprises your way, and runs remarkably well on digital modes with an external soundcard. In fact, compared to Yaesu's later offerings like the FT-891 or the FT-991A, the FT-818 is a simple joy to use.
So which is it? At this time I haven't made up my mind, so if you have any advice or suggestions let me know in the comments below!
'Getting to know you, getting to know all about you'
Fans of Rogers and Hammerstein's 'The King and I' will remember the song. I first heard it when the impossibly beautiful Deborah Kerr sang it to the King of Siam's kids in the movie version of the musical. OK, Ms. Kerr couldn't sing, or couldn't sing good enough, so the undisputed queen of 1950's & 60's female musical over-dubs, Marni Nixon, turned Ms. Kerr into a musical star. I've been smitten with Deborah Kerr (and Marni Nixon) ever since.
Nothing to do with ham radio, but with a look like that, who cares?
'Getting To Know You' is a tune I often sing to any new radios or accessories that come across my bench, particularly if the device falls outside of what I describe as normal ham radio operational protocols. That would be just about anything not made by Icom, Kenwood or Yaesu. And so it was with a radio I'd had an interest in for years, but didn't know where to start when looking for one - a Motorola Micom commercial HF transceiver. These were (and still are) in common use in the MARS, CAP and SHARES communities, and unlike their L3/Harris, Barrett or Codan brethren, they were relatively affordable on the used market. Motorola stopped manufacturing the Micom line about 8 years ago, but there's still an active user community, swapping advice, radios and components. Good working examples pop up regularly on eBay. So, in terms of availability and price, they are pretty accessible and have a very good reputation for ruggedness and long service life.
I found mine, a 2E model. on a Groups.io site devoted to commercial and military HF rigs. According to the seller it was in excellent condition and had been used in a test environment at a small radio accessory development company he used to own. The radio came with an external long wire tuner (similar to an Icom AH-4), microphone, power cable, programming software and some documentation. On arrival it was clear that the rig really was in very good condition. The microphone was the only real iffy item - it had been in a lot of hands, and it was a bit 'sticky'. The seller dug a new one out of his box of parts and sent it to me for free.
The biggest issue was a programming cable. Motorola did a lousy job of documenting just how to connect this thing to a computer to get it set up. All the instructions say is, 'connect programming cable'. What programming cable? What does it look like? Where do I connect it? There's a 25 pin accessory connector on the back of the rig and, like the rest of the radio world would, I figured that served as the radio programming port. But no. I found out through the user community that programming takes place through the CAT6 microphone connector. What this means is, there's no CAT-like radio control that lets you do voice ops while managing frequency or settings. There are no original Motorola programming cables to be had, at least none I've been able to locate. There is a guy on eBay selling what he claims is a home made programming cable, but what he sells doesn't work. I was saved by an instruction sheet issued by the Civil Air Patrol back in the early 2000's that showed how make a programming cable using CAT6 cable to a DB9 serial connector.
The Motorola software is old, but pretty good. It allows you to set up the channel frequency memories and settings, and configure the radio for ALE. It was written to run on Windows 2000 or Windows 7, and has a distinctive 32 bit Windows XP look and feel, but runs just fine on Windows 11 in compatibility mode. Earlier this year I got the radio programmed with a swath of Georgia ARES, SHARES and other public service frequencies, played around with it a bit, then got distracted by other rigs. The Micom sat unused for months.
A few weeks ago I came upon a Micom video on the LifeIsTooShortForQRP YouTube channel. The host reviewed a Micom 2E - the same model as mine, except his is the remote head version. Other than that, it's the same radio. He reviews and repairs a LOT of commercial and military HF gear, and had nothing but praise for the Micom. The video renewed my interest in the Micom, and I decided to get it back on the air and spend more time learning its capabilities.
I now see why the Micoms were (and still are) so popular. They are a mil-spec chunk of metal that just works. I have mine connected to an LDG Z-100 tuner so I can use to my MyAntennas end-fed in the back yard. The speaker audio is excellent - designed to 'punch through' in noisy environments, and I get consistently great audio reports whether I'm using the hand mic, or the Motorola handset I found on eBay.
I've only used it on sideband for local, state and regional nets. It MAY do digital, but I'll need to work on figuring that out. As far as I can tell Motorola never produced a digital modem. Discussion on the topic is very... unclear. One recommendation is a digital mode interface made by XGGComms out of New Jersey, built with a 25 pin connector specific to the Micom. Reportedly it will also allow the 25 pin port to serve as the programming and radio control connection. One's on order, but it'll be weeks before I'm able to give it a comprehensive test.
The Micom has ALE built into the firmware ALE 2G, and apparently does it well, so that'll be the next thing I get it set up for.
Overall, I'm finding the Micom an interesting example of a commercial HF rig, and it's helped me better understand what the commercial HF hardware world looks like. Customers aren't interested in spinning dials and waterfalls. They want a radio that's easy to operate, holds a few channels, has a long mean-time between failure, and when one of their personnel keys the mic, it works with no fuss or muss. They are business tools, not hobbyist toys.
I'm sure I'll be writing more about the Micom, as I get deeper into digital modes and ALE. So stay tuned.
It's been just a few weeks since the Yaesu FTX-1 Optima and Field models have started to ship. We've had the usual silly and pointless unboxing videos, and only a few in-the-field-making-contacts videos have come out. But there have been enough of those videos to show:
the firmware is still buggy
the field version with just the battery is pretty big and heavy; it ain't no Elecraft KX2
the radio addresses some of the issues that linger with the very good FT-710, such as waterfall display averaging
audio quality and volume are both good
the radio naturally 'sits' at a good viewing angle (something Icom blew with the IC-705)
something I never thought of, but Yaesu botched the placement of the two BNC connectors - the UHF/VHF connector should be at the top of the stack, making it easy to mount a whip antenna for local repeater work and still connect an HF antenna cable
like all field radios that have come before it in the Yaesu line, it's about as water resistant as a submarine with screen doors
There have been no reports on Bluetooth or GPS performance yet. And no discussion or evaluation of the performance of the 'snap-on' accessories like the external tuner or cooling fan.
For me there are few huge wait-and-see items, and this post is a request for someone to specifically address them.
First, does the radio have back-lit buttons? Internet chatter indicates that, yes, the radio does have some back-lit buttons, but I'd love someone to do a short video in low-light conditions to show just what buttons are back-lit, and show the menu item that controls the lighting level (assuming there is one).
Next, how well does this rig perform when running digital modes? In the recent past, Yaesu's digital mode configuration settings on their HF field radios were an unholy mess (FT-891, 991A and a few others of the same generation). My sense with the FT-710 is that Yaesu spent a lot of time cleaning up their menu structures, but I never got to work the radio on digital. Since this rig seems to borrow a lot from the 710 interface, I'd like to see someone do a video on configuring the rig for something like FT8, and then running an extended session outdoors to see just how cool the rig does, or doesn't, run.
Last, and most important, how well does the FTX-1 do when running digital modes over a USB-C cable? This is the Icom IC-705's biggest design flaw - Icom badly botched the RF shielding in the rig, and it's unusable on digital modes over USB. I want to know how well the FTX-1 works on digital when controlled by a USB cable. Did Yaesu get it right - did they incorporate proper RF shielding? If yes, this radio has the potential to grab the majority QRP radio market share from Icom.
So Yaesu YouTuber Fanboys, here's your mission - I want a comprehensive, focused video of the new FTX-1 covering all the things I list above. Get it posted by the end of the week. Move out.
The new Yaesu FTX-1 started shipping this week and the ham radio world is all a-flutter. The Yaesu fanboys are squealing with delight, the Yaesu haters are harumphing, and folks in the middle, like me, are taking a 'let's wait and see' attitude.
One of the FTX-1 issues I did gripe about on Facebook is the lack of built-in GPS and Bluetooth, and no wi-fi capability. In this day and age, and particularly at this radio's price point, leaving out these features seems kinda' dumb.
However, someone responded to my post with a strong argument against GPS, Bluetooth and wi-fi integration, and his argument made sense. Now I'm not so sure stuffing all this technology into an HF ham radio is such a good idea.
Bluetooth and wi-fi are perishable standards. This means that the standards are always advancing, and backwards compatibility can be iffy. Over the course of a few years any radio with these features will become increasingly out of step with the latest standards. As the radio ages, it becomes harder and harder to sync it with Bluetooth devices like wireless headsets, or get the radio on a working and secure wi-fi network. I'll admit, it's more likely that the radio will fail for other reasons before the Bluetooth and wi-fi features become obsolete, but it does make me think about a radio with obsolescence engineered into the box.
GPS is a bit different. The GPS data standard is stable and has a lot backwards compatibility. There is an installed base of millions of GPS devices in critical applications (like aviation) that can't be messed with. This means GPS, by its nature, is pretty 'future proof'. But GPS integration by ham radio manufacturers has always been half-assed. I've written about this in the past. What this means is that owners who want GPS info for uses beyond DSTAR or C4FM integration will get only a fraction of the potential out of the GPS receivers built into the radios.
So let's look at what a modern HF radio must have to be relevant in today's world. The list is actually pretty short. It needs to be able to transmit on all bands from 10 meters through 80, and should be able to tune continuously from 1.5 mHz to 30 mHz. The radio has to do AM, SSB & CW, and do them all well. It must have good filtering and bandwidth adjustments. And of course, some sort of audio output (speaker), a physical control interface (knobs, buttons & switches) and a virtual control interface (CAT or CI-V) via serial or USB.
Yes, Lego does make a radio! (OK, it's not a real radio, but it's still cool. Check it out!)😄
A radio with these features, and just these features, is a very viable and a very future-proof rig. It carries no technology that will cripple it due to obsolescence. Plus, by adding external components (that 'Box of Legos' thing), you can add relevant functionality without endangering the radio's basic resistance to obsolescence. The transceiver is the core of a system to which you add functionality by dipping into the metaphorical Box of Legos.
The IC-718 has been in production for a quarter century and lacks most bells and whistles available on current rigs, But it's still a very viable HF rig that has survived precisely because it lacks technologies that could have aged-out, forcing the radio from the market. Using the Box of Legos concept, it can be easily built out to match the capabilities of more modern rigs
The Yaesu FT-891 is a very good basic HF rig. It lacks a lot of modern features such as a soundcard interface, antenna tuner and GPS. Its simplicity is a strength - there's little with this radio that will 'age-out'. Using the Box of Legos concept, it's easy to expand the rig's capabilities to match more sophisticated units that are packed with technologies that will age-out.
Want to be able to match a variety of antennas? Grab an external tuner. The beauty of an external tuner is that you can match it to the mission. Just want a basic 100 watt tuner for rag chewing or low power digital modes? There's plenty of them on the market. Need to run higher power level digital modes for SHARES or MARS nets? There's a few tuners available for that. Want a battery powered tuner you can run on a POTA activation? Those are available, too, in max wattage ranges from 20 to 100.
Want to run digital modes? Virtually every radio made in the past 30 years can support digital modes. If the feature isn't built into the radio, you can easily out-board the digital signals to an external soundcard device. There's lots of good options. Amazon will sell you a very nice external USB soundcard for under $20, or you can go for a more expensive but more capable dedicated unit like the SignaLink, or one of the manufacturer-specific soundcard interfaces. Any of these options will get you on digital modes with little fuss.
Think your rig is old? Here's a picture of N6CC's field setup, running Winlink using a 70's-vintage military AN/PRC-174 radio. and a SignaLink as the digital interface
Is your radio's volume output a bit weak? There are plenty of small, lightweight and cheap battery powered speakers on the market.
Two small battery powered speakers designed for use with devices like smartphones with 3.5mm audio output jacks. These work well with radios that need a bit of extra audio 'oomph'. The small red one in the foreground (about $12 on Amazon) actually provides better sound, but the battery only lasts an hour or two before it needs a recharge
Need access to GPS to time sync your FT8 session? Remember, the radio doesn't care a wit about a time sync for FT8, it's the WSJT-X application running on your computer that cares. For less than $20 you can buy a USB GPS receiver to plug into your computer and get highly precise location and timing information. There's free software available that will sync your computer's system clock to the GPS timing signal. This is a far more useful solution than a GPS signal that stays locked up inside of a radio.
Here's a nice looking GPS receiver that gets good reviews and uses the ubiquitous uBlox receiver chip. Cheap and effective
Just add one of several free GPS monitoring applications to your Windows device, and you'll be getting far more useful GPS info than you could ever hope to from a GPS receiver installed in a modern ham radio.
To sum things up, don't be afraid to buy into old or low(er) tech radio solutions, as long as you can bring the core transceiver up to snuff using add-ons that extend the radio's usefulness without endangering its resistance to obsolescence. Have that Box of Legos filled with useful add-ons that keep your radio running - and relevant - long after current Bluetooth and wi-fi standards are no longer supported.
The Starlink Mini is one neat device. How could it not be? Little bigger than a pack of printer paper, but lighter, with a built-in wireless router, IP67 rating and (drumroll please) - it'll run off of any DC voltage between 12 & 48. Plus the little thing delivers. I routinely get between 100 & 200 mbps when set up under open sky. Of course, much less when in a wooded area with only a limited view of the sky, but still usable (between 50 & 100 mbps). Plus Starlink has gotten aggressive with their plan pricing. Right now I pay a monthly $10 'reserve' fee that gets me 10 GB of data, and I can buy additional gigabytes at $2.00/gig as I need it. Or I can upgrade to a more expensive plan - $50/month and 50 GB of data, with add-on data billed at $1.00/gig. Full-time users can go with the $165/month unlimited plan, and that can be paused when not needed. All things considered, it's a bargain if you find yourself in places without internet or cell coverage.
When the Mini hit the market, discussions about power options started almost immediately. The standard Mini package includes a wall-wart that converts 120v AC line voltage to 30 volts DC, but right away folks noticed that the minimum 12 volt power requirement was well within the ranges of some small & lightweight battery power supplies. These include small power packs designed to charge phones, tablets and laptops. YouTube hosts a number of videos of Mini owners using these power packs to run a Mini for a few hours or more.
I've given some of these power packs a try, and my experience is that they don't work well. The Mini will power up, connect to the satellite constellation, sync with the Starlink system, then disconnect, reconnect, disconnect... it's never a stable or usable connection. After a few days of testing I concluded that the problem is likely that these small battery packs are not providing enough power for the Starlink antenna to negotiate and maintain a stable connection with the satellite constellation. The receiver will draw up to 35 watts on initial power-up and while connecting to the Starlink network. These power packs may be able to provide over 13 volts at full charge, but 35 watts is a hefty load to put on one of these devices for any length of time, and my suspicion is that the voltage drops close enough to the 12 volt minimum that the receiver can't maintain a stable connection. This isn't a knock on these power banks. They are actually pretty good little devices, and mine are now relegated to recharging our phones and tablets while on the road.
So, I went looking for a different portable solution. I want to be able to power the Mini for short periods of time at things like field activations, family gatherings at parks, or when taking short breaks while traveling. All I'm after is a few hours of run time. At the recommendation of one Australian YouTuber, I decided to test a device that sits on top of the very common Ryobi 18 volt tool batteries that are found in every Home Depot. These batteries are available in a variety of amp-hour ratings, from 1.5 up to 12. I've tested the 4 amp hour batteries, because that's the largest capacity I have (I own a lot of Ryobi cordless tools). What's great about the Ryobi batteries is their 18 volt capacity. This means they will stay well above the minimum 12 volt requirement, even as the battery runs low.
But how to get that 18 volts out of the battery and to the Mini? The answer is a 'hat' that sits on top of the battery and allows you to power the Mini. Manufactured by a company called SYMIK, it snaps onto any Ryobi 18 volt battery and provides two USB C ports, one USB A port and an LED light. Depending on the connection, the SYMIK hat can either charge the battery or provide up to 100 watts of power through one of the USB C ports. Plenty of wattage to meet the Mini's power needs for short periods of time. Unlike other power hats (including Ryobi's own version), this neat gizmo provides an OLED display that shows what's going on with the battery - state of charge, output voltage and amps, and more. While not a particularly rugged or weatherproof device, it is well made and reasonably priced. It came on the market in 2023, and seems to have been designed for the hobby drone market, as a portable charging station.
The SYMIK battery 'hat' set up and powering my Starlink Mini
The Starlink is waterproof, the connecting cable is waterproof, but the SYMIK and battery aren't. I need to find a smaller waterproof box to put the batteries and the SYMIK into
How fast? I was getting over 200 mbps within 15 minutes of setting the system up. Admittedly, this is on the fast end of what Mini users will see, even under a fully open sky
My initial testing shows that one 4 amp hour Ryobi battery will power the Mini for about 2 - 2.5 hours. This is for casual use - some internet surfing, some video watching, occasional small file 'pushes' up to the satellite constellation - emails, documents, pictures, etc. The connection stays reliable all the way to the end, and the SYMIK hat will shut down when available power drops to just below 10 amps. Heavier usage for things like video streaming will reduce battery run-time, likely by at least half.
Of course, you need an appropriate USB cable to connect the Mini to the SYMIK power supply. They are readily available from several online vendors, and from Starlink directly. It's just a USB C connector on one end, and the standard waterproof Starlink canon plug on the other end.
This brings us to the last consideration. Water resistance. The Mini is waterproof - it's IP67 rated. The power connection at the Mini is considered waterproof, too. Everything else in this power chain isn't. Not even remotely. The Ryobi battery and the SYMIK power hat need basic environmental protection. Right now I'm thinking about an inexpensive plastic water resistant ammo can that can hold two batteries, the SYMK power hat, and cables, Route the power cable thru a makeshift water resistant port on the ammo can. If ya'll have any thoughts or ideas on this, I'd love to have them!
I'll be posting more about this topic, and other Starlink topics, as I do more testing and actual field use, so stay tuned!
Someone recently posted on, of all sites, the Groups.io Elecraft KX site, that the Elecraft KX3 - released in 2013 - is too old and out-dated to be relevant.
Old and out-dated my ass.
Let's look at the current Sherwood Engineering receiver test data. There are about 157 radio evaluations on Sherwood's site. The KX3 currently sits in 9th place*. Since it's release the radio has always ranked in the top 10, and at one time was, I believe, ranked third or fourth, right behind the Elecraft K3 (both have the same receiver circuitry).
That puts the KX3, as of April 2025, in the top 6% of all radios rated. Impressive. But then you look at the KX3's competition. In this rating, it beats:
Elecraft's own new and shiny K4 and K4D
Every Flex radio tested
Every Apache radio tested
Every Drake receiver (highly vaunted in their day, and no slouches today)
The Icom 7610, 7300 and the 705
The TenTec Omni V (still highly sought after for it's excellent receiver performance)
In fact, at least five of the eight radios that sit above it on the Sherwood list were designed and built AFTER the KX3 was released in 2013.
(*I know some of you are going to say, 'I call BS, because numerically it sits 11th on the list' - well yes, but there are three very slight re-works of the Elecraft K3 that sit just above it, and I consider those to be one model.)
A lot of hams poo-poo the Sherwood ratings, saying they don't relate to anything in the real world, they are just comparisons of some meaningless values. I would agree that the Sherwood ratings don't measure the overall radio experience, but Sherwood is the only objective receiver evaluation service we have in ham radio. You gotta' rate on something, and Ron Sherwood's evaluations are honest and accurate, and provide a good performance ranking. Is there a lot of real world difference between the 1st and 10th radios on the list? Probably not. But there sure will be a lot of performance difference between the 1st and the 20th, and the gap in performance quickly widens the further down the list you go.
So no, the KX3 isn't irrelevant. Yes, it's a bit quirky and it can be difficult for ham radio operators to place it in terms of format and power output. Is it a full featured rig? Yes. Is it a QRP rig? Yup. Is it portable? Definitely. Does it provide excellent performance on all modes? Certainly. Can it serve as a main station rig? Without a doubt.
So, it's 12 year old world-class performing, portable QRP rig that can serve as your main shack radio. And it still beats damned near every radio Sherwood Engineering ever tested.
It's not a perfect radio, and I'll address some of it's shortcomings (none of them fatal) in a later post, but I just wanted to get this out there for people to consider. If you want a radio with a world-class receiver that you can take to the field in a small bag, the KX3 is an excellent, and very relevant, option.
And when was the last time Yaesu or Icom encouraged you to do this to one of their radios?
Elecraft provides written instructions on how to open up and tinker with the insides of all of their radios
I like to write stuff down. Pen (or pencil) & paper. The way it's been done since the Egyptians started the fad over 3,000 years ago. I simply don't buy into recording casual notes on electronic media. I sit in meetings and watch people poking and swiping on their tablets or phones, yet not really paying attention to the topics under discussion. The technology gets in the way.
My wife and kids tell me that, having ridden this rock around the Sun for over 68 years, I'm something of a luddite, set in my ways, too old to change, blah, blah, blah. For the record, these are the same wife and kids who come to me for tech support when they forget how to turn on their tablets or can't get the printer to work. Anyone who's read this blog knows I'm not against technology. Far from it. But, having ridden this rock for so long, I'm able to identify situations where old school technology is a better fit than new school technology.
Taking notes in the field, particularly when operating radios in the field, is one of those situations.
Background. I 'grew up' in the Army, where, as a leader, you wrote everything down. My niche job in the Army - surveying & mapping - took writing things down to extremes. Surveyors, both civilian and military, are obsessive about field notes. Field notes form the legal description of the survey. Whether we're talking about accurately locating a road centerline that will run through a subdivision, or the location of a missile launch site, there's a huge price to be paid if the data isn't accurate. Surveyors write everything down, in a specific format, with clarity, precision and accuracy (and without erasures). Hand written field notes done by experienced surveyors can be important historical documents, and many states retain libraries of survey notebooks as the foundational legal records of property boundaries and ownership. I internalized the surveyor's mindset, and still follow it today.
I'm not implying that scribbling down POTA contacts while you are working a pile-up is the same as a surveyor making careful field notes. What I am saying is that, in my experience, the foundational technology - pen or pencil, and paper - is often a better logging tool than a computer-based logging system. In fact, I know a lot of experienced field operators who record the contacts first on paper, then go back later and fill out the digital log.
This post won't cover how to log on paper - everyone has their own way of doing it. But I will discuss some of the tools. Many will say, "Hey, it's just paper and pen or pencil, what's the big deal?" Well OK, but I'm a paper, pencil and pen geek, so obviously we're going to dive down the rabbit hole. Let's go!
First, the paper part. I have yet to use a regular office supply store notebook that didn't become a semi-soggy mess while operating outdoors. Here in the southeast, where the summer humidity can reach 90% on a dry day, a regular notebook can quickly become unusable, particularly if you are using a ball-point pen, or a pencil with hard lead. The moisture in the paper results in a slick surface that doesn't provide enough traction to let the ink or lead flow properly. There are some really good solutions to this problem. The first is a regular surveyor's notebook. Most surveyor's notebooks are bound, or stitched, but you can also get them spiral bound. They use paper with a high 'rag' content (there's a lot of cotton linen in the paper content) and the pages are given a water resistant coating. This makes them ideal for use in high humidity conditions. While more expensive than a regular school-grade notebook, they really are not that much more expensive, especially if you buy in bulk (remember, you are not buying milk or bread - these notebooks won't go bad just sitting around for a few months, or years, waiting to be used). Surveyor's notebooks come in several different layouts, based on the type of survey activity they record. I recommend what's called a 'level book'. This has all pages laid out in columns and rows. If you get a survey 'field book', it will likely come with facing pages showing separate layouts - the left hand page is lined for notes, and the right hand page is set up in a grid pattern for field sketches. This layout can work for ham radio logging, it's just not as convenient.
Three very common notebooks under consideration. The Elan E64 spiral bound, the Rite-in-the-Rain field book, and the Elan E64 bound level book. Elan Publishing is a major manufacturer of field books, and many are sold under private brand labels. It's safe to say that if you spot a surveyor making notes in a field notebook, the book was made by Elan, regardless of the name on the cover. All of them use water resistant paper, but Rite-in-the-Rain takes it a step further by applying an additional waterproof coating. Any of these will do just fine in a field environment, and all are readily available from Amazon
Personally I like the spiral bound books for field logging. They lay flat, and if I need to tear out a page to hand over to another operator (who may not have brought something to write on) it's a lot easier and neater to do than trying to tear a page from a bound notebook. You can also get loose-leaf pages for use in 3-ring binders, but I don't like those because trying to 'reach' across the binder rings while writing is a pain.
Notebook page layouts. The Rite-in-the-Rain notebook is at the top, the Elan 64 spiral bound at the bottom, and the Elan hard bound on the right. The Elan 64 spiral bound is a great option, except for the layout (notes on the left, gridded for field drawings on the right). The Elan hard bound on the right is great, but it's hard to tear pages out of. For this reason I tend to go with the Rite-in-the-Rain notebook
One brand of notebooks I particularly like (although they are more expensive) are the ones made by the Rite-in-the-Rain company out of Tacoma, Washington. The paper they use is more water resistant than anything I've tested, and although the coating and texture can cause issues with some pen inks and pencil leads, if you test beforehand you'll find plenty of pens and pencils that work. We'll discuss more on this in a bit. I don't worry too much if these notebooks get wet, they seem to dry out just fine.
Now on to the writing implements, starting with pens. A good pen needs to be comfortable in the grip, have good, smooth ink flow, but not too much ink flow that it leads to smearing. I'm a southpaw, and this ink smearing thing is a serious issue. In over 50 years of work, I've used an enormous range of pens, from the cheapo Skillcraft ball point pens the Army bought by the truckload (and were actually not too bad), to some elegant A.T. Cross models, to cheap but very nicely performing gel pens, to Fisher Space Pens with their pressurized ink cartridges. Let's look at a few of my favorites.
Want a very good yet inexpensive pen that can be bought at Wal-Mart? Try out the Pilot G-2 gel pen. It doesn't look like a whole lot, but the designers did their homework. The ink flows very smoothly and evenly and the ergonomics are great - the pen feels good in the hand. I always carry a few in my field kit.
Next up is the Pentel RSVP medium point. While it doesn't feel as good in the hand as the Pilot (it has a narrower and shorter grip), the ink flow is outstanding - noticeably smoother than the Pilot. In fact the ink flows well both under very light pressure, and the 'press hard, you're signing three copies' pressure level. It's really remarkable how good the ink flow is on a relatively inexpensive pen.
Fisher Space Pen/Rite-in-the-Rain. I've written about Fisher & Rite-in-the-Rain on this blog before. Fisher makes the pens that are sold under the Rite-in-the-Rain name, and they feature Fisher's well known pressurized 'space pen' ink cartridges. These pens are renowned for writing under just about any condition, even under water, and the hype is mostly true. They put ink on paper under conditions that have other pens failing to write altogether. The best example are those awful printed receipts you'll get in restaurants, the ones so slick that no pen will leave a mark, and you go looking for a Sharpie. The Fischer ink cartridge can usually tackle that. I own a number of the Rite-in-the-Rain pens (I like the bright orange barreled models - easy to find). They are comfortable to grip, and the ink flows well. Recently though, I bought a Fisher Space Pen branded Zero Gravity model. The barrel is made out of rubber coated brass, and it comes with a medium tip cartridge. The ink flow is excellent. It's easily the most comfortable pen I've held for some time, and it's my new favorite for general purpose writing.
In terms of feel on the paper, the Pentel R.S.V.P. is the clear winner, with the Fisher Gravity coming in second. The Pilot G2 is also very nice, but as we'll see has one major flaw
Here we are with the same pens, but writing on an Rite-in-the-Rain field notebook with water resistant paper. The Pentel R.S.V.P was the smooth writing winner, with the Fisher Gravity a close second. The Pilot G2 had a bit of a 'gritty' feel to it as I wrote. Two of the pens, the Fisher Gravity and the Pilot G2, exhibited ink smearing. The G2 was obviously the worst. I tested by writing the line, then swiping my finger lightly over the text. This issue effectively disqualifies the Pilot G2
Same pens & pencil, but writing on an Elan 64 field notebook with water resistant paper. I didn't do the smear test here, but I'd expect the same results as above. The Pentel R.S.V.P was still the winner, the Fisher a close second, and the Rite-in-the-Rain a respectable (in terms of performance) third
But, which pen do I take to the field? Except for the Pilot G2, any of these pens would do fine, but I'm going to stick with my Rite-in-the-Rain / Fisher orange bodied model. They are lightweight, rugged, easy to keep track of and the pressurized ink cartridge ensures ink will flow under the conditions I'm most likely to encounter on a field activation. The Fisher Gravity is a very nice pen, but it's an expensive instrument, and my pens have a habit of walking off. For field use, it's Rite-in-the-Rain.
So now we're down to pen vs. pencil. Is there a reason to choose one over the other? Not really, it's all a matter of personal preference. I used to stick strictly to pencils for field notes - again it's a surveyor thing. But over the past few years I've come to prefer the pen, mainly for the visual contrast on the notebook page. I still take pencils to the field, and my decades-long favorite are the classic Pentel P200-series mechanical pencils - the P205 for the 0.5mm lead diameter model, and the P207 for the 0.7mm model. These pencils are very well made, rugged (I have yet to break one), feel good in the hand, and are widely available. Pentel's pencil lead is some of the best available - it doesn't break easily and is smooth on the paper. My current preference is for the 0.7mm diameter lead - it writes really well on water resistant paper.
One last topic. Logging. Like many hams, I've chased awards, high field day scores and other contact-related things in ham radio. And like many hams I've played around with a variety of electronic logging systems - N1MM, Ham Radio Deluxe, Log4OM, etc. I never felt any of them worked all that well for me. I spent more time fussing with the software interface than actually logging contacts. I understand the utility of a computer-based logging system, and for serious contesters and serious 'runners & gunners', they are absolutely necessary. But I enjoy a more leisurely pace on the radio, spinning the dial, grabbing an interesting CQ call, maybe working a few special event stations or helping POTA operators fill their logs. My preferred logging method is good old paper and pencil, using the classic ARRL logbooks. It's slow, it's old-school, but it works great for my operating style. Plus, once a contact is in the paper log, it's there forever. I love flipping back through my logs, seeing what stations and countries I've contacted in the past, what equipment I used, what bands I was on. I've lost an unknown number of contacts to digital logging applications. I can't blame the logging apps, I just did a lousy job of saving out the contacts and archiving them. It's a discipline thing. For this reason, when logging, it's paper and pencil.
For fun, I'm not the only one who dorks out on pens and pencils. There's the always delightful, on point, and over-caffeinated Adam Savage - my brother from another mother...
