Survivalist Forum banner

is there a handheld radio with a 100 mile range?

63K views 91 replies 43 participants last post by  Dizzyfun 
#1 ·
Ham radio is out of the question for this guy. i need something though with 100 mile range. anything out there?
 
#2 ·
No. Nothing in the amateur radio service could meet your expectation. Certainly not from any unlicensed bands. You could explore the relationship between portable DC power requirements as it relates to power output, resistance/reactance, ground versus sky wave propagation, digital modulation techniques, and antenna theory to better understand why. What you are posing requires satellite phones. I hope your pockets are deep.
 
#3 ·
No. not by direct line of sight.

The cost of the technology to make this possible would be most than likely beyond the means of the average Joe. You would basically be looking at two options.

1. A dedicated repeater network that would bounce the signal from one repeater to the next. Depending on terrain, man made intererence, etc., you could be looking at multiple repeaters to close that distance. You radios would also need to be equipped with some kind of carrier tone (PL) that would automatically activate the repeaters to prevent any unauthorized users from accessing your system.

Or,

2. Setting up your own closed communications network where one radio would transmit to a nearby base (receiver/transmitter) which would carry the transmission either by dedicated phone line, or microwave path, to a 2nd base, that would then broadcast the transmission out to the second radio.

Both options would require you to remain in range of the repeaters or base stations at all times, so going on the move would effectivly shutdown your network.

There is a 3rd option out there, but I'm doubting it's reliability in a crisis.

3. Voice over IP: Basically your transmission is digitized and routed over the internet to the destination of your choice where it is forwared on to the 2nd radio. The amateur radio field is big on VoIP right now, but there are many private networks coming online as well. It's a little more technical then I'm making it out to be but basically with a couple specialized receivers, a couple computers, some software, a phone connection, and someone to make it all happen you're up and running. But like I said, come shtf and there go the phone lines.

Personally, I'd just bite the bullet and get a couple sat phones.

Beyond that, homing pigeons. Hey, it worked in WWI.
 
#6 ·
If you have ever frequented a CB radio forum, most people tends to think that their situation in unique / different / or special and that instead of doing some research, it is just easier to ask the same question over and over again on internet forums.
I had one guy that asked the same exact question on 4 different forums, looking for a answer that was different then mine.
The answer was you cannot bend the laws of physic's without something having to give up something.

I have a family member that repairs microwave equipment.
He has a cabin that he does not use that was situated 9 miles from his residence.
He took a old low band VHF handheld telephone, I think it was around 49 Mhz and he increased the voltage of the handset and the base station, he increased the size of the antenna and he re-tuned it so both were still on the same frequency.
Drove up to his cabin and was able to still use his cordless telephone - full quieting 9 miles away...

He then got the bright idea that he would try to do the same thing with a 900 mhz telephone - spread spectrum.
Now the problem is - anything over a couple of milliwatts and you have to have a license to use it...
He does have a Radio Telephone license to operate transmitters including microwave of more then 1500 watts, but he does not have a amateur radio license... Which is silly, because it doesn't cost anything except the cost to take the test.

At one time, a person would buy a mobile transceiver and a transverter and adapt it to work on the microwave bands. With a dish and a couple of watts it was possible to transmit in the GHZ range many miles.
The problem is , as the frequency goes up, the SWR is more critical and you have to move away from coax into waveguide equipment and when something is wrong you don't just get a high swr, something goes BANG and then it quits. It is a very expensive lesson in communications.

Might I suggest that the forum members here join the ARRL and subscribe to QST Magazine.. At least you would get some exposure to all of this stuff, even if it was not the exact answer that you were looking for.
 
#8 ·
Nothing even close hand-held to hand-held.

Closest is Low-VHF band business band 300 watt base stations with tall towers and beam antennas.

Put in your own repeater at each end and you can use hand-helds locally that will repeat to the other system and to their hand-helds. (Motorola CDR700 repeater w/2 CDM 750 low VHF band radios)(Henry 300 watt amplifier)(Motorola HT-750 handhelds)(tower and antenna)

Very expensive as it requires a frequency search, FCC license, and the equipment is more expensive than VHF/UHF gear.

You can also get HF business band mobiles, but the same licensing and and frequency search expenses, and the equipment is just as expensive, if not more so, than low VHF.

Just my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drew Kelor
#19 ·
First off - have you ever seen the cans used for a repeater for 10 meters?
Even if you could afford them, they are massive. Looks more like 65 gallon hot water tanks then anything else.

And the problem is - even if you had a 300 watt PA amplifier you wouldn't get 300 watts to come out the other end because the loss inside of the cans and the feed line throws about 75 watts away. The same holds true for reception, although your base station might have excellent receive, when you connect it to the diplexer, it throws a portion of the signal away and makes what is normally a good signal - simplex, hard to receive on a repeater...

I know you said LOW business band, this was just an example..
6 meters - 50 MHz the duplexers are almost as large - looks like water filters for a Culligan system.

Most people who builds a system like this doesn't use diplexers, they just put one antenna atop one mountain and they put the other antenna on another mountain a mile or so away and then they link the two halves of the repeater together with a UHF link.
The problem is - then you have to use even more equipment and you have more opportunities for something to go wrong.

A Walkie talkie still isn't going to talk 100 miles, just plain old line of sight..

The old 5 watt / 3 channel - Midland 11 meters models I had when I was younger would talk about 3 miles in a good location.
 
#9 ·
Satellite phone, or cell phone, that is about it.

Radio waves cannot penetrate through the earth. This means the maximum distance between any two points on a radio network is the distance to the horizon; at 6ft tall (average human height), that distance is only a couple miles. Throw a few hills, trees or tall buildings in there, the distance becomes much shorter.

This is the reason radio antenna towers exist. They're up high, so the distance to the horizon is longer and they can cover more area. To pass a radio signal from point A to point B, there must be a network of towers with direct line-of-sight to each other, and direct line-of-sight to points A and B, to relay the signal between them.
 
#12 ·
You can work a satellite 400+ miles away slant range, 2m FM at 2 watts on an HT. I've done it many times.

HT's are typically FM.
FM is generally line of sight.
The earth is curved, mountains, cities, etc. get in the way.
You need serious altitude, or you fail.
 
#13 ·
Some of us have been working on the standalone / distance / license type issues for some time in various modes such as, base stations, repeater, crossband repeater, mobiles, and handheld (HT). In my case, with a hand held to hand held, and not in the ham band, on rolling treed terrain about six miles is the best I've done so far with UHF. Much farther with UHF base to base and base to mobile, twenty miles is doable there. 100 miles on a HT and not HAM ? don't have a solution for you at the moment.
 
#25 ·
Because one party or the other (or both, though less likely) already messed up and will never be eligible for a license.

Could a third person (spouse, teen offspring, cousin, etc,) become the designated comms person at the other end, and make an amature license an option?
 
#48 ·
New here, and been doing a lot of research. You say there are radios that will do 30 miles. Can you elaborate, and would these same radios work if towers are down? I've read some information on radios that bounce off the ozone, sattalite radios, etc. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
 
#17 ·
Try 2 meter

My dad was a ham radio guru, he would use the ham for around the world communication, and the 2 meter for traveling in a city. Most rigs are handheld now and can communicate between each other as well as to a base station. there are repeater towers for the band and they will reach 100 miles easily.
 
#20 ·
My dad was a ham radio guru, he would use the ham for around the world communication, and the 2 meter for traveling in a city. Most rigs are handheld now and can communicate between each other as well as to a base station. there are repeater towers for the band and they will reach 100 miles easily.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong about repeaters being able to talk 100 miles.
You are under the assumption that the repeater was built in the most opportune place - the place with the highest elevation in the state or country.

There is only two repeaters in Pennsylvania that I know of that will talk more then 65 miles, and they cannot communicate to a mobile at more then 50 miles unless you are hill topping. The one is owned by Kevin ( 146.835 / Seven Springs - Champion PA ) and the other is owned by a repeater group and managed by Tom K3WS atop Blue Knob MTN. - ( 147.150 / Blue Knob repeater association).
They will hilltop on a good day to Ridgeway PA - almost 100 miles from the 835 machine, but only 90 miles at best to the Blue Knob repeater..
THE OTHER ONE MIGHT BE THE 147.390 OR THE 147.315 - which sits on top of Rockton Mtn. in Clearfield County - which is the highest point along I 80 / east of the Mississippi. Please note - is not the highest point in the state or country, just along Interstate 80. They will hilltop to Butler PA, to Somerset PA, to Bradford PA and out to about Clarion PA in a mobile and will hill top the whole way to Franklin PA with a good antenna. To the east they will go to

Most repeaters were built for local communications only and has a range of about 30 miles on a good day. This means if you built a repeater atop Rattlesnake Mountain - in Pennsylvania, near State College / Phillipsburg - it would talk north 30 miles, it would talk south 30 miles, it would talk east 30 miles and it would talk west 30 miles.

If you put up a antenna with a substantial amount of gain, that is more then 1 and you put it up high enough and you use a transceiver with about 50 watts, you will increase the range of most repeaters by about 10 - 50%

However - you cannot hit it if it cannot hear your signal, which means you have to be at an elevation at which it can see your signal and at which you can see it's signal.

Repeaters are not magical objects, that defies the laws of physic's.
It cannot magically make a signal appear that normally could not be received using simplex from the two same locations. And, even if you can use simplex, if the signal is too weak - the repeater isn't going to hear it, even if you do use the 300 watt PA to transmit, it will just be an alligator - all mouth and no ears.
 
#21 ·
The short answer is that you'll only be able to talk line of sight to the International Space Station, and that would be on the Amateur VHF bands.

The next closest option with a handheld over 100 miles is when you are within the footprint of a passing ham satellite. Again putting you in the Amateur bands.

The only handheld I know of that will talk over 100 miles are HF handhelds ........... again putting you in the Amateur bands. http://www.eham.net/articles/3496
 
#23 ·
SO-50, and there are other FM voice birds that will likely be launched next year. But you'll probably only get 1-2 good passes/day, the passes are short, and the satellite is usually very crowded. Certainly not something you could rely on, but the point remains: you can talk with an HT, FM, 2 watts, hundreds of miles. But it all hinges on line-of-sight. If you could find me two points on the surface of the earth separated by 100 miles, but visible to one another with a telescope, I could work it with an HT and the right antenna.
 
#24 ·
Speaking generally, low frequency stuff, around 30mhz, is the best choice in terms of range for "survivalist" type people. All the high frequency stuff makes little sense unless you're wanting to transmit lots of data in a legally compliant manner, none of which is really applicable to the suggested scenario.

The more fundamental question is why you want such a radio anyway! A receiver on commercial band makes sense for gathering information, but actively transmitting doesn't really do much for you, as it's unlikely anyone listening will be in a position to assist you in any meaningful way. A marine band radio is probably the only half worthwhile item as rescue helicopters may be monitoring it, but they are sub 5 mile for handhelds. Save your money and buy a decent survivable receiver and the means to keep it operable.
 
#27 ·
The only really good options, afaik, is HF.
But they're not really handhelds, AND of course...they're ham radios. I too would really like to know why ham is not option in this case. If ham IS an option, there are portable varieties out there, not handheld really, but close enough to be man-portable without too much trouble. But still needs large antennas. That is the closest you'll get for that range, unless you wanna put your bets on comms that rely on infrastructure that might be out of your control...

Here's two that I know work, personally seen these used in the field back home, at distances from 50 to 700 km. There might be others as well, but these are the ones I've seen. The Yaesu is brilliant imho.

Yaesu FT-817ND: http://www.yaesu.com/indexVS.cfm?cmd=DisplayProducts&ProdCatID=102&encProdID=06014CD0AFA0702B25B12AB4DC9C0D27&DivisionID=65&isArchived=0
Elecraft KX3: http://www.elecraft.com/KX3/kx3.htm

It has to be said though, that getting a ham license is necessary to get these and use them, but as I've said in another thread here, getting that license also gives you the background necessary to use such radios (and others) much more effectively, learning what works and what doesn't, and why.
 
#30 ·
While a good radio, he still won't be getting 100-mile comms point-to-point on that. Yes, he could use repeaters and networked options, but as mentioned already; either he sets it up himself (expensive, especially if he want it hardened against different catastrophes), or he uses available repeaters (out of his control, who knows how long they will last).
This is my opinion of course, but I still think that the best long range SHTF-comms would be HF, simply because it can work point-to-point, and is not reliant on infrastructure. Ymmv.

Another thing that pops into my head here, is why would you need a handheld with that kind of range? Of course different folks have different needs, but still...
We're talking an area that is waaay out of a normal tactical AO for a small group of people here, so it shouldn't be necessary for tactical comms between units on foot. Hell, a normal army brigade is usually not spread out that thin.
And if we're talking long range patrols of some sort (scrounging, security, reconnaissance), be it vehicle-mobile or on foot, for more normal long range comms (situation updates, reporting and similar), then why not use something more capable than a handheld?

The Yaesu FT-817ND for example, it is small and portable, weighs less than 5 lbs and is battery powered, AND cover both HF and VHF bands.
Most tactical comms have a limit of 15-18 miles tops, and then only when it's LOS, even less when in rugged terrain or dense vegetation. But still such radios are enough for normal comms between units/people that tactically speaking depend on each other, both intra-team and between small unit teams working in conjunction with each other.
What kind of situation would need a handheld long range radio, instead of a portable long range radio that is small and light enough to even go into the cargo-pouch on a LBE, or at the very least a small patrol pack?

Once again, different folks have different needs, but I still can't see what the OP is after here. It might help if he could give some hints :)
 
#34 ·
2 points. First, I wasn't suggesting that radio as a solution to anything more than aramchek's pondering if there was a 6M HT.
Sorry, I missed that part. Thought you meant for reliable long range comms :)

The second is not everyone thinks opsec, coded communications, and tactical comms between units will be a necessity. Maybe his granny lives 100 miles away and he wants to be able to check in on her from time to time. Maybe she's 85 and isn't a candidate to pass the ham test.
Why can't we just answer the questions as they are posed instead of explaining why they don't need to know it?
I agree, not everyone thinks about these things. I didn't either, when I wrote that post, I specifically considered reliable long range comms, not any type of comsec.
That is also why I wrote at the end that it might be useful to get some input from the OP as to why ham is not an option. It will be much easier to answer the question he asked.
The short answer to his short question would be "No" or "cellphone", but I'm guessing none of those would be much help to him. So why not give him some input as to what to look for, and give some info on how different comms can be used, and is used? As several have done in this thread already... :confused:
 
#36 ·
Thanks for the tip on the 6m ICOM HT. I hadn't actively looked for an HT with that band. One problem there is that the longer wavelength than 70cm/2m means that you won't be using a full-wave antenna (~18' long), or even a quarter-wave (~9') with an HT so it wouldn't be optimal with a standard whip antenna. I don't know enough about 6m's characteristics -- it's mostly quiet whenever I've tuned to it. I wish more people would use it, there's probably room for more antenna experimentation that combines VHF + occasional HF properties it gets.
 
#37 ·
Have you got much experience with HF properties within the 6-meter band?
I know that it is possible to get sporadic E propagation from time to time, but those instances I've seen is few and far between and not to be counted on as reliable, although very nice when it does occur. Would be nice to have more of that, but I haven't good experiences with it; one of the reason I'm going for HF in first place.

Anybody else use it regularly?
 
#44 ·
I have read this thread and can't figure out what issues the OP has with getting a amateutr radio license? If he is worried about getting on the government radar by having a license, I can assure him that the FCC, FAA, Coast Guard and local law enforcement are more interested in UNLICENSED knob twiddlers who lack technical knowledge, inadvertently causing interference to aviation, maritime or public safety radio systems.

It is not the hams they are worried about. It is the splattering free banders which trash the spectrum for an entire continent that they are worried about.

So just get the ham license and get a sturdy, manpack HF radio and nrig a goood antenna which is resonant on your working frequency. Get over it.
 
#47 ·
I have read this thread and can't figure out what issues the OP has with getting a amateutr radio license? If he is worried about getting on the government radar by having a license,
Or perhaps he or she is concerned about his name and address being advertised for the whole world to easily ascertain? Though this is the exact reason why I have a PO box.

I can assure him that the FCC, FAA, Coast Guard and local law enforcement are more interested in UNLICENSED knob twiddlers who lack technical knowledge, inadvertently causing interference to aviation, maritime or public safety radio systems......
Remember “1600 Alaska”? http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-fines-alaska-man-for-interfering-with-air-traffic-using-cb-radio
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top