Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 1676 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#phone#radio#ham#more#vhf#radios#still#analog#sdr#transceiver

Discussion (73 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

thenthenthen1 day ago
There are many cheap shanzhai android phones with walkie talkie ptt functions (around 400MHz iirc) for about a decade. We tried to convince manufactures to open up the software stack to no avail, while being bullied at local hackerspaces (“this is illegal!”). I am licensed.
lxgr1 day ago
It's mindblowing to me how modern cell phones have worse broadcast and P2P capabilities than what we had decades ago (when feature phones often featured FM receivers and could share photos via Bluetooth across manufacturers and OSes).

Airdrop was the closest thing we had, and even that has been intentionally nerfed for non-contact senders.

It's absurd that modern phones can talk to satellites hundreds of kilometers above, but not to other phones a few meters away in the same room, airplane cabin, train car etc.

wolvoleo1 day ago
P2P capabilities aren't what the providers and governments want.

The providers don't want it because they can't charge you for it. The governments don't like to see people communicate outside of their control. See how Apple caved to China making AirDrop no longer public and has followed suit in the rest of the world because other governments fear this capability too.

euroderf1 day ago
So, do phones in the "libre" genre have these features ?
throwaway270925about 11 hours ago
> share photos via Bluetooth across manufacturers and OSes

You can still do that! It never went away.

lxgrabout 8 hours ago
It's never been a thing on iOS, unfortunately.
lichenwarp1 day ago
Why is it that pretty much every ham operator I've met has been a complete jackass.
HelloUsername1 day ago
Previous discussion on 14-oct-2024 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41818609 191 comments
wolvoleo1 day ago
Nice!! I wish it could do DMR though. Analog isn't used to much anymore in these parts. Although to be more precise, HAM radio has declined a lot but DMR repeaters are linked in groups so it seems like there's a lot more activity.
wolrahabout 21 hours ago
Exactly my thought. APRS is nice but I'm just not interested in buying another otherwise analog-only radio. I know a lot of the popular digital modes are hard due to proprietary components but I'd be a lot more interested in something that supported digital voice and higher rate data modes even if it were just M17.
s03nk31 day ago
Is it so difficult to have schematics and pcb exported as PDF so that people do not need to fire up KiCAD to view the stuff?
mk_stjames1 day ago
I encounter this problem as well when looking at projects on Github on a near daily basis it seems.

It just led me to finding this:

https://kicanvas.org/

worth a bookmark.

Retr0id1 day ago
Or even a picture of the physical device! I found some on a linked sales listing: https://chelegance.com/products/kv4p-ht-plugplay-vhf-radio1-...
wolvoleo1 day ago
Thanks! I was looking for that.

I see they use those cheapo Chinese RF modules (SA818). I've seen those also with SDR input/output, that's interesting. The underlying chip is very similar: The chip that will be used in this module is the RDA1846. This is a chip that's in most Chinese handhelds and is internally fully SDR but it decodes to analog. There's also the RDA1847 with similar pinout which offers the raw SDR stream and can thus be used for any mode, but with the added complexity of having to do the SDR decoding externally.

That means that this design could probably also be modified to do DMR. Though the SDR side might be a little bit too much to ask of an ESP32. On the other hand, it is only a very low bitrate signal.

oslem1 day ago
Sounds like a great contribution you could make!
bdavbdav1 day ago
I used to use SDR for DAB radio in the nexus 7 in the dash of my BMW E46. It didn’t work very well but was closer to being some kind of radio receiver (not trans at least)
landgenoot1 day ago
> 1 watt transmit can go miles yet sips your phone’s battery

How far can such a device reach in a typical urban environment with the longer antenna?

lxgr1 day ago
VHF is effectively line-of-sight, and no antenna size can change that (although it does improve efficiency for both sending and receiving), so for two handheld radios, you are limited to about 10 km.

The only thing that really helps extend the range is elevating the antenna, and repeaters allow you to do that even between two mobile stations.

ac291 day ago
VHF doesnt need line of sight, it has excellent ability to penetrate obstructions due to its long wavelength. For example, its not difficult to receive FM radio transmissions indoors, even from tens of km away. Some obstacles will effectively block any radio signal though, such as solid earth or concrete (esp rebar reinforced concrete).

You are right that handheld radios wont get more than about 10km, but that is due to the curvature of the earth. Mountain top to mountain top, you could easily do 50-100km

lxgr1 day ago
That's what I meant by "effectively": Reflections, diffraction, and (moderate, i.e. think doors and windows, not walls) light obstacle penetration make some indoor reception possible, but the radio horizon remains the strong limiting factor.

That's even true for the L- and S-band; otherwise you wouldn't be able to use a cell phone in a windowless room, for example. (Much of what's commonly attributed to "object penetration" is actually mostly due to reflections and diffraction around obstacles.)

giantg21 day ago
I think there's other phenomena that people might be interested in such as E-skip and tropospheric ducting. Although you cant really rely on those.
souterrain1 day ago
Practical use, dense urban, flat, UHF is about 1km. VHF is worse.

Most radio amateurs would utilize a repeater to get over this limitation. Assuming there is a reliable repeater one is welcome to use nearby.

quietsegfault1 day ago
In dense urban environments, VHF (~144 MHz) actually performs better than UHF (~446 MHz) for a few reasons... Lower frequencies diffract better around obstacles. VHF diffracts more readily around and over buildings than UHF. VHF penetrates building materials better than UHF — lower frequency = longer wavelength = better penetration through walls. UHF suffers from higher path loss over distance compared to VHF.
fodmap1 day ago
You can extend the reach using repeaters. This free app is handy for that https://hearham.com/repeaters
RobotToaster1 day ago
1w seems a little limited? A cheap baofeng is 8w.
Kaliboy1 day ago
Those cheap baofeng's are illegal to use where I live on most of the spectrum they can operate on. Illegal to press the talk button anyway.

So maybe the 1w is also a regulatory issue.

souterrain1 day ago
In the US all transmitting at 1W with these radios is contrary to regulations.

That said, no one is going to stop you from squatting on 146.580 MHz for example, a frequency commonly used by outdoors folks, rules notwithstanding.

ac291 day ago
> In the US all transmitting at 1W with these radios is contrary to regulations.

With a ham license the limit is 1.5kW, without one its zero

asdff1 day ago
How does the FCC enforce this sort of thing? Are they listening in to certain frequencies nationally with the ability to triangulate a handheld down to actually identifying someone?
Bender1 day ago
They mostly don't. They send scary letters and maybe eventually fine someone. They have a handful of triangulation vans for the entire US. The barely respond to complaints that are revenue impacting and generally don't respond to complaints from hams that a non ham is using their equipment. Once a quarter they make an example of someone so that it appears they enforce things. The people they make examples of are usually trying really hard to troll them or doing something highly disruptive and these will end up on a few websites and magazines.

People tinkering and staying away from ham bands will generally be fine and for the cheap ham gear that made easy by design usually by doing a factory reset or worst case having to clip a diode to widen their frequency ranges. Most ham gear is designed to be highly hackable.

fodmap1 day ago
Most of the time they get a complaint, and they investigate.

https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/guides/fcc-enforcement-...

martheen1 day ago
Someone complained, they send someone to check and triangulate, verify that the operator doesn't have the license, then issue a warning or fine.
l23k41 day ago
Unless you're going out of your way to force them to react, they do not.
lormayna1 day ago
Only on the paper, the real power is around 3/3.5W
takipsizad1 day ago
1w is usually okay and using 8w from a phone is probably way too much power demand
Melatonic1 day ago
Is it still worth it to mess around with older full duplex handhelds ?
gh02t1 day ago
Analog handhelds are still abundant, they've gotten smaller and more efficient but older ones are still basically just as good as new. IMO digital handhelds are superior, but digital protocols are much more fragmented so analog remains king as a common denominator (practically every digital handheld can do analog, too).
tamimio1 day ago
I loved it, amazing work, thanks for sharing it!
Crunchified1 day ago
This doesn't turn your phone into a ham transceiver at all. It turns your phone into a transceiver controller. Given that a cell phone is a transceiver, this headline is rather disappointing clickbait.
alexwwang1 day ago
Agree.

We need a compact short wave transceiver device actually.

jonah1 day ago
QRP is the keyword you may be looking for. 9W, battery powered, SDR shortwave transceivers. There are inexpensive and expensive versions.
FabCH1 day ago
Baofeng is 20 dollars? How much cheaper and compact do you need?

And I know, I know, Baofengs are notorious for going over the allowed noise limits… but still…

takipsizad1 day ago
Baofeng's are not shortwave radios afaik
jimnotgym1 day ago
Baofengs also have terrible receive filtering. It is perfectly possible to hear no stations because you are being overloaded by something on another frequency. I tried my first SOTA activation with a Boafeng. A transmitter on another hill meant I received nothing, although stains could hear me. By a Yaesu, still cheap
NordStreamYacht1 day ago
Yaesu FTW
sfmike1 day ago
Is this prevented by physics or cost or just no one has the motivation?
gh02t1 day ago
Compact HF/shortwave radios with transmit capability exist, but they're pretty expensive and are generally definitely portable but not quite handheld. The biggest user of such equipment is the military, so a lot of the tech is engineered for that with civilian/amateur use as an afterthought. ICOM, Yaesu, and Xiegu are probably the best known makers, and you're looking at ~$1000 as table stakes for a modern one, though there are some slightly cheaper options.

Handheld CB radios do exist and are cheap, but I've never really used them.

souterrain1 day ago
There are a number of compact shortwave (radio amateurs prefer the term "high frequency" or HF, in contrast to VHF, UHF) transceivers. The impracticality is from the size of an efficient antenna.

I have personally made voice (single-sideband or SSB, which is analog like AM without wasting energy transmitting a carrier or redundant sideband) contacts with a 5 watt portable (Elecraft KX2) between countries in Europe, using a meter-long whip antenna and a trailing counterpoise wire.

These radios are incredibly complex weak-signal equipment, and that is reflected in the price.

That said, it is fun. Using morse code to do the same is even more fun.

I would never rely on this for off-the-grid communication, though.

_whiteCaps_1 day ago
There's the trusdx or the QMX.
RobotToaster1 day ago
A compact CB transceiver would be fun.
topspin1 day ago
Fun, but short range. A quarter wave CB antenna is about 2.7 meters long. Without that, you're making more heat than radio.
lovelearning1 day ago
I don't see it as clickbait since the realities of the Android ecosystem is a shared context.

Most people know that just about every Android phone has a restricted hardware design, not an expandable one.

So, "turn your phone into X" is bound to automatically evoke images of another device that plugs into the phone via common connectors like USB or the audio jack and an app on the phone to control that device. That's what the phrase means to most people in the context of Android.

"Turn your phone into a ham radio transceiver controller" is neither needed nor entirely accurate, because then people will assume it can control _any_ ham radio transceiver.

Crunchified1 day ago
The article is chiefly about a radio circuit you can "build", plus some controller software that happens to run on an Android phone. Meanwhile the headline is 100% focused on describing something that your phone can be made to do (which you have admitted that it can't).

The two don't add up, and your apologetic analysis doesn't convince me otherwise. It's still clickbait. An Android cell phone has radio guts, and that headline is just gutless.

lovelearning1 day ago
It's not "apologetic" and it wasn't meant to convince you but to refute your pointless pedantic nitpicking for other readers.
lxgr1 day ago
"Turn your phone into a nuclear reactor (by plugging it into a wall outlet served by a nuclear power plant)"
developer7861 day ago
Why do some people get so hung up about minor things in life. The OP has done a fantastic job, not just building it, but both the delivery and mechanics.
lovelearning1 day ago
Very funny.

However, your analogy is not equivalent to, nor an example for, what I said. There's a difference between a phone's own USB/audiojack interfaces and a wall outlet.