you can't fly to cuba from the US directly anyway, so canadian flights for example must go around US airspace.
Flights between Canada and Cuba are not required to travel around US air space. That is not at all required.
One example is a recent Air Canada flight from Toronto to Havana. I'm not sure how long this link will work beyond today, but the flight clearly travels over New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Florida.
These are very common in Arizona and So-Cal. On each of the 5 and 15 freeways between San Diego and the LA-area, there is a permanent checkpoints in periodic use by the Border Patrol almost precisely 70 miles away from the border. I wonder if there is something special about the 70 mile mark.
Because many instances may occur at your delivery address that is beyond our control, you agree that any delivery confirmation provided by the carrier is deemed sufficient proof of delivery to the card holder, even without a signature.
So let's say that UPS claims to deliver it to you but takes no signature -- and the box promptly walks away. From the language above, it sounds like you have the responsibility to hassle with UPS for an insurance claim.
And on the Chargeback Policy in case you decide that it wasn't your fault that a device didn't exactly isn't on your doorstep when you get home:
7. Chargeback Policy
All references to a “chargeback” refer to a reversal of a credit/debit card charge placed on www.ybuy.com. There is no reason for a chargeback to ever be filed. If a credit is due, simply contact us and we will gladly issue it. Unnecessary chargebacks are theft and can be prosecuted. If you feel that your credit/debit card was used fraudulently on www.ybuy.com, please contact us for immediate resolution at support@ybuy.com.
YOU AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT CHARGEBACK ANY AMOUNTS CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT/DEBIT CARD ON THIS SITE. IF YOU CHARGEBACK A CREDIT/DEBIT CARD CHARGE FOR A PAYMENT INITIATED BY YOU, YOU AGREE THAT THIS SITE MAY RECOVER THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGEBACK IN ADDITION TO $ BY ANY MEANS DEMED NECESSARY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO RECHARGING YOUR CREDIT/DEBIT CARD OR HAVING THE AMOUNT RECOVERED BY A COLLECTION AGENCY.
Price for non-contract device is exactly the same as what you pay on contract, which is what the market will bear. The only difference is whether you pay it all upfront, or with a series of monthly payments that are folded into your service bill.
How many people do you know that buy unlocked non-contract iPhone's? Practically no one. People buy unlocked non-contract phones, just not iPhones. My argument is that the price of the unlocked, non-contract iPhone's is higher than the market will bear to discourage people from buying the device through AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon -- companies with whom Apple has lucrative distribution and marketing agreements. I'm speculating that those agreements require Apple to sell the iPhone for a higher-than-market-value price.
The entire iPhone 3GS carries a Bill of Materials and manufacturing costestimated at $178.96.
The iPod touch 4g has a better screen (960x640 px at 326 PPI vs 480x320 at 163 ppi) and and a faster processor (1GHz A8 vs 600MHz A8) than the iPhone 3GS. There is research online indicating that Apple generally prices its iDevices at double the cost of the BOM and manufacturing cost. That seems fair to me. They have an ungodly amount of R&D costs for that great iOS software, hundred of millions in marketing, the cost of the iStores with the 50 blue-shirted employees -- it's expensive. But...is it realistic to suggest that the iPod Touch 4G that has a better screen, faster processor, and more RAM than the 3GS has a BOM and assembly cost of $78.96 less?
I find it hard to believe that the cost of a cellular modem, ear piece, microphone, and larger battery accounts for that $78.96? I don't think so...
A group that can exist at a nexus between newspapers, websites, cable networks, and TV stations and think about the big picture and the future without the normal burdens associated with a business operating at a large scale...They are actively iterating and experimenting in many directions...
Nexus, iterating, big picture...my head is spinning.
For what it's worth, I have never been disappointed by anything -- electronic, clothes, home goods, whatever -- that I bought from Amazon that has more than 10 reviews and 4+ stars. And when you look at TVs on Amazon, you don't have to rely on 10 reviews -- mostTVs have hundreds of reviews to rely on.
From my understanding, those suffering from CF in California generally have their bills picked up by the state since no insurance plan could ever afford to treat CF patients. I believe this is under the state's Genetically Handicapped Persons Program.
But not having CF myself, I'm certainly no expert on the cost of care for it...
I could point the finger to crappy ATI support, or I could just pay $30 for a copy of FSX that will run just fine. One alternative would be to learn to program and contribute to FlightGear, but my hobby is flight simulation -- it's more effective for me to just pay the $30.
Someone asked what the difference between flightgear and MSFS is -- I'm providing my perspective that MSFS is a far-ahead of flightgear.
When Flightgear 2.0.0 was released, it was released with a new system that more-slickly rendered runway lights -- it used a so-called "point sprite approach." However, Flightgear's implementation of point sprites did not accommodate ATI's non-standard spec, so airports were 100%-dark for all those using ATI hardware. Who is at fault -- whether the Flightgear developers or ATI -- doesn't really matter to me. Why? It's fairly rare for other software vendors to ignore a quirk in a very popular piece of hardware -- ie. the runway lights have worked just fine in every MSFS version I have played.
And this went on for months with no word of a fix or a patch from Flightgear. In fact, I'm not sure that it's fixed even today.
I find that comment bizarre - how could anyone care whether some particular gun was in the game or not? Was the in-game gun controversial or overpowered or somesuch in BF2? Are there really MP5 fanboys out there? It boggles the mind.
The original tweet linked to above and held up as a source indicates that DICE licenses the guns in BF3. That response was prompted by the following question addressed to Matros:
@zh1nt0 Hi will it be possible to add Mp5 in with current game after B2K DLC comes out? Mp5 is my favorite weapon of all time.
Your source is to those that follow him known as generally highly uninformed. This tweet was likely just a lying excuse for why they left the MP5 out of the game.
The MP5 was in Battlefield 2. If DICE and EA put an effort into licensing the equipment in its games, it would have licensed it at the time. So why would it not be in BF3? Some might speculate that perhaps the relationship between H&K and DICE/EA deteriorated. If that were true, then why is the M416 in there? How about the G3? How about the MP7?
You have to remember that many of the people that care enough about Battlefield 3 to complain about BF3 featuring this weapon or that are likely those that don't have a lot of clout in the real world -- teenagers, mostly. Matros is not going to put a lot of effort into figuring out why the MP5 wasn't included -- he likely just walked over to his PR boss and asked what a plausible excuse was and used that.
I just did a quick google on "battlefield3 equipment licenses" and turned up nothing in the first three pages, so...probably not actually licensed.
As another note, there is a little disclaimer at the bottom of the recently-released BF3 trailers (such as this one) that reads:
"The depiction of any weapon or vehicle in this game does not indicate affiliation, sponsorship, or endorsement by any weapon or vehicle manufacturer."
Some might suggest that statement implies that there is some contract between EA and these equipment manufacturers spelling out the terms by which DICE may use such equipment, including that there be such a license. In fact, I'm inclined to suggest that this disclaimer is intended to set up a legal shield to avoid having any relationship at all with equipment manufacturers.
I've always wanted to play a serious World War II shooter from the perspective of a German soldier. I mean, we've stormed Omaha beach so many times... it'd be interesting to defend it. And we'd get to participate in some really unique content that hasn't been completely done to death by every shooter ever.
Have you heard of Battlefield 1942? It is one of the most popular World War 2 games ever and is a multiplayer game -- meaning that you can play both sides of the war. It even has a Omaha Beach map.
The Hams won't be the ones in the dark when infrastructure breaks down. They don;t need no (communications) infrastructure.
Not too long ago, there was a city-wide blackout here in town (in the United States). Once I made it the 3 miles home from work after an hour of fighting traffic, I found some D-batteries and and tuned up the only local station I could find that was on the air -- it was an AM station that is designated by the US Government as the county's station for emergency information in the event of nuclear catastrophe and the only station equipped with a generator and enough fuel to sail a fully-laden container ship to the moon. You would not believe the misinformation and the lack of information.
For hours, and hours, and hours -- there was no information whatsoever from the power company on why this power outage occurred and when it would be fixed. There was even misinformation -- someone claimed on the air that someone heard an explosion at a geothermal power plant that supplies some power to the city -- turned out to be untrue and stoked concerns of terrorism in those that heard it.
The very week after, I picked up a radio and finally put my license to use. Wish I had done it earlier -- would have been very nice to be able to chat with folks around the county on what was happening in their neck of the woods and what they heard. Some of the repeaters are battery or generator powered. I probably could have taken my handheld transceiver to a tall point in the neighborhood and done simplex on 5 watts 30 miles away.
I am kind of fond of my 817ND. It isn't necessarily the wattage you put out, but how good is your antenna. I also have a 897 and I get a bigger kick out of using my 817. Making contacts over 2000 miles away on 5 watts and a EF-10/20/40 antenna is kind of fun, especially when the DX contact picks your QRP call out of the pile-up.....
You make a fair point -- it is extremely satisfying to make contacts at 5 watts. If I were to be it another way, I would say that the FT-897D will go as low as 5 watts if you want it to, so you're not giving up the ability to go QRP with the 897D. On the used market, the 817ND retains its value unusually well -- I have found that the price difference between the FT-897D and the FT-817 to be around $150.
I would submit that the value of having a radio that can do both QRP and high-power is worth more than $150 -- the FT-897D strikes a better balance between base station power and portability than the FT-817ND.
Backpacking, definitely. There's a program called Summits On The Air (SOTA) where people hike up hills or mountains to activate them for contacts. Living in Colorado, there are plenty of those around! I figure it's good exercise and also allows me to play with things like portable/emergency operation, solar charging, mobile antennas, you name it, and get some exercise too which I very much need!
SOTA looks to be a very active organization -- in Europe. When you read forum posts from those involved in SOTA, you will find that the challenges of activating a peek in Europe differ greatly from operating from peaks in Colorado or elsewhere in the western US. For example, how are you going to mount a dipole above treeline? There's no trees from which to hang it.
However, for a dipole, you want it to be a half-wavelength above the ground. For the 20-meter band, you're looking at an antenna resonant on 20 meters when 32 feet long and operating 32 fee above the ground. How do you do that above treeline with something one or two people can carry in backpacks?
For 10 meters, mounting a dipole with two collapsible 15 foot fishing poles is popular and doable -- for 20 meters, I'm not so sure of the solution.
Anyway -- a lot of things to overcome. But this is the beauty of ham radio -- just hard enough to challenge you but not opaque enough to frustrate you. Would love to keep in touch with you about this if you would be willing to share your e-mail address.
The Icom 706 Mk II G is a decent mobile with much better DSP. You just need a PhD to be able to figure out how to operate it.
Interesting point. There are indeed complaints about the sound quality of the FT-897D; personally, I think it sounds great.
I'll concede that the 706mkiig is potentially the single most popular HF/VHF/UHF all-mode radio. It got that way for being a very solid performer both mobile (in a car) and sitting on your desk. If I were to install a transceiver in my car, the 706mkiig is the one I'd go with.
However, there are hams that have studied the relative power usage of the 706mkiig and the FT-897 and found that the 706mkiig tends to suck down quite a bit of power even while only receiving, making it a poor candidate for portable (extra-vehicular, shall we say?) activity, such as mountain topping:
The FT-897 can be configured to use minimal current on RX by turning the dial light to automatic, and disabling the DSP. Using headphones helps as well. In this mode, you can get down to 550-600mA, which is much lower than counterparts like the IC-706. In fact, other than the dedicated manpacks like the F-817, VX-1210 and military equivilants, only a few rigs like the Elecraft are more frugal.
Just looking at the specifications for the FT-897D and for the IC-706mkiig:
FT-897D:
Squelched: 600 mA (Approx.) Receive: 1 A
IC-706MKIIG:
Rx Standby: 1.8A Max Audio: 2.0 A
I don't know what the OP means by mountain topping -- does he mean he's going to drive his truck to a mountain top and transmit from there or does he mean to toss everything he needs in a backpack and hoof it to a high point? The radio he chooses depends on that distinction. If he's backpacking, I would say the FT-897d is the best choice of the two.
Next step is I want to get something portable like an FT-857 or 817 and do some mountaintopping. Good times!
Have to recommend the FT-897 wholeheartedly. The FT-897 is electrically identical to the FT-857. The FT-857 is the FT-897 in a smaller package intended for use in a car. As such, the FT-857 has fewer external buttons and knobs than the FT-897 so navigating it while it's on your desk or on top of a boulder could be more challenging than with the FT-897.
While the FT-817 is very popular among the mountain topping community, 5 watts is a frustratingly low level of power unless you're on CW. I'm not sure about the condition of your legs and back, but carrying a larger battery and a marginally heavier transceiver so that you can do 20 watts is probably worth the effort. Further, the FT-897 will do a better job on your desk than either the FT-817 or the FT-857 will do.
I bought a 897 used on craigslist for about $650. Don't even bother with the retail price tag -- Yaesu and ICOM both build their gear to last.
As a result, there's a new void appearing among people who love to tinker. Amateur radio is a great outlet for that. The equipment is complex enough to enjoy working with but simple enough that you can work on it yourself.
Just recently I picked up a DC power supply built primarily for amateur use -- it was amusing to see that Astron included a print-out of the electrical schematic.
Slashdot Mirror
you can't fly to cuba from the US directly anyway, so canadian flights for example must go around US airspace.
Flights between Canada and Cuba are not required to travel around US air space. That is not at all required.
One example is a recent Air Canada flight from Toronto to Havana. I'm not sure how long this link will work beyond today, but the flight clearly travels over
New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Florida.
I would hope so...
These are very common in Arizona and So-Cal. On each of the 5 and 15 freeways between San Diego and the LA-area, there is a permanent checkpoints in periodic use by the Border Patrol almost precisely 70 miles away from the border. I wonder if there is something special about the 70 mile mark.
From the Terms of Service:
6. Delivery Confirmation
Because many instances may occur at your delivery address that is beyond our control, you agree that any delivery confirmation provided by the carrier is deemed sufficient proof of delivery to the card holder, even without a signature.
So let's say that UPS claims to deliver it to you but takes no signature -- and the box promptly walks away. From the language above, it sounds like you have the responsibility to hassle with UPS for an insurance claim.
And on the Chargeback Policy in case you decide that it wasn't your fault that a device didn't exactly isn't on your doorstep when you get home:
7. Chargeback Policy
All references to a “chargeback” refer to a reversal of a credit/debit card charge placed on www.ybuy.com. There is no reason for a chargeback to ever be filed. If a credit is due, simply contact us and we will gladly issue it. Unnecessary chargebacks are theft and can be prosecuted. If you feel that your credit/debit card was used fraudulently on www.ybuy.com, please contact us for immediate resolution at support@ybuy.com.
YOU AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT CHARGEBACK ANY AMOUNTS CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT/DEBIT CARD ON THIS SITE. IF YOU CHARGEBACK A CREDIT/DEBIT CARD CHARGE FOR A PAYMENT INITIATED BY YOU, YOU AGREE THAT THIS SITE MAY RECOVER THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGEBACK IN ADDITION TO $ BY ANY MEANS DEMED NECESSARY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO RECHARGING YOUR CREDIT/DEBIT CARD OR HAVING THE AMOUNT RECOVERED BY A COLLECTION AGENCY.
Okay -- I wasn't aware that this was one of those internal "border patrol" checkpoints. Should have RTFA.
If you try to take drugs through a border checkpoint, you're going to get caught. Should this surprise anyone?
Price for non-contract device is exactly the same as what you pay on contract, which is what the market will bear. The only difference is whether you pay it all upfront, or with a series of monthly payments that are folded into your service bill.
How many people do you know that buy unlocked non-contract iPhone's? Practically no one. People buy unlocked non-contract phones, just not iPhones. My argument is that the price of the unlocked, non-contract iPhone's is higher than the market will bear to discourage people from buying the device through AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon -- companies with whom Apple has lucrative distribution and marketing agreements. I'm speculating that those agreements require Apple to sell the iPhone for a higher-than-market-value price.
On the Apple Website, a contract-free (although not carrier- unlocked) 8GB iPhone 3GS is priced at $375. [apple.com]
Indeed, it is carrier-unlocked. My mistake!
On the Apple Website, a contract-free (although not carrier- unlocked) 8GB iPhone 3GS is priced at $375.
A 8GB iPod Touch 4G is priced at $199.
The entire iPhone 3GS carries a Bill of Materials and manufacturing costestimated at $178.96.
The iPod touch 4g has a better screen (960x640 px at 326 PPI vs 480x320 at 163 ppi) and and a faster processor (1GHz A8 vs 600MHz A8) than the iPhone 3GS. There is research online indicating that Apple generally prices its iDevices at double the cost of the BOM and manufacturing cost. That seems fair to me. They have an ungodly amount of R&D costs for that great iOS software, hundred of millions in marketing, the cost of the iStores with the 50 blue-shirted employees -- it's expensive. But...is it realistic to suggest that the iPod Touch 4G that has a better screen, faster processor, and more RAM than the 3GS has a BOM and assembly cost of $78.96 less?
I find it hard to believe that the cost of a cellular modem, ear piece, microphone, and larger battery accounts for that $78.96? I don't think so...
A group that can exist at a nexus between newspapers, websites, cable networks, and TV stations and think about the big picture and the future without the normal burdens associated with a business operating at a large scale...They are actively iterating and experimenting in many directions...
Nexus, iterating, big picture...my head is spinning.
For what it's worth, I have never been disappointed by anything -- electronic, clothes, home goods, whatever -- that I bought from Amazon that has more than 10 reviews and 4+ stars. And when you look at TVs on Amazon, you don't have to rely on 10 reviews -- most TVs have hundreds of reviews to rely on.
From my understanding, those suffering from CF in California generally have their bills picked up by the state since no insurance plan could ever afford to treat CF patients. I believe this is under the state's Genetically Handicapped Persons Program.
But not having CF myself, I'm certainly no expert on the cost of care for it...
Point your finger to crappy ATI support.
I could point the finger to crappy ATI support, or I could just pay $30 for a copy of FSX that will run just fine. One alternative would be to learn to program and contribute to FlightGear, but my hobby is flight simulation -- it's more effective for me to just pay the $30.
Someone asked what the difference between flightgear and MSFS is -- I'm providing my perspective that MSFS is a far-ahead of flightgear.
When Flightgear 2.0.0 was released, it was released with a new system that more-slickly rendered runway lights -- it used a so-called "point sprite approach." However, Flightgear's implementation of point sprites did not accommodate ATI's non-standard spec, so airports were 100%-dark for all those using ATI hardware. Who is at fault -- whether the Flightgear developers or ATI -- doesn't really matter to me. Why? It's fairly rare for other software vendors to ignore a quirk in a very popular piece of hardware -- ie. the runway lights have worked just fine in every MSFS version I have played.
And this went on for months with no word of a fix or a patch from Flightgear. In fact, I'm not sure that it's fixed even today.
I find that comment bizarre - how could anyone care whether some particular gun was in the game or not? Was the in-game gun controversial or overpowered or somesuch in BF2? Are there really MP5 fanboys out there? It boggles the mind.
The original tweet linked to above and held up as a source indicates that DICE licenses the guns in BF3. That response was prompted by the following question addressed to Matros:
@zh1nt0 Hi will it be possible to add Mp5 in with current game after B2K DLC comes out? Mp5 is my favorite weapon of all time.
The horse's mouth: http://twitter.com/#!/zh1nt0/status/137569596440973313
Your source is to those that follow him known as generally highly uninformed. This tweet was likely just a lying excuse for why they left the MP5 out of the game.
The MP5 was in Battlefield 2. If DICE and EA put an effort into licensing the equipment in its games, it would have licensed it at the time. So why would it not be in BF3? Some might speculate that perhaps the relationship between H&K and DICE/EA deteriorated. If that were true, then why is the M416 in there? How about the G3? How about the MP7?
You have to remember that many of the people that care enough about Battlefield 3 to complain about BF3 featuring this weapon or that are likely those that don't have a lot of clout in the real world -- teenagers, mostly. Matros is not going to put a lot of effort into figuring out why the MP5 wasn't included -- he likely just walked over to his PR boss and asked what a plausible excuse was and used that.
I just did a quick google on "battlefield3 equipment licenses" and turned up nothing in the first three pages, so...probably not actually licensed.
As another note, there is a little disclaimer at the bottom of the recently-released BF3 trailers (such as this one) that reads:
"The depiction of any weapon or vehicle in this game does not indicate affiliation, sponsorship, or endorsement by any weapon or vehicle manufacturer."
Some might suggest that statement implies that there is some contract between EA and these equipment manufacturers spelling out the terms by which DICE may use such equipment, including that there be such a license. In fact, I'm inclined to suggest that this disclaimer is intended to set up a legal shield to avoid having any relationship at all with equipment manufacturers.
All weapons appearing in the game (sp and mp) are licensed
Oh really? Can you provide a source on that?
I've always wanted to play a serious World War II shooter from the perspective of a German soldier. I mean, we've stormed Omaha beach so many times... it'd be interesting to defend it. And we'd get to participate in some really unique content that hasn't been completely done to death by every shooter ever.
Have you heard of Battlefield 1942? It is one of the most popular World War 2 games ever and is a multiplayer game -- meaning that you can play both sides of the war. It even has a Omaha Beach map.
The Hams won't be the ones in the dark when infrastructure breaks down. They don;t need no (communications) infrastructure.
Not too long ago, there was a city-wide blackout here in town (in the United States). Once I made it the 3 miles home from work after an hour of fighting traffic, I found some D-batteries and and tuned up the only local station I could find that was on the air -- it was an AM station that is designated by the US Government as the county's station for emergency information in the event of nuclear catastrophe and the only station equipped with a generator and enough fuel to sail a fully-laden container ship to the moon. You would not believe the misinformation and the lack of information.
For hours, and hours, and hours -- there was no information whatsoever from the power company on why this power outage occurred and when it would be fixed. There was even misinformation -- someone claimed on the air that someone heard an explosion at a geothermal power plant that supplies some power to the city -- turned out to be untrue and stoked concerns of terrorism in those that heard it.
The very week after, I picked up a radio and finally put my license to use. Wish I had done it earlier -- would have been very nice to be able to chat with folks around the county on what was happening in their neck of the woods and what they heard. Some of the repeaters are battery or generator powered. I probably could have taken my handheld transceiver to a tall point in the neighborhood and done simplex on 5 watts 30 miles away.
I am kind of fond of my 817ND. It isn't necessarily the wattage you put out, but how good is your antenna. I also have a 897 and I get a bigger kick out of using my 817. Making contacts over 2000 miles away on 5 watts and a EF-10/20/40 antenna is kind of fun, especially when the DX contact picks your QRP call out of the pile-up.....
You make a fair point -- it is extremely satisfying to make contacts at 5 watts. If I were to be it another way, I would say that the FT-897D will go as low as 5 watts if you want it to, so you're not giving up the ability to go QRP with the 897D. On the used market, the 817ND retains its value unusually well -- I have found that the price difference between the FT-897D and the FT-817 to be around $150.
I would submit that the value of having a radio that can do both QRP and high-power is worth more than $150 -- the FT-897D strikes a better balance between base station power and portability than the FT-817ND.
Backpacking, definitely. There's a program called Summits On The Air (SOTA) where people hike up hills or mountains to activate them for contacts. Living in Colorado, there are plenty of those around! I figure it's good exercise and also allows me to play with things like portable/emergency operation, solar charging, mobile antennas, you name it, and get some exercise too which I very much need!
SOTA looks to be a very active organization -- in Europe. When you read forum posts from those involved in SOTA, you will find that the challenges of activating a peek in Europe differ greatly from operating from peaks in Colorado or elsewhere in the western US. For example, how are you going to mount a dipole above treeline? There's no trees from which to hang it.
However, for a dipole, you want it to be a half-wavelength above the ground. For the 20-meter band, you're looking at an antenna resonant on 20 meters when 32 feet long and operating 32 fee above the ground. How do you do that above treeline with something one or two people can carry in backpacks?
For 10 meters, mounting a dipole with two collapsible 15 foot fishing poles is popular and doable -- for 20 meters, I'm not so sure of the solution.
Anyway -- a lot of things to overcome. But this is the beauty of ham radio -- just hard enough to challenge you but not opaque enough to frustrate you. Would love to keep in touch with you about this if you would be willing to share your e-mail address.
The Icom 706 Mk II G is a decent mobile with much better DSP. You just need a PhD to be able to figure out how to operate it.
Interesting point. There are indeed complaints about the sound quality of the FT-897D; personally, I think it sounds great.
I'll concede that the 706mkiig is potentially the single most popular HF/VHF/UHF all-mode radio. It got that way for being a very solid performer both mobile (in a car) and sitting on your desk. If I were to install a transceiver in my car, the 706mkiig is the one I'd go with.
However, there are hams that have studied the relative power usage of the 706mkiig and the FT-897 and found that the 706mkiig tends to suck down quite a bit of power even while only receiving, making it a poor candidate for portable (extra-vehicular, shall we say?) activity, such as mountain topping:
The FT-897 can be configured to use minimal current on RX by turning the dial light to automatic, and disabling the DSP. Using headphones helps as well. In this mode, you can get down to 550-600mA, which is much lower than counterparts like the IC-706. In fact, other than the dedicated manpacks like the F-817, VX-1210 and military equivilants, only a few rigs like the Elecraft are more frugal.
Just looking at the specifications for the FT-897D and for the IC-706mkiig:
FT-897D:
Squelched: 600 mA (Approx.)
Receive: 1 A
IC-706MKIIG:
Rx Standby: 1.8A
Max Audio: 2.0 A
I don't know what the OP means by mountain topping -- does he mean he's going to drive his truck to a mountain top and transmit from there or does he mean to toss everything he needs in a backpack and hoof it to a high point? The radio he chooses depends on that distinction. If he's backpacking, I would say the FT-897d is the best choice of the two.
Next step is I want to get something portable like an FT-857 or 817 and do some mountaintopping. Good times!
Have to recommend the FT-897 wholeheartedly. The FT-897 is electrically identical to the FT-857. The FT-857 is the FT-897 in a smaller package intended for use in a car. As such, the FT-857 has fewer external buttons and knobs than the FT-897 so navigating it while it's on your desk or on top of a boulder could be more challenging than with the FT-897.
While the FT-817 is very popular among the mountain topping community, 5 watts is a frustratingly low level of power unless you're on CW. I'm not sure about the condition of your legs and back, but carrying a larger battery and a marginally heavier transceiver so that you can do 20 watts is probably worth the effort. Further, the FT-897 will do a better job on your desk than either the FT-817 or the FT-857 will do.
I bought a 897 used on craigslist for about $650. Don't even bother with the retail price tag -- Yaesu and ICOM both build their gear to last.
Not being funny, but why not just send an e-mail?
Just like any other hobby, it's a way to pass the time. Why hunt or fish if you can just buy food at the store?
As a result, there's a new void appearing among people who love to tinker. Amateur radio is a great outlet for that. The equipment is complex enough to enjoy working with but simple enough that you can work on it yourself.
Just recently I picked up a DC power supply built primarily for amateur use -- it was amusing to see that Astron included a print-out of the electrical schematic.