Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)

Thirded, I used hamstudy to pass all of the tests and after a few years on the air I finally know enough to understand the ARRL manuals. I'm reading the extra manual and it's pretty incredible, they walk you through the theory of building a transceiver starting at doping silicone to make semiconductors.

Look, a decent Yaesu costs 5x as much, and the Baofeng fully fulfills the role I recommended it for - which is to get a beginner started quickly. The entire point was that you don't need to take part in the pay to win game.

Noone said Baofengs are high-quality devices. But that's kind of the point, and it is easily good enough to get onto a local relay to get some easy satisfaction and practice the non-technical aspects (like: err, what did he say? and what am I supposed to say now?). Since it's only $35, I own one and have have used a couple of different models. I've done QSO's (connections) over repeaters around 25km away with these from rural but non-elevated positions without any problems. (Ok, I probably used an antenna that costs $10 extra.)

Besides, what's so interesting about 70cm/2m handhelds that makes getting an expensive one worth it anyway? Spending the money on a HF (around 3MHz-30MHz, often a bit more) transceiver seems like a much more interesting choice (long distance, antenna building, atmospheric conditions etc.). (This does not mean there are no interesting things to do on 70cm/2m. But even with a Baofeng you can e.g. work a satellite with the right antenna.)

Yes, you're relying on the superior equipment and position on the other end, but so what, if it works? Noone tells the QRP (low power) crowd to get an amplifier either, and certainly noone complains about the very crude DIY designs most people build. It's ok.

I see your point, but the argument is that if you're just getting started, $30 is a much easier pill to swallow.

As for your tests on the Baofengs, I'd be interested to see your sources and the exact models tested.

As a counterpoint: Here's a video of an Official Baofeng UV-5R being stress tested, and demonstrating how resilient the front-end is: https://youtu.be/KqVq2G9dY5Q

I don't think that a Yaesu HT would continue working after running without an antenna, but I wouldn't want to try it myself.

Baofengs are terrible but they're cheap and extremely accessible. Also they provide enough room for experimentation with antennas and basic theory.

Not all equipment has to be the best equipment. Sometimes "OK" is enough.

Check out some of their newer hardware. The UV-5X3 doesn't have the spurious emissions problem common in previous models.

Granted, the included antenna is garbage. I ended up building a j-pole and picking up a signalstick for mine. It works quite well with both.

Doesn't Icom make an entry-level 2m radio anymore?

I have an Icom sitting around somewhere that I am pretty sure I got brand-new for under $100 back in 2004-2005. It's pretty primitive, sure, and I don't think it even came with a rechargeable battery at that price (but you can drop eneloops into it and it's just fine), but I suspect it doesn't produce nearly as much QRM as a Baofeng.

If Icom/Yaesu have stopped making entry level radios, shame on them.

Yes, Baofengs are the bottom of the barrel, but they are an excellent way to get someone into the hobby. If they decide they don't care they are out $40 instead of hundreds. I only had Baofengs for a few years and was able to join in the rag chew on the local repeater.

Fast forward a few years and I've graduated to a Kenwood in my truck and a Kenwood HT with all the bells and whistles. Are they better? Of course they are, but the UV-82HP was plenty to get started with.

Dunno, pretty commonly I see reviews where cheap baofeng's reach repeaters better than more expensive Yaesu radios. Personally my ft-70dr doesn't hit distant repeaters as well as my baofeng. Is it a nicer radio in many ways, but not particularly good for distant repeaters. The yaesu does seem better in noisy environments though.

The menu system is MUCH harder to use and MUCH more inconsistent. Drives me nuts that when you find a menu, spin the selector to make a selection, to select you hit the PTT, sometimes you hit f, sometimes you hit V/M. Worse is often the manual doesn't even mention that part.

The QRP kits are cheap (and some very clever!) but QRP operation can be very challenging as a way to start in.

Personally, I think an inexpensive 10m rig is the way to go, although if you live in a place with a decent 2m or 70cm repeater network there's an argument to be made for getting a cheap HT first. There's almost an assumption in most clubs that everyone has a 2m HT (e.g. talk-in channels for events and stuff).

A club that I joined years back handed me an old Radio Shack 10m SSB on my second meeting, it was sort of the "village bicycle" radio that everyone got to use until they bought their own. That was a fine way to start; I think it put out 10-12 watts or so (I'm dead sure internally it shared a lot of parts with some CB radio they must have sold at the same time), but that's enough to get a feel for things without too much frustration, even if your antenna isn't optimal.

Desired by... the same people as the ones communicating? In the majority of cases or in the minority?

...no? I can't read your HTTP communication merely by being with propagation distance. I have to actually have control over the communication channel. Which I don't.

I'm well aware it's by design, I'm not sure how that implies it can't be a downside.

The fact that it's by design makes it an upside?

I agree with you on all counts—I feel like you guys are massively misunderstanding my comment and somehow taking it as an attack on the notion of ham radio, as if somehow I feel like it's some kind of evil. I don't. I never did. It can be a great, useful, awesome thing. Where did I deny this? All I was saying was that "no downsides except the equipment cost" is emphatically not an accurate picture—and I feel accurate pictures are important regardless of how awesome something is. In this case it matters because I don't want some poor soul to read this, go buy the equipment, and then discover (hopefully not the hard way) that his (say) encrypted communication is illegal, and everything he says must be public to the whole world. I don't get why everyone here is so quick to extrapolate from "X isn't perfect, it has tradeoffs Y/Z" to "X utterly sucks, I hate it, and it needs to stop existing". It isn't helpful; it's a real turn-off that just sucks the energy out of what could be a more meaningful/nuanced/informative discussion.

Except on 7.255Mhz. Stay away from those lids

Yes. That ^^^

I rarely talk on mine, and the folks who are really into it aren't generally the type i'd want to hang with, but i want to be of service to my community in an emergency, and i want to be able to communicate with others in an emergency for purely selfish reasons.

also, it's kinda cool to be in a strange area, start talking, and find locals who can point you to a good place to eat, or spend the night, or whatever. ;)

I like it for the electronics and hacking - like I said I've got an Amateur Extra class license and a 2x1 call sign, and I have literally NEVER keyed up - not even once.

Indeed. If you're athletic or want to get there, I highly recommend checking out Summits On The Air (SOTA). It's all about climbing mountains with backpack- or goat-portable ham gear and building clever but lightweight antennas on the summit for hasty conversations. It's a blast and the people are almost universally interesting and nice. The total opposite of the guy with the fake police car and yellow flashing light bar on the roof.