Yaesu FTM-400XDR Tools and programming

[Romer]

When I got my 7800 we had a program load going around the club. We all bought the same tool and posted up additions to the file

Anyone have a memory load for this radio? What tool do you use to program?

 

[Romer]

here is the last load I used on my 7800 for reference

 

[DaveInDenver]

Yaesu gives you the software I thought. How the memory works and is organized a different on the FTM-400 so you'll have to see when you open the ADMS-7 software what options you have to import other configurations. Chirp doesn't support the FTM-400 so not sure how easy it is to convert from one to the other.

https://www.yaesu.com/indexVS.cfm?c...49&encProdID=227201D29C822AEFF8482F3367495319

I used the SD card to program my FTM-400 and I was doing that with a hastily built command line hex editing tool since RT Systems didn't yet have software for it.

 

[Mendocino]

@DaveinDenver, can you use the Chirp configuration for Yaesu on the FTM-400? It appears to be supported.
https://chirp.danplanet.com/issues/1469

 

[DaveInDenver]

I'll have to read through the notes. I thought there were hang ups in reverse engineering protocols and since the software is free not much demand? Export/import using CSV perhaps.

 

[nakman]

Well for the sake of argument, or perhaps just the pleasure of starting one, I have become against the practice of mass uploading a bunch of repeater data.. and if someone is relatively new to the hobby, would further say this is a terrible idea.

Every radio I have bought used has come with stuff that I find to be confusing, in the wrong order, incorrect, or just not necessary. For example the tone on Ken's file for Colorado Connection is now 88.5hz, not 123..

If you know your radio, it takes about 1 red light to add a repeater and save it. You should know how to do this. Also know what those repeaters are and what those nicknames are, and decide in what order they are in. If you want to save memory banks and all that I guess that's a fine use of your time for me I don't care to learn it, I'd rather force myself to program new channels in the old fashioned way, and only keep on hand what is needed or useful. I can easily load a few up to prepare for a trip... then remove them. I could also look in a repeater book and get what I need, should I find myself somehow air dropped into different state with no cell coverage and I was stuck or hurt or something.

I helped program a bunch of people's Yaesu's way back when, and also a bunch of Bao UV-3's and UV-5's... and I think I did all those people a disservice. Most came back to me at some point because they forgot which repeater to use, or couldn't access the Breck repeater after it changed, etc. Also when scanning they'd run through all the repeaters in the western hemisphere followed by every simplex channel we know including every Cruise Moab frequency... then miss something. All they really needed was 146.460 and 145.310 to be in the moment that day. I have also witnessed one of them being asked to assist with someone else with the same radio, like "hey you also have a FT78000, I can't seem to hit the Connection, can you help?" only to respond "man I don't know how all that works, Dave programmed mine and I don't want to mess it up." yes, true story. sad.

I also think a lot of people have become less engaged with the hobby because of how easily the answers were handed to them... It's like buying a turnkey rock buggy, the first day you can't point and shoot up a wall you park it back on the trailer, and first instinct is call the guy back you bought it from because you think the front locker isn't working. yet you don't even know which wire is for the air compressor. So rather than dive into it, you just park the rig or only run easy trails.. you probably forgot to turn the hubs.

Not saying we should all buy boards and diodes & start building our own radios, but if you're going to rely on a tool like this, no different from a hi lift jack, first aid kid, winch, you should own up to a basic understanding of how to operate it, and be able to dial in and save a new repeater.

 

[DaveInDenver]

The age-old derogatory name is "appliance operator" for a ham who regards radios simply as tools. We have indeed created many in that way Tim. But lets also remember that in the fog here a lot of people didn't want to be hams either. So I'm not sure we don't have a some continuing responsibility to help. I do think that if a driver does not want to be a ham we also shouldn't force the issue. My hang-up here is why then do I need to still use CBs if someone doesn't want to use ham? Was there some memo that said "Thou must use CB whilst 4x4ing." Any communication is done by common agreement. I'd even rather just use FRS radios than CBs at this point. The world continues to spin and technology evolves. I know, I know, old FJ40s are "real" while a 200 is a wannabe. But even that at some point people realized internal combustion trumped horses and burros for carrying junk on dirt roads, so there isn't one ideal forever frozen in time. Things must and will change so embracing new isn't always bad. Heck, VHF FM has been around since the 1970s, so we're not even really talking about cutting edge radios. Although they did take until the 1980s to really filter down to a price cheapskate hams could afford.

 

[nakman]

I wouldn't want to see Ham radio become the new requirement for wheeling, I'd actually be against that proposal for an event like Cruise Moab. CB is the default because it's old and well known, and has a low barrier to entry. However yes today FRS is likely better quality and cheaper. Perhaps it's worthy of consideration as we evolve.. to move that CM requirement to FRS.. .seems more practical in this day and age. I have been on runs where Ham is required.. and it was great, yes. but that's not Cruise Moab.

My point above though was just along the lines of being an enabler of another's oblivion, to the point where it hurts the effort rather than helping it. Just like any computery thing, if you know less about it you're less likely to mess with it, and I've seen this first hand. Sure, huge strides have been made in the last 10 years with adoption, and supporting that transition, it is beyond a doubt it's the superior communication tool. And the stories of the benefits are endless at this point... my first one likely starts in 2007 on Tomichi pass.

But when my radio stopped transmitting in the 80 years ago I was able to find the short in the coax because I put that wire there, and knew where to look. When I couldn't hit the Connection anymore a few years ago I knew what sequence of buttons to push to toggle the code frequency. And when the day comes that I struggle to learn APRS I will also own those reasons, it won't be because "Andy programmed it wrong." I suspect that some of those radios we programmed are just barely turned on anymore, and most are now full of bad data and an operator who is unable or unwilling to fix it.

 

[Romer]

Excellent Point Tim. Maybe rather than programming, we have a sticky thread with how to find the repeaters info and leave it to the operator to enter it in

I must admit I can't remember the last time I used any of the programming info. probably because I am not as aware of what was in there as I should be. If I programmed it in it would be because I thought I needed it

 

[DaveInDenver]

I guess I feel an obligation when perhaps I shouldn't.

So defaulting to CB is just because that's the way it's always been so it must always be. I think in the modern era that if we must have a lowest common denominator then do FRS. CB still requires some level of attentiveness, tuning your antenna and dealing with interference and radios last updated during the Reagan administration.

So I don't see the justification. If you want to require a system that is pre-channelized but with the need to tune external antennas then GMRS is no more technically demanding and gets you FM and 50 watts, too. Plus an antenna 6 inches tall.

 

[Mendocino]

I started with Dave's programming and have modified it heavily. I found this to be of huge value. IMO, we don't all have to be "Makers" (but personally I totally love HAM, but am not very good at it.)

Some people just don't have much interest in knowing the inner working of the tool. Do you feel bad that you can't repair a mobile phone today? While I'm not suggesting we go to all black boxes, I'm acknowledging that some people don't geek out over HAM and I would rather see people operating than not operating because they don't know where to start.

 

[Romer]

Thinking about this more I see value to both sides. My Ham has been set and forget for many years now. With the new Radio I am excited to learn new features. Having a base set to program would be helpful, but I also need to do more to understand the list and how to program individual items.

 

[AimCOTaco]

No doubt, even programming radios with software for myself can be a negative in the sense of me not learning the radio interface as well as I should.

I think the happy medium should be that you program in all the stuff you really need by hand, the hard way, with the manual and a list of must haves so that you learn the radio. Then later when you realize you screwed something up and want to move a chunk or add/change a chunk you use the software (and learn that).

In practice with a new APRS radio you'll have PLENTY of stuff to learn to keep you off of Daves "appliance operator" list even if you cheat on programming your frequencies.

Have fun guys!

Oh, and a lot of the time; "Andy programmed it wrong" is exactly what I'm running into

 

[Stuckinthe80s]

I'm good with blaming Andy for my problems.

 

[Stuckinthe80s]

At the risk of derailing this thread even further from it's original intent, here is something I found when discussing this very topic for CM.

 

[AimCOTaco]

Nic,
Do you know more about this data? Since FRS does not allow for any external antennas I'm not clear on what was used for FRS in the tests? Assume the radios that can use mobile antennas did in the test and those with fixed on unit antennas stayed that way?

Definitely some good discussion in here about alternative systems and the best go to for lowest common denominator coms. I really dig ham but recognize it is not and should not be for everyone. Ham is intended for learning, hacking, research, etc and the flexible nature of it makes it much more complex in practice.

It's also worth keeping in mind that CB and FRS are legally structured to keep communication distances short to prevent saturation and allow for many user groups without overlap. That's why you can't power up and in the case of FRS can't hack the antenna system. GMRS is more useful with greater power, repeaters, flexible antenna systems, etc but cost of entry still rivals ham when you throw in the $70 license. I'll gladly add GMRS when it's more prevalent but I feel it lacks adoption so far.

Nic, I look forward to messing up some of your APRS gear soon bud

 

[DaveInDenver]

Meh, charts like that don't mean anything. Much too general.

BTW, I didn't mean appliance operator as necessarily derogatory. Amateur radio can be as much or as little as you want. What might be the frustration is it's not supposed to be hand's off, though. Even geeky hams rarely build their own radios and other than opening them for illegal out of band use I'd expect you could count on one hand the number of hams who even own a soldering iron to modify a radio. So the appliance operator-ness of each of us is relative. The average ham 30 years ago would look like a very technical one now.

But neither are CB or GMRS hands off. You need to tune antennas and be aware of interference you might cause. The part that is restricted is the spectrum allocation and emission types. The FCC is explicit in not using CB for DX, which implicitly means they know some people are RF savvy. They used to require a license similar to GMRS, where you'd get a call sign because of the potential for misuse like that. They just gave up enforcement of it.

 

[nakman]

If you really wanted to push this forward, the next big step would be a pilot run. Pull together a dozen cheap FRS radios (or GMRS) and hand them out at the start of your run, tell everyone to default to this com & see how it works, leaving the CB's as backup. Then let the group report how it went, compared to yesterday's run on the CB, etc.

 

[Stuckinthe80s]

Nic,
Do you know more about this data? Since FRS does not allow for any external antennas I'm not clear on what was used for FRS in the tests? Assume the radios that can use mobile antennas did in the test and those with fixed on unit antennas stayed that way?

Definitely some good discussion in here about alternative systems and the best go to for lowest common denominator coms. I really dig ham but recognize it is not and should not be for everyone. Ham is intended for learning, hacking, research, etc and the flexible nature of it makes it much more complex in practice.

It's also worth keeping in mind that CB and FRS are legally structured to keep communication distances short to prevent saturation and allow for many user groups without overlap. That's why you can't power up and in the case of FRS can't hack the antenna system. GMRS is more useful with greater power, repeaters, flexible antenna systems, etc but cost of entry still rivals ham when you throw in the $70 license. I'll gladly add GMRS when it's more prevalent but I feel it lacks adoption so far.

Nic, I look forward to messing up some of your APRS gear soon bud

There wasn't a lot of detail in the testing and I realize it is still pretty subjective. To be clear, I'm hitching my horse to the HAM wagon and will maintain my CB in my truck for when it is required. Also, I'll probably dabble in the other forms because I'm a tech geek and why not set fire to my money?

And I'll definitely be hitting you up soon on the APRS. I've asked Santa for a mobilink! I'm sure I'll be able to persuade your help with a case of Tank 7!?!? (even if I partake in the offering)

 

[Stuckinthe80s]

If you really wanted to push this forward, the next big step would be a pilot run. Pull together a dozen cheap FRS radios (or GMRS) and hand them out at the start of your run, tell everyone to default to this com & see how it works, leaving the CB's as backup. Then let the group report how it went, compared to yesterday's run on the CB, etc.

I like this approach and will definitely keep it in mind for an excuse for a club run. I know Matt @MTSN has most of the available options for comms and I'm sure he'll be up for it.