# Which HF transceivers can be operated remotely via Ethernet port without a host computer?

What HF transceivers will support remote operation without requiring a computer at the remote station?

Here's a start:

• ICOM 7610

• Flex Radios (not sure which)

Any others?

• There's two small issues with your question: the first one is that this actually asks for device recommendations, and that's off-topic, but the more content-wise interesting is that this will quickly derail: What is a "computer" at the remote station? Your two examples are technically SDRs with small computers in a box. You can buy a box and a small computer and do that yourself. Then, you get all the permutations of RTL-SDR+upverter|hackrf|USRP B2xx/N2xx/X3xx|Lime|… + RaspberryPi|Odroid|Intel NUC|ITX boards|… OR things like RedPitaya (indeed a very interesting device here) or Ettus E310. Mar 5 '18 at 16:46
• I am going to answer this as if this wasn't asking for a recommendation - instead as if it is a query about the technology from someone who wants to understand the issues involved. Mar 5 '18 at 21:48
• An interesting question is whether a well-armored Raspberry Pi with some sort of added remote or auto reboot capability would be more or less reliable than an HF transceiver with an ethernet-capable embedded processor/SBC. Mar 6 '18 at 19:12
• I have almost a dozen of them networked by WiFi, working with a Ubuntu host to produce SDsolarBlog.com/montage - armored by scp and RSA passwordless authentication in the wild, as I update the site at Bluehost. I love the fact that they can act as host computers to program Arduinos - My combination is called a "Piduino" - so this would definitely be defined as a "host computer" -- but more about the OP, the Linux software environment is not supported by most of these radio mfgrs. So it would have to be home-brew. Not to say it is a bad idea. But Echolink would be much easier. Mar 7 '18 at 20:05

## 1 Answer

As to the second part of your question I would add the IC-7200, which I studied recently.

The Yaesu FT-450D has a serial port which I use with a USB converter to send commands like channel programming, and in fact has a program which duplicates the front panel on-screen. So Ethernet is not required for control of the FT-450D.

As to the primary question, the short answer is that there isn't any such thing, as worded in the OP.

Here is why: Ethernet itself is simply a cable with specific wiring. In order to use it effectively you need devices that can send the proper voltages and data pulses to communicate data.

Therefore, in order to actually do anything with it there must be a device on the other end of the cable sending commands to the radio.

Now we get down to the definition of a "host computer"

For instance, an Arduino with an Ethernet shield could be used to send commands to such a radio. (Not saying this would be easy).

Arduinos are classified as "microcontrollers" - yet by my definition I would call them little computers since they are programmable.

Raspberry Pi is a small inexpensive Linux computer with a built-in Ethernet port and could potentially be used to send commands to such radios. (Again, not saying it would be easy - Linux software for these radios is not well-developed)

In short, my opinion (and practice) is that to get the most out of any kind of data connection with such radios, what you will find most useful is a Windows computer.

It can be a small laptop (like I use with my FT-450D). I run Windows 7 and the software works great. The computer came from Walmart for \$88 on rollback - an HP 3115m. But then I added a Solid-State Drive and topped off the memory, plus bought the ADMS-450 programming software, bringing the cost up to a couple of hundred in total.

I am very glad to be able to program my radio this way. it is well worth it just to be able to program the channels. I very rarely use the full front-panel program. The radio is right next to me so I do not need any kind of remote control.

I don't quite understand the motivation for asking this question, but it probably isn't money since these are expensive radios to start with.

In my case I saved a couple of hundred by buying the FT-450D instead of the IC-7200, then used that savings to pay for the laptop.

You are on the right track investigating these issues. But it would make the most sense to use the full potential of what you pay for, IMHO.

Hope this answer helps.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN IN COMMENTS THAT ARE NOT IN THE OP: The control point is 4200 km from the transceiver.

Answer: There are many examples of doing this such as Echolink.

The rest of my answer stands, as it would definitely require a computer at the control point, even if all it runs is Echolink software or a browser.

There is no such radio that can do this without a computer at the control point(s) and to provide the Internet tunnel(s).

• To clarify, my motivation is that my remote station is 4200 km away from my home station. (My remote site is in on the Atlantic in Nova Scotia, but I live in Alberta). I wish to avoid the use of a separate computer because, as an experienced user ( I have 2 Raspberry Pi's, 1 Beaglebone, 1 Linux box, 4 Windows boxes & 1Mac), and work full-time as a computer systems analyst) I know they are a PITA as they require care and attention, such as rebooting, patching, not to mention the dreaded BSOD. I need a solution that will minimize the possibility of system failure. Mar 6 '18 at 17:59
• -1 : Using a windows laptop remotely from over 1000 miles away seem like a terrible idea. Mar 6 '18 at 19:08
• I use Echolink from my laptop all the time and it works just fine, without any concern about distance. Even the furthest sites are only a few ms away by fiber.Clearly, the downvotes are from N00Bs who have never actually done this. Mar 9 '18 at 21:55