Why use the SR105U vs the DRA818U transceiver module?

[trevor229]

I was looking over the project and noticed the high shipping cost for one of the sources for the SR105 module. I have also seen a few sources claim that it is legacy/discontinued. It seems harder to find a reliable source compared to the DRA818U (or V for VHF) module. It has nearly the exact same scpecifications and is much more ubiquitous and usually below $10. The only reason I could think of is AMSAT utilizing this module on actual space hardware? I am really curious.

[njsat]

https://a.co/d/ammAf4A Rogers E. Campbell, IV RECMedia, LLC Cell: (973) 202-9384 Pager: (201) 237-0581 <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>

…

________________________________ From: Alan Johnston ***@***.***> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 8:06:51 AM To: alanbjohnston/CubeSatSim ***@***.***> Cc: Subscribed ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [alanbjohnston/CubeSatSim] Why use the SR105U vs the DRA818U transceiver module? (Discussion #355) Hi, No, AMSAT isn’t flying this module, our FM transceivers are custom designs. This module was chosen because of its low power 0.5 W output. The 1 W DRA818U would drain the batteries faster. Also, the attenuator circuit already gets warm with this module, and having a high transmit power when the receiver is inches away isn’t great. If this module was discontinued in the future, I would look at the SR110U module as it is pin selectable 0.5 W output/ 1 W. This would be useful if flown as a high altitude balloon payload. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#355 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BNRFN43ZZE3224MWBPZA3DT2MYVOXAVCNFSM6AAAAABV4EEFV6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTCOJWHE2TEMQ>. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>