If there is interference with the same tones, there is interference with different ones, too.
Again, proper engineering (coordination in this case) is a necessary first step, and selecting different CTCSS tones to mask a problem is not a solution. Overdeviation? Another engineering deficiency. Although the 15 kHz channels don't help, either. Still, they can be overcome to some degree. Still waiting for a reason that doesn't involve compromised engineering. Joe M. WA3GIN wrote: > > > Here is one reason to have a different PL Tone...close spacing. Here in > NOVA 146.625 and 146.610 are two repeaters spaced on opposite sides of > WDC. Coverage is about the same. .625 users frequently bring up the > .610 machine due to intermittant over deviation, etc. If the .610 > machine had the same PL tone there would be no benefit from using the PL > tone. > > Seems there is always an exception to the rule ;-) > > 73, > dave > wa3gin > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* n...@no6b.com <mailto:n...@no6b.com> > *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Sunday, August 30, 2009 4:00 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Repeater-Builder] Nearby Repeaters > > > > At 8/30/2009 09:57, you wrote: > > > >When "area plans" show something like "repeaters in this area > all use > > > >CTCSS tone X" I always cringe a little. > > > > > > Sure makes it a lot easier for travelers to find all the local > > > repeaters. > > > > > > Bob NO6B > > > >Who's so dumb that they SCAN with CTCSS Decode turned on? > > Because many repeaters don't repeat CTCSS. Also some older radios don't > scan CTCSS decode very well. > > >I think the "one CTCSS in an area" is just a leftover from the time > >when we all had single-tone boards in our rigs. No one needs this > >"feature" in area repeaters anymore. > > No, SoCal (TASMA) just adopted a regional CTCSS plan. In some > way/places > it was simply a formal acknowledgement of what some regions had already > implemented, but in others we had a mishmash of different open tone > "standards" that had nothing to do with trying to avoid other system > tone > freqs. > > On 440, many repeaters in this area use the same CTCSS freq. At one > site I > know of about a dozen repeaters all use the same tone; AFAIK none of > them > bother each other. If they did, I'm sure they would quickly find the > source (since it would be another ham's system) & fix the actual > problem, > rather than mask it with CTCSS as others have pointed out. > > >(No one has trouble finding repeaters out here, and we've had a system > >where every large club and small backyard repeater is on different > >tones for decades. We never went with the popular, silly idea that > >different tones are somehow "difficult" for someone who knows how to > >operate their rig.) > > Perhaps that's one reason why I didn't try out many systems last time I > passed through the Denver area. > > IMO, if different CTCSS freqs. are required to keep co-located amateur > systems from talking to each other, there is an engineering deficiency > somewhere. > > Bob NO6B > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Internal Virus Database is out of date. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: > 07/31/09 05:58:00 >
