...unforatunately we don't exist in a perfect world...so waxing the 1973 Jeep
works good enough and is less expensive than repainting it...different PLs in
the case in point masks the deffecency well enough to allow relatively good
repeater services to coexistance under less than ideal circumstances. In fact
the other repeater guys have refused to activate PL but they do transmit a
different PL so their users can simply turn up their squelch and operate
happily ever after.
OH WELL ;-))
----- Original Message -----
From: MCH
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Nearby Repeaters
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
>
