Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Custom MVP
kg4ogn wrote: Hello, Can anyone tell me where I can find information on tuning a UHF GE Custom MVP Yup. Look on this page: http://www.repeater-builder.com/rbtip/geindex.html Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Since the Wacom WP-639 duplexer is equal in capability to the Telewave TPRD-1554 duplexer (they both have four 5 cavities in a band pass/band reject configuration) the most likely reason that you could not get the Wacom unit to work properly is that it was not tuned per the manufacturer's instructions. A critical part of the tuning of this model is the completion of the pre-tune steps before commencing the final tuning. The eight-page document entitled Field Tuning Instructions for 4-cavity BpBr Circuit Duplexer is available for download at a number of repeater sites. I have used several Wacom duplexers over the years, and I think they are excellent products. I recently tuned a WP-639 duplexer in a 2m portable repeater, and followed the tuning steps exactly per the instructions to achieve a high performance system. The Rexolite rods were between two and four inches extended on all cavities, and the response curves were almost identical to the curves shown in the instructions. When the PA is no more than 20 watts or so, and the receiver has very good front-end selectivity, the WP-639 works quite well. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY cwbunting wrote: I couldn't get these cans to work with my repeater. I ran out of room on the rexolite rod when I was trying to tune them. It seemed that I could have gotten a better notch out of them, but the rod didn't go any further... Anyone else have experience with these cans, are they any good? They would desense like crazy, I switched to a Telewave TPRD-1554's and they work 10 times better. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: [Re: [Re: [RE:hash,bash,smash,noise...
You missed it slightly ... Sort of the up-dated part of the Mocup discussion back in the seventies. I deliberately tossed that in to change the subject. Neil mch wrote: I for one have never heard of it. Motran, yes. Mocom, yes. Mocan, no. Do you by chance have a model number? (Or did I miss a joke?) Joe M. Neil McKie wrote: Any one familiar with the Mocan? Neil Lee Williams wrote: The noise level is getting pretty high on this list,can we get back to building repeaters??? Any brand will do! : Perhaps you can show me how it's done!! : : Maybe someday you'll grow up. :: someone get a bottle for the baby. : Tell us how you really feel : : give it a rest. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Eric Lemmon wrote: I have used several Wacom duplexers over the years, and I think they are excellent products. I recently tuned a WP-639 duplexer in a 2m portable repeater, and followed the tuning steps exactly per the instructions to achieve a high performance system. The Rexolite rods were between two and four inches extended on all cavities, and the response curves were almost identical to the curves shown in the instructions. When the PA is no more than 20 watts or so, and the receiver has very good front-end selectivity, the WP-639 works quite well. I agree with what is said, but will add one detail. If the repeater transmitter has a *better than usual* sideband noise figure, the power can be significantly higher than 20 watts. The GE PLL exciter and solid state PA will allow about 100 watts with no desense with this duplexer, or if you are fortunate to have a GE 4EF5A, about 200 watts. PLL and/or Tubes are better. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Indeed, everyone has made a good point (or more) in this thread. I agree with Kevin, GE's MASTR II PLL VHF Exciter, or a tube set on any band, are certainly better. There's a high-performance UHF system that I'm involved with utilizing a B94MSY (1/4KW tube PA) with only a PD526 duplexer and isolator; the receiver has a Chip Angle pre-amp ahead of it as well. The antenna is a 10dB stick - and it hears as well as it talks! Proof positive that Tubes are lovely for high-power duplex operations. I find it interesting that a WP-639 (2-Meter duplexer) is utilized on a UHF repeater/relay system, however. If it works, it works - it seems that it'd be more trouble than it's worth, though. As for the Spectrum (a.k.a. Spread Spectrum) equipment, I'm glad that it works for you. Some are fortunate to have that experience. We each have our preferences, and as mature adults we should simply agree to disagree, acknowledging that we each find our own merits in various types. On another hand (why have only two?), conflict (to a degree) makes life interesting. Perhaps someone has the tuning instructions for the WP-642 handy? I haven't had success in finding it, but I admit that my search hasn't been thorough nor up-to-date while I've been busy the past several months. It was purchased in like-new condition, and while I believe I've figured out its peculiarities on my own, it would be nice to see the factory's take on it. 73, -Matt W6KGB Interesting. I have a set of 639 cans on my repeater on 446.175 with No problems at all. have no problem with the length of the tuning rods. No desense. and last time I checked about 50 watts out.. BTW the repeater is a SPECTRUM...has been working for years sitting out in the barn. NO I would never use it at a commercial site But its been giving me years of trouble free service. I last tuned it when it was installed back in 1994. last checked it in july this year. Bad connector up at the antenna. Kevin Custer wrote: Eric Lemmon wrote: I have used several Wacom duplexers over the years, and I think they are excellent products. I recently tuned a WP-639 duplexer in a 2m portable repeater, and followed the tuning steps exactly per the instructions to achieve a high performance system. The Rexolite rods were between two and four inches extended on all cavities, and the response curves were almost identical to the curves shown in the instructions. When the PA is no more than 20 watts or so, and the receiver has very good front-end selectivity, the WP-639 works quite well. I agree with what is said, but will add one detail. If the repeater transmitter has a *better than usual* sideband noise figure, the power can be significantly higher than 20 watts. The GE PLL exciter and solid state PA will allow about 100 watts with no desense with this duplexer, or if you are fortunate to have a GE 4EF5A, about 200 watts. PLL and/or Tubes are better. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Neal Newman wrote: Interesting. I have a set of 639 cans on my repeater on 446.175 with No problems at all. have no problem with the length of the tuning rods. No desense. and last time I checked about 50 watts out.. Yes it is interesting. How did you manage to tune up a set of 2 meter cavities on a UHF repeater? http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp639.pdf Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Interesting. I have a set of 639 cans on my repeater on 446.175 with No problems at all. have no problem with the length of the tuning rods. No desense. and last time I checked about 50 watts out.. BTW the repeater is a SPECTRUM...has been working for years sitting out in the barn. NO I would never use it at a commercial site But its been giving me years of trouble free service. I last tuned it when it was installed back in 1994. last checked it in july this year. Bad connector up at the antenna. Kevin Custer wrote: Eric Lemmon wrote: I have used several Wacom duplexers over the years, and I think they are excellent products. I recently tuned a WP-639 duplexer in a 2m portable repeater, and followed the tuning steps exactly per the instructions to achieve a high performance system. The Rexolite rods were between two and four inches extended on all cavities, and the response curves were almost identical to the curves shown in the instructions. When the PA is no more than 20 watts or so, and the receiver has very good front-end selectivity, the WP-639 works quite well. I agree with what is said, but will add one detail. If the repeater transmitter has a *better than usual* sideband noise figure, the power can be significantly higher than 20 watts. The GE PLL exciter and solid state PA will allow about 100 watts with no desense with this duplexer, or if you are fortunate to have a GE 4EF5A, about 200 watts. PLL and/or Tubes are better. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps someone has the tuning instructions for the WP-642 handy? I haven't had success in finding it, but I admit that my search hasn't been thorough nor up-to-date while I've been busy the past several months. It was purchased in like-new condition, and while I believe I've figured out its peculiarities on my own, it would be nice to see the factory's take on it. 73, -Matt W6KGB The tuning for the WP-642 is the same as the 641, but you'll have to tune the additional 2 cavities on the radio side; which are simply Band-Pass: http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp641.pdf Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Kevin Custer wrote: Kevin Custer wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps someone has the tuning instructions for the WP-642 handy? I haven't had success in finding it, but I admit that my search hasn't been thorough nor up-to-date while I've been busy the past several months. It was purchased in like-new condition, and while I believe I've figured out its peculiarities on my own, it would be nice to see the factory's take on it. 73, -Matt W6KGB The tuning for the WP-642 is the same as the 641, but you'll have to tune the additional 2 cavities on the radio side; which are simply Band-Pass: http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp641.pdf Kevin This may also help: http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp643.pdf Kevin I *may* have gotten the 642 and 643 mixed up. At any rate, the information is in the two PDF's above. The 642 *appears* to have 6-BPBR cavities, whereas the 643 is 4-BPBR (like the 641) with 2 additional BPF's on the radio side. It's early.. WCIS Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
The tuning for the WP-642 is the same as the 641, but you'll have to tune the additional 2 cavities on the radio side; which are simply Band-Pass: http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp641.pdf Kevin This may also help: http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp643.pdf Kevin I *may* have gotten the 642 and 643 mixed up. At any rate, the information is in the two PDF's above. The 642 *appears* to have 6-BPBR cavities, whereas the 643 is 4-BPBR (like the 641) with 2 additional BPF's on the radio side. It's early.. WCIS Kevin Yes, the 642 has 6 BP/BR cavities, unlike my 222Mc duplexer (WP-652) that has 4 BP/BR cavities with 2 BP cavities like the 643. Thanks for the links. -KGB Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
I'm not sure that those smaller cans are good at 600Kc?? Or if they are, then you may have the wrong interconnecting cables on them. James *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 11/30/2003 at 6:41 AM cwbunting wrote: I couldn't get these cans to work with my repeater, I ran out of room on the rexelite rod when I was trying to tune them. It seemed that I could have gotten a better notch out of them, but the rod didn't go any further... Anyone else have experiance with these cans, are they any good?? They would desense like crazy, I switched to a Telewave TPRD-1554's and they work 10 times better. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
KE1AI wrote: I'm not sure that those smaller cans are good at 600Kc?? Or if they are, then you may have the wrong interconnecting cables on them. Actually, the specifications listed in Wacom's original documentation **for this duplexer** is *AT* 600 Kc. : http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp639.pdf Many duplexer manufacturers, like Wacom, specified their highband products at 500 Kc, which resulted in better performance when properly tuned for a 600 Kc split like on 2 meters. Wacom originally specified their WP-641 duplexer to provide 85 dB of isolation at a 500 Kc split, but when tuned to 600 Kc, 93 dB actually resulted. The specification for the WP-639 is 80 dB. So, we need to be careful of specifications. If you don't read the specifications carefully the WP-641 *looks* like it is only 5 dB better than the WP-639, when in reality, it is actually 13 dB better when apples are compared to apples. As suggested by Eric, there is nothing wrong with the WP-639 duplexer. This duplexer was designed back in the day when an 80 dB isolation unit was sufficient to keep a 100 watt tube transmitter and a more deaf .5 uV (-113 dBm) receiver separated. Now, we have solid-state (read dirtier) transmitters and GaAs FET assisted receivers that can easily hear a 12 dB SINAD signal at .1 uV (-127 dBm). What am I getting at? Today's receivers (with preamps) can hear about 15 dB better than those of 30 years ago, and today's transmitters are significantly dirtier than their tube-type counterparts. Obviously in today's world either a better duplexer is needed or we need to run better exciters (like the GE PLL) or like I, run TUBE power when big power is a necessity. I guess we could choose to use deafer receivers but I for one am opposed to that if the radio site allows for a better actual sensitivity rating. So, can I use a WP-639 duplexer on my solid-state repeater? Yes, but don't expect it to fully isolate 100 watts when using a really sensitive receiver. A good suggestion would be a receiver hearing at .2 uV (-121 dBm) could likely be used with a *typical* transmitter (sideband noise at -80 dB from carrier) running about 25 watts or so. Now, put that old GE Mastr Pro (ER-41-C) receiver on your repeater (.5 uV or -113 dBm) and you'll be able to run 9 dB more transmitter power or 200 watts. See my point Spectral Purity and Receiver Sensitivity both play an important role in How much power can I run through this 4, 5 inch cavity duplexer. Hope this helps... Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
I remember when the Micor came out ... then sometime later, the GE Mastr II arrived on the scene. One of the guys in our shop took one look at the Mastr II Control head - quickly nicknamed it a G-Cor. Neil Kevin Custer wrote: In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
I have used VHF cavities in 3/4 mode many times for UHF combining - Cabling would not be the same, but the 10 Sinclairs I use for a 5 channel UHF combiner work well. Ssb Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Good repeaters ???
I have been playing with GE Phoenix SX UHF and VHF for temporary and link repeaters - very inexpensive, programmable and wideband - reasonable performance and if you derate the transmitter will last a long time, and as inexpensive as they are just replace instead of repair. Use a pair of Phoenix's until you can buy a M/ACOM Mastr III. Ssb Nu5d Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Tuning Instructions for WACOM WP-639 Duplexers
It would have helpful if I had included a URL for the WACOM Tuning Instructions when I posted my previous response. Mea Culpa! The instructions apply to WP-604, -609, -612, -621, -629, -639, and -641. http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp6xxtuninginstructions.pdf 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found!
Ken, I went back to the site today. There are absolutley NO markings of any kind on the box. Wow, that thing has some signal on 147.457!! It's really killing my input. Anyway, thanks for the help. I'll be making some phone calls tomorrow morning. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do for Verizon? Would they get you involved in soemthing like this? Thanks again.. Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 5:43 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found! Hi Adam, The person you should try to get in contact with at Verizon would be the Outside Plant Engineer for your area. Can you email me some information such as the location of this Light Span box? I can try looking him/her up on the company website Monday. Ken --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Adam C. Feuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Eric, Thanks so much for the reply and the information. We are certain (100%) that the interference is coming from the Light Span. We DF'ed it right to the box and then used the spectrum analyzer to give us the exact frequency. Also, being the only box mounted out there in the woods wasn't too hard to figure out. Then, we proved are findings and witnessed how good our receiver could be without the interference but I won't go into those details here. Anyway, I think I'll start by giving them the benefit of the doubt and see if I might be able to find the right person to talk to at Verizon before I get the FCC involved. I know this will be a long process but I've lived with the interference for this long, another month or two won't kill me. However, if time goes by and I get no results I will resort to your suggestion. The 1meg split repeater was coordinated for about 20 years under TSARC and has now been grandfathered by UNYREPCO who does our coordination now. Thanks for the info Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Interference Found! Adam, Any emission by a commercial/industrial system that causes significant interference to a licensed user in an adjacent band is a violation of FCC rules, period. You don't need to spend any more time trying to contact Verizon to resolve this issue. Write the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, and let Riley Hollingsworth take it from there. Believe me, once an FCC Nastygram gets Verizon's attention, they'll be all over that site, looking for the cause. If the problem is not corrected in a timely manner, a whopping fine will be assessed for every day it continues. Rest assured, every cent of the cost of correcting this interference problem will be paid by Verizon, not you. It will greatly help your case if you can show that the offending carrier is at 147.457 MHz, and is not the result of an image response in your receiver or of IM occurring in a poorly-designed receiver's front end. It will also add credence to your complaint if you can use repeatable T- Hunt tactics to pinpoint the source of the carrier to a specific antenna or cabinet. Take note as to whether or not the carrier is modulated and/or identified in any way, and whether it is continuous 24/7 or intermittent. Turn off all of your equipment before making these searches, just to be absolutely certain that the carrier is not generated within your own repeater. Many receivers, and a surprising number of controllers or IDers, generate birdies that render certain frequencies unusable. Be certain your own equipment is innocent before filing a complaint. Of course, you had better be certain that Verizon is, in fact, the offender before pointing a finger at them! If your repeater is officially coordinated, your case is even stronger. A 1 MHz split, in New York? Hmmm... 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY Adam C. Feuer wrote: Hello All, Back in September, I sent out a message asking if anyone had any interference experience with the 2 meter pair 146.460 / 147.460 as I have a constant carrier on my input. I didn't really receive any substantial replies and have been looking for the source ever since. Yesterday it was found! My input (147.460) is being crushed by a Verizon Light Span which is mounted in an outdoor enclosure at the site. It is emitting a strong carrier on 147.457... Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] duplexer
Pretty sure Phelps Dodge Copper Company evolved and spun off CableWave Systems, then CelWave RFS. Ssb Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found!
Light Span sounds like a transmission product made by AFC in Petluma CA. 147.456 is 72 times 2.048 MHZ or 96 times 1.536 MHz which are typical backplane clocks in that type of equipment. That box is supposed to be FCC part 15 class A with respect to emissions or better. The Lightspan products were supposed to meet Bellcore GR- 1089 for emissions. That level would still be a discernable signal to most 2mtr receivers. Ed K3SWJ --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Adam C. Feuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ken, I went back to the site today. There are absolutley NO markings of any kind on the box. Wow, that thing has some signal on 147.457!! It's really killing my input. Anyway, thanks for the help. I'll be making some phone calls tomorrow morning. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do for Verizon? Would they get you involved in soemthing like this? Thanks again.. Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 5:43 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found! Hi Adam, The person you should try to get in contact with at Verizon would be the Outside Plant Engineer for your area. Can you email me some information such as the location of this Light Span box? I can try looking him/her up on the company website Monday. Ken --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Adam C. Feuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Eric, Thanks so much for the reply and the information. We are certain (100%) that the interference is coming from the Light Span. We DF'ed it right to the box and then used the spectrum analyzer to give us the exact frequency. Also, being the only box mounted out there in the woods wasn't too hard to figure out. Then, we proved are findings and witnessed how good our receiver could be without the interference but I won't go into those details here. Anyway, I think I'll start by giving them the benefit of the doubt and see if I might be able to find the right person to talk to at Verizon before I get the FCC involved. I know this will be a long process but I've lived with the interference for this long, another month or two won't kill me. However, if time goes by and I get no results I will resort to your suggestion. The 1meg split repeater was coordinated for about 20 years under TSARC and has now been grandfathered by UNYREPCO who does our coordination now. Thanks for the info Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Interference Found! Adam, Any emission by a commercial/industrial system that causes significant interference to a licensed user in an adjacent band is a violation of FCC rules, period. You don't need to spend any more time trying to contact Verizon to resolve this issue. Write the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, and let Riley Hollingsworth take it from there. Believe me, once an FCC Nastygram gets Verizon's attention, they'll be all over that site, looking for the cause. If the problem is not corrected in a timely manner, a whopping fine will be assessed for every day it continues. Rest assured, every cent of the cost of correcting this interference problem will be paid by Verizon, not you. It will greatly help your case if you can show that the offending carrier is at 147.457 MHz, and is not the result of an image response in your receiver or of IM occurring in a poorly-designed receiver's front end. It will also add credence to your complaint if you can use repeatable T- Hunt tactics to pinpoint the source of the carrier to a specific antenna or cabinet. Take note as to whether or not the carrier is modulated and/or identified in any way, and whether it is continuous 24/7 or intermittent. Turn off all of your equipment before making these searches, just to be absolutely certain that the carrier is not generated within your own repeater. Many receivers, and a surprising number of controllers or IDers, generate birdies that render certain frequencies unusable. Be certain your own equipment is innocent before filing a complaint. Of course, you had better be certain that Verizon is, in fact, the offender before pointing a finger at them! If your repeater is officially coordinated, your case is even stronger. A 1 MHz split, in New York? Hmmm... 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY Adam C. Feuer wrote: Hello All, Back in September, I sent out a message asking if anyone had any interference experience with
Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSR-2000 Receiver acts like a barometer
At 06:59 AM 11/30/03 +, you wrote: I am having a problem with my MSR-2000 VHF receiver going flaky whenever it is (1) wet out (2) pressure drops It has a oscillating noise on the receiver, and sensitivity goes to crap on the RX. Anyone else ever run into this? I have some spare receivers, I think I'll try replacing it first, and see if it fixes this. Could my xtals be the culprit?? -K1CWB 145.310/R Lancaster, PA More likely your antenna system. As a test go to the site on a day when it's really bad and unplug the feedline from your cabinet and plug a dummy load into the cabinet. Try the system with a handheld. I'll bet that it performs just fine. Then reconnect the feedline and move the dummy load to the top end of the feedline and repeat the test... ...and so forth until you get to the antenna itself. I'll bet that you have moisture in the antenna system somewhere. Mike WA6ILQ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
On the sets I have I had to add about 2 1/2 of copper brasing rod to the rod that is in the center of the tunning capacitor. Also if you have PL-259s on the cans the Tees like to go bad, I had one disintegrate in my hand once. If you have N connectors, the solder joints from the connector to the metal plate like to crack with time and tempreture variations, or some one arm stronged it with a pair of pliers. Any way to get the coupling loop out, you need to unscrew the PL-259 on the side of the can and remove the screws holding the plate on top. When re-soldering use Kester 44 solder with 2% silver and a 80 watt soldering iron, not a soldering gun. They work good, but you may want to run a PLL exciter if you are using MASTR-IIs. The PLL is cleaner and will allow less isolation from TX to RX which is what you need with these cans. -- Original Message -- From: cwbunting [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:41:51 - I couldn't get these cans to work with my repeater, I ran out of room on the rexelite rod when I was trying to tune them. It seemed that I could have gotten a better notch out of them, but the rod didn't go any further... Anyone else have experiance with these cans, are they any good?? They would desense like crazy, I switched to a Telewave TPRD-1554's and they work 10 times better. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? And the chief designer of the M2 was hired away by RCA. A while later a new RCA mobile came out (the name escapes me). The designer admitted that it could have been named the Mastr-3 as it was a Mastr II with all the bugs fixed. This was long before the actual GE M3 came out. Stop by your regional library some time and look in the periodical index for the Fortune magazine article abut the rush project the RCA mobile radio division had to get the new radio out the door. I whish I had kept that copy when my dad was a subscriber. Mike WA6ILQ If memory serves me correctly, that would be either the RCA TAC 200 and/or RCA 1000 built about 50 miles from my home. And yes the Chief Design Engineer was taken away from GE's Mobile Radio Division in Lynchburg VA to go work for RCA in Meadowlands (Little Washington) Pennsylvania. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Moto stuff.....
At 02:44 PM 11/30/03 -0800, you wrote: Was that RCA radio known as the Veetac or something like that? I have some technical information on the Veetac ... and have seen one only once. Mike, do you have a Veetac in your collection? I have a high band RCA solid state mobile of some kind ... I've been thinning down the collection recently - I now have 4 fewer Motrac mobiles on the shelves but now have some receiver chassis and some tubes in a drawer. Still have the 6-freq UHF 64LHT and the 71LHT (4f plus extender) mobile looking for a home. My old 2m base with the railroad PS and the 6-freq G RX and the 6-freq TX (A or K, could never remember which was the 30w and which was the 60w, this was the 30w model) is gone, the tubes went in the tube drawer. I have two old 6' indoor grey cabinets (with the chrome trim) and one 7' to get rid of. The 7' has the 5 panel meters, the 6's have the 3 meters. But stuff keeps showing up... I was given three Mitrek tabletop bases... two on 470 and one on 154... if anybody needs a 470 mobile chassis let me know... I'm looking for a 420 chassis and another 450 chassis And I've decided the HT-200 remote base is never going to happen... I have HT-200 boards on 450, 146 and 52mhz and at one time was going to make up an all-HT-200 suitcase. Even bought a all-aluminum thick instrumentation case made by Halliburton-Zero for it. HT200 cases and boards are available, just ask. All in all, I'm thinning down a 2-car garage and 20x20 shop full of stuff. Even have an IC-230 and a couple of Yaesu 720s that need a home. Mike WA6ILQ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
At 07:28 AM 11/30/03 -0800, you wrote: In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer And the chief designer of the M2 was hired away by RCA. A while later a new RCA mobile came out (the name escapes me). The designer admitted that it could have been named the Mastr-3 as it was a Mastr II with all the bugs fixed. This was long before the actual GE M3 came out. Stop by your regional library some time and look in the periodical index for the Fortune magazine article abut the rush project the RCA mobile radio division had to get the new radio out the door. I whish I had kept that copy when my dad was a subscriber. Mike WA6ILQ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler
See the website associated with this list, www.repeater-builder.com 73,Lee,N3APP - Original Message - From: Tom Parker To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 6:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler Hello everyone, I am need of "elmering" on a UHF Micor Tripler. I need to know the role of the two stages, the first being the M9690 and the second stage being the pair of M9737's. What I want to understand is what kind of output should I expect and which is the tripling stage? i.e., does the signal get tripled in the M9690 and then the output power boosted in the second stage (two M9737's) or vice versa. I really don't know. I find zero literature on the web. Any help anyone in the group can provide will be greatly appreciated. thp Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Re: [Re: [RE: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?]]]
A few people from this list are asking me what I was referring to in the statement below. My father recently died. http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2003/11/09/obituaries/local/9fb1a53bab4d7ec586256dd900131f42.txt JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNIP Did you hear about my recent loss? Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re[2]: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
Hello Kevin, Thanks for the info, do you think I'll have better luck with the TPRD-1554's? Or should I just stay with split antennas on the tower (which actually doesn't work all that bad) The repeater is an MSR-2000 running 10 watts out of a 110w PA. -K1CWB Sunday, November 30, 2003, 9:46:38 AM, you wrote: KC Received: from n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.80]) KC by mail.fission2.com (Merak 6.2.1) with SMTP id CPA74271 KC for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:49:45 -0500 KC X-eGroups-Return: KC [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC Received: from [66.218.66.160] by n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with KC NNFMP; 30 Nov 2003 14:46:44 - KC X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC X-Apparently-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com KC Received: (qmail 8582 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2003 14:46:38 - KC Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) KC by m20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2003 14:46:38 - KC Received: from unknown (HELO S-UTL01-SFNOC.stsn.com) (199.107.154.76) KC by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Nov 2003 14:46:38 - KC Received: from kuggie.com ([10.11.39.112]) KC by S-UTL01-SFNOC.stsn.com (SAVSMTP 3.1.0.29) with SMTP id M2003113006470404916 KC for Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:47:04 -0800 KC Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; KC rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) KC X-Accept-Language: en-us, en KC To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com KC References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 199.107.154.76 KC From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC X-Yahoo-Profile: repeaterbuilder KC MIME-Version: 1.0 KC Mailing-List: list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com; contact KC [EMAIL PROTECTED] KC Delivered-To: mailing list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com KC Precedence: bulk KC List-Unsubscribe: KC mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] KC Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:46:38 -0800 KC Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans KC Reply-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com KC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 KC Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit KC KE1AI wrote: I'm not sure that those smaller cans are good at 600Kc?? Or if they are, then you may have the wrong interconnecting cables on them. KC Actually, the specifications listed in Wacom's original documentation KC **for this duplexer** is *AT* 600 Kc. : KC http://www.repeater-builder.com/pdf/wp639.pdf KC Many duplexer manufacturers, like Wacom, specified their highband KC products at 500 Kc, which resulted in better performance when properly KC tuned for a 600 Kc split like on 2 meters. Wacom originally specified KC their WP-641 duplexer to provide 85 dB of isolation at a 500 Kc split, KC but when tuned to 600 Kc, 93 dB actually resulted. The specification KC for the WP-639 is 80 dB. So, we need to be careful of specifications. KC If you don't read the specifications carefully the WP-641 *looks* like KC it is only 5 dB better than the WP-639, when in reality, it is actually KC 13 dB better when apples are compared to apples. KC As suggested by Eric, there is nothing wrong with the WP-639 duplexer. KC This duplexer was designed back in the day when an 80 dB isolation unit KC was sufficient to keep a 100 watt tube transmitter and a more deaf .5 uV KC (-113 dBm) receiver separated. Now, we have solid-state (read dirtier) KC transmitters and GaAs FET assisted receivers that can easily hear a 12 KC dB SINAD signal at .1 uV (-127 dBm). What am I getting at? Today's KC receivers (with preamps) can hear about 15 dB better than those of 30 KC years ago, and today's transmitters are significantly dirtier than their KC tube-type counterparts. Obviously in today's world either a better KC duplexer is needed or we need to run better exciters (like the GE PLL) KC or like I, run TUBE power when big power is a necessity. I guess we KC could choose to use deafer receivers but I for one am opposed to that if KC the radio site allows for a better actual sensitivity rating. KC So, can I use a WP-639 duplexer on my solid-state repeater? Yes, but KC don't expect it to fully isolate 100 watts when using a really sensitive KC receiver. A good suggestion would be a receiver hearing at .2 uV (-121 KC dBm) could likely be used with a *typical* transmitter (sideband noise KC at -80 dB from carrier) running about 25 watts or so. Now, put that old KC GE Mastr Pro (ER-41-C) receiver on your repeater (.5 uV or -113 dBm) and KC you'll be able to run 9 dB more transmitter power or 200 watts. See my KC point KC Spectral Purity and Receiver Sensitivity both play an important role in KC How much power can I run through this 4, 5 inch cavity duplexer. KC Hope this helps... KC Kevin Custer KC Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to KC http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- Best regards, K1CWBmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
[Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-739
I have a set of wacom WP-739 cans and was wondering if anyone has any experience with them for ham use, they have the external tuning stubs on the side and knobs on top. are they suitable for 600kc split on vhf or will i need more isolation say at 50 watts from a mastr II.?? thanks. KF7NN Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Custom MVP
kg4ogn wrote: Great Thanks!! Is the procedure the same for VHF and UHF radios? I saw that the page had tune up for a VHF MVP is everything the same for UHF? No, but UHF tuning instructions reside on this article in specific: http://www.repeater-builder.com/ge/mvp/no6bmvp.html Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found!
Lightspan is a very common deployment network product for the RBOC's. They create quite a bit of noise, and it should be the 96 times 1.5415 clock that is the over all clocking for the T1's that ride on the equipment. This may be caused by a T1 or a shelf not being properly terminated. If you know where the local Central Office is it may be worth a stop early in the morning as the outside techs are usually there for coffee. Has anyone tried cross posting this to the LMR newsgroup? I believe there are some people over there that may be able to help with this problem. Thank you Joe (an ex- RBOC Central Office tech) I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book. -- Groucho Marx, 1890-1977 -Original Message- From: edctexas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 3:23 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found! Light Span sounds like a transmission product made by AFC in Petluma CA. 147.456 is 72 times 2.048 MHZ or 96 times 1.536 MHz which are typical backplane clocks in that type of equipment. That box is supposed to be FCC part 15 class A with respect to emissions or better. The Lightspan products were supposed to meet Bellcore GR- 1089 for emissions. That level would still be a discernable signal to most 2mtr receivers. Ed K3SWJ --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Adam C. Feuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ken, I went back to the site today. There are absolutley NO markings of any kind on the box. Wow, that thing has some signal on 147.457!! It's really killing my input. Anyway, thanks for the help. I'll be making some phone calls tomorrow morning. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do for Verizon? Would they get you involved in soemthing like this? Thanks again.. Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 5:43 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Interference Found! Hi Adam, The person you should try to get in contact with at Verizon would be the Outside Plant Engineer for your area. Can you email me some information such as the location of this Light Span box? I can try looking him/her up on the company website Monday. Ken --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Adam C. Feuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Eric, Thanks so much for the reply and the information. We are certain (100%) that the interference is coming from the Light Span. We DF'ed it right to the box and then used the spectrum analyzer to give us the exact frequency. Also, being the only box mounted out there in the woods wasn't too hard to figure out. Then, we proved are findings and witnessed how good our receiver could be without the interference but I won't go into those details here. Anyway, I think I'll start by giving them the benefit of the doubt and see if I might be able to find the right person to talk to at Verizon before I get the FCC involved. I know this will be a long process but I've lived with the interference for this long, another month or two won't kill me. However, if time goes by and I get no results I will resort to your suggestion. The 1meg split repeater was coordinated for about 20 years under TSARC and has now been grandfathered by UNYREPCO who does our coordination now. Thanks for the info Adam N2ACF - Original Message - From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Interference Found! Adam, Any emission by a commercial/industrial system that causes significant interference to a licensed user in an adjacent band is a violation of FCC rules, period. You don't need to spend any more time trying to contact Verizon to resolve this issue. Write the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, and let Riley Hollingsworth take it from there. Believe me, once an FCC Nastygram gets Verizon's attention, they'll be all over that site, looking for the cause. If the problem is not corrected in a timely manner, a whopping fine will be assessed for every day it continues. Rest assured, every cent of the cost of correcting this interference problem will be paid by Verizon, not you. It will greatly help your case if you can show that the offending carrier is at 147.457 MHz, and is not the result of an image response in your receiver or of IM occurring in a poorly-designed receiver's front end. It will also add credence to your complaint if you can use repeatable T- Hunt tactics to pinpoint the source of the carrier to a specific antenna or cabinet. Take
[Repeater-Builder] Shop cleaning...
For sale... Two Motorola Alphamate IIs $50 each Two Mitrek 470mhz chassis removed from tabletop base stations (these are a complete mobile in all senses except for no model/serial tag) make offer or will trade for other frequency ranges. Looking for 40-50mhz, 406-420mhz or 450-460mhz Radio Shack Pro-2066 trunking scanner - make offer (almost new) 6-freq UHF 64LHT - make offer 4-freq 71LHT (with extender) - make offer two 6' Moto cabinets one 7' Moto cabinet (2553 keys available at the same price it costs me from my locksmith - $4.50) one Sun Microsystems 19 monitor (free) one HP Laserjet 3D in excellent condition (but the duplex function is not working and not worth fixing so just think of it as a regular LJ 3 but with two autoselecting paper trays). Has the RAM memory expansion kit. This is a heavy production printer - I've seen more than one of these run 8 pages per minute for 10 hours a day for months at a time. Shipping will be actual UPS cost from 91101 - in Pasadena, California. As far as the cabinets or the Laserjet I could be coerced into meeting someone most anywhere in a 2-hour radius if 1/2 of the fuel is reimbursed. Will post other stuff as it turns up. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler
Ah Hem... uh.. thanks Lee, but I've been there. Here's the deal, the MRF 557 does not directly replace the M9690, i.e., the 9690 is stud mounted and the MRF 557 has no stud and one lead wider than the others, but there is no clear estimation of where the wider or what the wider lead is, I would assume it's the collector, but not being totally sure, I thought there might be some experience out there that could help.. In the absence of any data sheet or other information, I cannot 100% determine that mine is out, i.e, the signal appears to be tripled at thit point, but the power is greatly diminished instead of amplified (the MRF557 is rated at 2 watts and has 6 or so dB of gain (if I remember correctly). I really would like to know what's going on before I tear one of these puppies apart and get totally lost because of my misguidedness. Thanks for the reply though, thp Lee Williams wrote: See the website associated with this list, www.repeater-builder.com 73,Lee,N3APP - Original Message - From: Tom Parker To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 6:08 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler Hello everyone, I am need of "elmering" on a UHF Micor Tripler. I need to know the role of the two stages, the first being the M9690 and the second stage being the pair of M9737's. What I want to understand is what kind of output should I expect and which is the tripling stage? i.e., does the signal get tripled in the M9690 and then the output power boosted in the second stage (two M9737's) or vice versa. I really don't know. I find zero literature on the web. Any help anyone in the group can provide will be greatly appreciated. thp Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-739
george vagner wrote: I have a set of wacom WP-739 cans and was wondering if anyone has any experience with them for ham use, they have the external tuning stubs on the side and knobs on top. are they suitable for 600kc split on vhf or will i need more isolation say at 50 watts from a mastr II.?? Are you sure about the model number being WP-739? Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler
It doesnt sound like the 557 is even close. Mayhaps someone on the list has a 9690? Micor mobiles are cheap enough to have lots of spares around. Yes,the wider lead should be the collector. If you are converting to ham band from commercial you should read about the circulator mods on the website. Beyond that, I cant help much. 73,Lee,N3APP - Original Message - From: Tom Parker To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 7:23 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Micor Tripler Ah Hem... uh.. thanks Lee, but I've been there. Here's the deal, the MRF 557 does not directly replace the M9690, i.e., the 9690 is stud mounted and the MRF 557 has no stud and one lead wider than the others, but there is no clear estimation of where the wider or what the wider lead is, I would assume it's the collector, but not being totally sure, I thought there might be some experience out there that could help.. In the absence of any data sheet or other information, I cannot 100% determine that mine is out, i.e, the signal appears to be tripled at thit point, but the power is greatly diminished instead of amplified (the MRF557 is rated at 2 watts and has 6 or so dB of gain (if I remember correctly). I really would like to know what's going on before I tear one of these puppies apart and get totally lost because of my misguidedness. Thanks for the reply though,thp Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base
Hi Ken, I'll go along with that except ! There is no accessory plug on the MVS that I have. I could use the mic plug for PTT and audio in and volume control pot for the audio out and that leaves the COR. Have any ideas for a COR point ? Bill ---Original Message--- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 30, 2003 05:57:15 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base At 10:52 PM 11/30/2003 -, you wrote: Any one out there using a GE MVS as a remote base ? If so would you have the hook up info for it. PTT, COR and good audio locations. ---Same as they would be for use as a repeater, no? -- President and CTO - Arcom Communications Makers of state-of-the-art repeater controllers and accessories. http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html Our new Repeater Audio Delay (RAD) board is now shipping! Compatible with many controllers! AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000 http://www.irlp.net Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ . Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base
Check out manual LBI31926. It should have all the info you need. Available at http://www.radtek.ws http://64.204.241.148/lit/ge_e_mans/uncat/LBI/31926C.PDF Duane - Original Message - From: birt150 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 5:52 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base Any one out there using a GE MVS as a remote base ? If so would you have the hook up info for it. PTT, COR and good audio locations. Thanks, Bill Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base
Bill, The 'accessory plug' is 'available' on any MVS. The plug that comes out of the radio is straight through wire to the set of pins inside the radio. The inside pins are the dual inline type. BTW, if you want to run it low power (10W), just unplug the PA and plug the exciter in to the same jack. Joe M. Bill wrote: Hi Ken, I'll go along with that except ! There is no accessory plug on the MVS that I have. I could use the mic plug for PTT and audio in and volume control pot for the audio out and that leaves the COR. Have any ideas for a COR point ? Bill ---Original Message--- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 30, 2003 05:57:15 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MVS as remote base At 10:52 PM 11/30/2003 -, you wrote: Any one out there using a GE MVS as a remote base ? If so would you have the hook up info for it. PTT, COR and good audio locations. ---Same as they would be for use as a repeater, no? -- President and CTO - Arcom Communications Makers of state-of-the-art repeater controllers and accessories. http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html Our new Repeater Audio Delay (RAD) board is now shipping! Compatible with many controllers! AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000 http://www.irlp.net Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ . Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-639 cans
K1CWB wrote: Hello Kevin, Thanks for the info, do you think I'll have better luck with the TPRD-1554's? Or should I just stay with split antennas on the tower (which actually doesn't work all that bad) The repeater is an MSR-2000 running 10 watts out of a 110w PA. If you are running the MSR at 10 watts, you'll likely have big noise problems. PA's aren't clean at 1/10 their power rating. Have you tried turning the power up? You might just be surprised. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Mackey; was: RE: [Re: [Re: [RE: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?]]]
Sorry to hear of your loss. Although I didn't know your father at all, it's clear from the obituary that he touched many other souls in his life. I'm sure you're proud to be his son. 73, Ken KB3JA Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000]
Well, John Just because someone has technical curiosity you don't have to run it or them into the dirt. I have beel thinking about what has been said about this product and wonder if the problem isn't the low Q of the circuits. I have to do some testing and find out for my self. I design and build RF and microcontroller and microprocessor based circuits all of the time. This may be a post mortem or a rebirth. I will say it ONE MORE TIME. I DON'T PUT NOISE, JUNK, OR CRAP ON THE AIR. IF IT IS AS YOU SAY THEN IT STOPS IN MY SHOP. DO YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH JOHN? 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course you are correct. The sad part is how many times this has resulted in giving hams a bad name by operating spurious equipment, or not able to perform the way a piece of quality equipment should. It isn't hard to find a Mastr II for $30 at a ham swap meet! Chuck Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it's human nature. Ask a kid if he would like some old stale popcorn right now, or whether he'd rather wait to go to the store later on and buy some new popcorn with his own money. What's his choice going to be? Yep, take the stale stuff and eat it now. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [[Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]] That is one of the major problems that causes bad repeaters, decisions of equipment based on financial inability rather than technical appropriateness. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000]
Sounds like a deal. I'm in Florida but I would have taken 2 of each. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Neil McKie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A recent swapmeet in the northwest Oregon area had UHF Mastr II's at $10 each ... and hi-band Mastr II's at $5 each. He had 50-60 radios at the swapmeet. Neil - WA6KLA JOHN MACKEY wrote: Of course you are correct. The sad part is how many times this has resulted in giving hams a bad name by operating spurious equipment, or not able to perform the way a piece of quality equipment should. It isn't hard to find a Mastr II for $30 at a ham swap meet! Chuck Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it's human nature. Ask a kid if he would like some old stale popcorn right now, or whether he'd rather wait to go to the store later on and buy some new popcorn with his own money. What's his choice going to be? Yep, take the stale stuff and eat it now. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [[Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]] That is one of the major problems that causes bad repeaters, decisions of equipment based on financial inability rather than technical appropriateness. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]
Okay, How much, tell me all about the machine. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Joe Cody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Coy. I have a master2 exec.converted to a repeater. It is tuned to 146.385/146.985. I recently changed frequencies and got new repeaters so this one is excess. will sell cheap or trade for 2m/220/440 mobil/handy I am in Winter Haven(about 40 miles east of you) Joe /KE4WDP [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: ac0y5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:55 AM Subject: [Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Thanks for the input Tony. The primary reason that I'm going to try the Spectrum is It's what I can afford now and It's something I havn't ran into before. If this one gives as much trouble as indicated by thoes of you who have owned them then I'll do something different. But for now it sounds like a challange and it's real cheep -$0.00-. I unexpectedly came into two 2 meter pairs at the same time. Here in Central Florida getting a pair is like finding hens teeth so the first pair got the MASTRII and the second pair will get the Spectrum until I get tired of tweeking it or until I get a replacment, another MASTRII. I can only afford a little at a time. 73 Tony and Thanks AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Tony King - W4ZT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First let me start out by saying that I currently have an SCR1000 in service on 2 meters but the Mastr II is cooking on the bench and will replace the Spectrum as soon as I finish the box to move the CAT- 1000 into. At 08:43 PM 11/26/2003, ac0y5 wrote: It seems a lot of the complaints are from oscillator drift and tuning drift. I have a few questions Does anyone know if the main problem resides in the exciter, or the power amp? I have replaced the PA in this SCR1000 because the old one failed. This is a 75 watt model which has the power control board (which gives you high/low power switching). The manual tells you that you MUST re-align the exciter to make it work properly on the reduced voltage. I always found it to be a bit unstable so it always stayed on high power. If you tune the PA, you'll find some instability there also. I don't know the answer to the question of bad components or bad design. I'd rather stick with what I've got personal experience with. As for oscillator drift, the SCR1000 was available with a crystal oven but mine didn't come that way. It's lived its entire life in the house where there have been no extremes of heat and cold. Yet, it would still move around some. I did place a small light bulb (in series with a resistor) right in the oscillator portion of the exciter board and it seemed to become more stable. My plan would eliminate all problems related to the oscillator because the Tx and Rx will be generated from a pair of Numerically Controlled Oscillators well filtered. I have already designed the entire circuit. Now, if Anyone knows where the problem may lay then I will be able to take care of the problem an external PA that I have or an exciter that I can buy cheaply. The power supply should be okay I had problems with the power supply. In the 75 watt model the power resistors which are mounted on terminal strips between the transformer and the large heat sink on the back get so hot that they will melt their leads right out of the solder. That compounds the problem and led to erosion of a resistor lead and supply failure. The entire supply is horribly inefficient, generating more heat than the entire unit consumed in its electronics. I finally removed the transformer, the resistors and the large heat sink with the pass transistors and powered the unit externally. and it has been stated that the receiver is quite sensitive. If necessary I can add a 5 or 7 pole helical resonator to the front end. It's sensitive if you can get it tuned without desensitization. That's the biggest problem with the receiver. It isn't as sharp as commercial receivers like the Mastr II or Micor so don't expect that kind of performance. From your many other posts it would appear you have considerable repeater experience which makes me wonder why you would want to take this on. It's not a joy to work on. The controller is junk (I replaced it with a CAT1000 over a decade ago). It's just old technology that doesn't come close to the old technology you find built by GE and Motorola. If you must redesign the oscillators, replace the exciter and PA, redesign/modify the receiver, come up with a controller, perhaps replace the power supply, hope the switches aren't intermittent (like some
RE: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Hello, I look at it this way, they used the Micor to decide how not to build the kind of transmitter Motorola did, the Micor is one of the most over engineered radios ever. They over-engineered it so they (Motorola) could use it in everything from mobiles to paging transmitters and paging link receivers. I am not saying it's a bad radio, just has way to many things in it that can go wrong. One example, switching the ground to turn the High Band Micor transmitter on, WHY!? If I remember correctly they did not do that in the UHF version, again WHY!? I worked on a lot of Micors and GE's back when they first came out, I can't see a lot of similarity between the two. If the engineers copied anything I can't see it much! Buying a competitors radio is a common practice, Quintron/Glenayre bought Motorola's radios and vise-versa, happens in every industry, not just with radios. When you get into someone coping a design the RCA people copied the GE Master II and had to pay big bucks when GE took them to court, RCA was pretty much out of business after that. Paul -Original Message- From: Kevin Custer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [RE: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]]
Gee John You're Real close to being right this time. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, JOHN MACKEY [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WOW!! Coy said he went with the spectrum because of money. Now this offer of a straight trade is one he can't pass up due to the money issue!! Kevin King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If money is your limiting factor. I will trade you a mastr II mobile for the spectrum. Just so I can keep it off the air. I have been the recipient of interference from one of those at a site I use to manage. Kevin -Original Message- From: ac0y5 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:56 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Thanks for the input Tony. The primary reason that I'm going to try the Spectrum is It's what I can afford now and It's something I havn't ran into before. If this one gives as much trouble as indicated by thoes of you who have owned them then I'll do something different. But for now it sounds like a challange and it's real cheep -$0.00-. I unexpectedly came into two 2 meter pairs at the same time. Here in Central Florida getting a pair is like finding hens teeth so the first pair got the MASTRII and the second pair will get the Spectrum until I get tired of tweeking it or until I get a replacment, another MASTRII. I can only afford a little at a time. 73 Tony and Thanks AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Tony King - W4ZT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First let me start out by saying that I currently have an SCR1000 in service on 2 meters but the Mastr II is cooking on the bench and will replace the Spectrum as soon as I finish the box to move the CAT- 1000 into. At 08:43 PM 11/26/2003, ac0y5 wrote: It seems a lot of the complaints are from oscillator drift and tuning drift. I have a few questions Does anyone know if the main problem resides in the exciter, or the power amp? I have replaced the PA in this SCR1000 because the old one failed. This is a 75 watt model which has the power control board (which gives you high/low power switching). The manual tells you that you MUST re-align the exciter to make it work properly on the reduced voltage. I always found it to be a bit unstable so it always stayed on high power. If you tune the PA, you'll find some instability there also. I don't know the answer to the question of bad components or bad design. I'd rather stick with what I've got personal experience with. As for oscillator drift, the SCR1000 was available with a crystal oven but mine didn't come that way. It's lived its entire life in the house where there have been no extremes of heat and cold. Yet, it would still move around some. I did place a small light bulb (in series with a resistor) right in the oscillator portion of the exciter board and it seemed to become more stable. My plan would eliminate all problems related to the oscillator because the Tx and Rx will be generated from a pair of Numerically Controlled Oscillators well filtered. I have already designed the entire circuit. Now, if Anyone knows where the problem may lay then I will be able to take care of the problem an external PA that I have or an exciter that I can buy cheaply. The power supply should be okay I had problems with the power supply. In the 75 watt model the power resistors which are mounted on terminal strips between the transformer and the large heat sink on the back get so hot that they will melt their leads right out of the solder. That compounds the problem and led to erosion of a resistor lead and supply failure. The entire supply is horribly inefficient, generating more heat than the entire unit consumed in its electronics. I finally removed the transformer, the resistors and the large heat sink with the pass transistors and powered the unit externally. and it has been stated that the receiver is quite sensitive. If necessary I can add a 5 or 7 pole helical resonator to the front end. It's sensitive if you can get it tuned without desensitization. That's the biggest problem with the receiver. It isn't as sharp as commercial receivers like the Mastr II or Micor so don't expect that kind of performance. From your many other posts it would appear you have considerable repeater experience which makes me wonder why you would want to take this on. It's not a joy to work on. The controller is junk (I replaced it with a CAT1000 over a decade ago). It's just old technology that doesn't come close to the old technology you find built by GE and Motorola. If you must redesign the oscillators, replace the exciter and PA,
RE: [Repeater-Builder] MSR-2000 Receiver acts like a barometer
Have you ruled out interference on the input that only occurs during these times? -Original Message- From: Chris Bunting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 5:21 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSR-2000 Receiver acts like a barometer Problem is, it only happens every couple weeks, and lasts for a couple hours, if I'm available and I spend 30 minutes to get the the repeater site, I can only hope it's still doing that. We tried all new feedline, I looked in the antenna/hardline connector and everything is dry. We even tried a brand new antenna and duplexer. This didn't fix the problem, which leads me to beleive it's in the receiver itself At 06:59 AM 11/30/03 +, you wrote: I am having a problem with my MSR-2000 VHF receiver going flaky whenever it is (1) wet out (2) pressure drops It has a oscillating noise on the receiver, and sensitivity goes to crap on the RX. Anyone else ever run into this? I have some spare receivers, I think I'll try replacing it first, and see if it fixes this. Could my xtals be the culprit?? -K1CWB 145.310/R Lancaster, PA More likely your antenna system. As a test go to the site on a day when it's really bad and unplug the feedline from your cabinet and plug a dummy load into the cabinet. Try the system with a handheld. I'll bet that it performs just fine. Then reconnect the feedline and move the dummy load to the top end of the feedline and repeat the test... ...and so forth until you get to the antenna itself. I'll bet that you have moisture in the antenna system somewhere. Mike WA6ILQ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000]
Maybe I'm reading more into this than I should, but it appears that the Spectrum was on the air from July 1976 until June 2001 -- 25 years -- before they purchased a couple of Micor repeaters. Like I said earlier, I had a Spectrum UHF, I believe it was the S7-R model, and it had the high stability oscillator options and the helical front end option. It ran for somewhere around 10 years with only very minor attention -- tweaked the frequency one time and had one solder problem. Prior to purchasing it, I checked with a couple of users that had Spectrum's in commercial service and got great reports from them. When I received the unit from the factory, I did have some issues with quality control -- mostly cosmetic -- and the factory took care of those issues. Obviously, I must have been the exception rather than the rule. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:56 PM Subject: Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000] ac0y5 wrote: I have been thinking about what has been said about this product and wonder if the problem isn't the low Q of the circuits. I have to do some testing and find out for my self. More reading on the subject: http://www.phil-mont.org/repeater.html Read the section July 1976 Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Paul Finch wrote: I worked on a lot of Micors and GE's back when they first came out, I can't see a lot of similarity between the two. If the engineers copied anything I can't see it much! Which maybe explains why you no longer work on them? For goodness sake, the radios are so similar it isn't funny.. Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-739
George Vagner wrote: I have a set of wacom WP-739 cans and was wondering if anyone has any experience with them for ham use, they have the external tuning stubs on the side and knobs on top. are they suitable for 600kc split on vhf or will i need more isolation say at 50 watts from a mastr II.?? take a look at it and tell me what you think it is i am not sure since i am not there to see it. http://vagner.com/fileexchange/download.php3?target=10foldername=nullaction=""> I tried but that page is protected. It isn't accessible by the public. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Repeater-Builder] Audio Processing
Does anyone have any audio processing secrets they would like to share?? I have been experimenting with an EQ compressor/expander, and got some amazing results. Just wondering if anyone else runs any processing equipment on their systems... http://www.lancastertowers.com/k1cwb/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Audio Processing
cwbunting wrote: Does anyone have any audio processing secrets they would like to share?? I have been experimenting with an EQ compressor/expander, and got some amazing results. Just wondering if anyone else runs any processing equipment on their systems... Read this: http://www.repeater-builder.com/rbtip/audioprocessing.html Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom WP-739
Kevin Custer wrote: george vagner wrote: I have a set of wacom WP-739 cans and was wondering if anyone has any experience with them for ham use, they have the external tuning stubs on the side and knobs on top. are they suitable for 600kc split on vhf or will i need more isolation say at 50 watts from a mastr II.?? take a look at it and tell me what you think it is i am not sure since i am not there to see it. http://vagner.com/fileexchange/download.php3?target=10foldername=nullaction=download Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
I believe the 1000 was the better known as the ML1000 ML for the RCA plant in Meadowlands. The 1000 or ML1000 was a larger (higher power version) of the Series 700 radios. With this discussion, I finally went out to my garage ... and went looking ... and found the following - all RCA: Three ML1000 manuals on 50 and 450 MHz bands. A Tac 200 (VEETAC) Fixed Stations manual (SM-8025626-1) 150 MHz (Signed and dated by the late Walt Braunstein, 9/80) The RF package (Transmitter/Receiver) at quick glance looks like a Mastr II ... careful study inside parts look like an early Motorola Syntor or 100 watt Mitrek. Uses a Temperature-Compensated Crystal Oscillator - TCXO that in the picture looks very like a take-off of a GE Integrated Circuit Oscillator Module - ICOM. The CTCSS 'Quiet Channel' module is immediately behind the front panel just like the Mastr II. The antenna relay is a take-off from a Micor. The receiver front end helical resonators are soldered to the circuit board. The control head looks like a cross between Micor and Mastr II control heads. Internally looks like a Mitrek control head. - I trust there a few folks who fondly remember the earlier RCA gear. For you, I found the following: An October 1978 Price Schedule for Replacement Parts and Accessories for RCA Mobile Communications Equipment. (2 copies) Advertising poop sheet for VEETAC control head stacking kits. Advertising poop sheet for the VEETAC High Band and UHF radios. Some TAC300 and TACTEC service info and a photocopied CMU-10A manual. Original factory supplied manuals: Super Carfone 450-470 mobile station. Remember the instant heating tubes? Carfone 450 CSU-15C ... base station used a 5894 in the final. Carfone CMV-4 ... the receiver crystal formula: Channel Freq - 0.915 Crystal Freq = -- = 11.62 - 13.3 Mc 13 The first LO crystal was used twice ... The receiver was 152-174 MHz ... The first IF was 12/.54 - 14.23 Mc (walking IF) The second IF was 915 Kc Used a relay to change channels - the relay contacts switched the crystals ... not crystal oscillators. Carfone Portlable Transmitter-Receiver CTR-1A weighed 44 Lbs. Fleetfone CMV-2EL, CMV-3EL, low band, used 1 or 2 807's in the final depending on the power output. I have two copies: one is stamped Mann C E on the front cover. Remember the RCA 'E Line'? E = Efficiency CMUE-15A2T with a Joe Olivera signature on the front. Super Basefone 25 - 54 MHz, 100 watt written on the front is Baldwin Hills (A CHP radio site in the Los Angeles area) Remember the FCC required 452-C tags - Transmitter Identification Tags to be stuck to every FCC licensed transmitter? I have a few of the original RCA labeled 452-C tags. Another place in my garage ... you remember the Motorola Service Station peel-off-the-back stickers you stuck on your your service truck? I have one that says RCA. You thought you collect stuff? Neil McKie - WA6KLA Kevin Custer wrote: You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? And the chief designer of the M2 was hired away by RCA. A while later a new RCA mobile came out (the name escapes me). The designer admitted that it could have been named the Mastr-3 as it was a Mastr II with all the bugs fixed. This was long before the actual GE M3 came out. Stop by your regional library some time and look in the periodical index for the Fortune magazine article abut the rush project the RCA mobile radio division had to get the new radio out the door. I whish I had kept that copy when my dad was a subscriber. Mike WA6ILQ If memory serves me correctly, that would be either the RCA TAC 200 and/or RCA 1000 built about 50 miles from my home. And yes the Chief Design Engineer was taken away from GE's Mobile Radio Division in Lynchburg VA to go work for RCA in Meadowlands (Little Washington) Pennsylvania. Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]
When ever you want. I was just trying to help. I have extra and could let it go to get you running. -Original Message- From: ac0y5 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:29 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Gee Kevin, That sounds like a great deal! I would like to take you up on that deal! I would like to play with this good looking machine for a while. How long do I have to take you up on your offer? I love to do Failure Analysis. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If money is your limiting factor. I will trade you a mastr II mobile for the spectrum. Just so I can keep it off the air. I have been the recipient of interference from one of those at a site I use to manage. Kevin -Original Message- From: ac0y5 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:56 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Thanks for the input Tony. The primary reason that I'm going to try the Spectrum is It's what I can afford now and It's something I havn't ran into before. If this one gives as much trouble as indicated by thoes of you who have owned them then I'll do something different. But for now it sounds like a challange and it's real cheep -$0.00-. I unexpectedly came into two 2 meter pairs at the same time. Here in Central Florida getting a pair is like finding hens teeth so the first pair got the MASTRII and the second pair will get the Spectrum until I get tired of tweeking it or until I get a replacment, another MASTRII. I can only afford a little at a time. 73 Tony and Thanks AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Tony King - W4ZT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First let me start out by saying that I currently have an SCR1000 in service on 2 meters but the Mastr II is cooking on the bench and will replace the Spectrum as soon as I finish the box to move the CAT- 1000 into. At 08:43 PM 11/26/2003, ac0y5 wrote: It seems a lot of the complaints are from oscillator drift and tuning drift. I have a few questions Does anyone know if the main problem resides in the exciter, or the power amp? I have replaced the PA in this SCR1000 because the old one failed. This is a 75 watt model which has the power control board (which gives you high/low power switching). The manual tells you that you MUST re-align the exciter to make it work properly on the reduced voltage. I always found it to be a bit unstable so it always stayed on high power. If you tune the PA, you'll find some instability there also. I don't know the answer to the question of bad components or bad design. I'd rather stick with what I've got personal experience with. As for oscillator drift, the SCR1000 was available with a crystal oven but mine didn't come that way. It's lived its entire life in the house where there have been no extremes of heat and cold. Yet, it would still move around some. I did place a small light bulb (in series with a resistor) right in the oscillator portion of the exciter board and it seemed to become more stable. My plan would eliminate all problems related to the oscillator because the Tx and Rx will be generated from a pair of Numerically Controlled Oscillators well filtered. I have already designed the entire circuit. Now, if Anyone knows where the problem may lay then I will be able to take care of the problem an external PA that I have or an exciter that I can buy cheaply. The power supply should be okay I had problems with the power supply. In the 75 watt model the power resistors which are mounted on terminal strips between the transformer and the large heat sink on the back get so hot that they will melt their leads right out of the solder. That compounds the problem and led to erosion of a resistor lead and supply failure. The entire supply is horribly inefficient, generating more heat than the entire unit consumed in its electronics. I finally removed the transformer, the resistors and the large heat sink with the pass transistors and powered the unit externally. and it has been stated that the receiver is quite sensitive. If necessary I can add a 5 or 7 pole helical resonator to the front end. It's sensitive if you can get it tuned without desensitization. That's the biggest problem with the receiver. It isn't as sharp as commercial receivers like the Mastr II or Micor so don't expect that kind of performance. From your many other posts it would appear you have considerable repeater experience which makes me wonder why you would want to take this on. It's not a joy to work on. The controller is junk (I replaced it with a CAT1000 over a decade ago). It's just old technology that doesn't
RE: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Kevin, Explain please! The only thing I see is the TCXO's that are even anywhere close. Show me a GE transistor radio that ever used negative keying in the exciter! By the way, I left the two way dealer for a rather large increase in pay to go into paging in 1983, that is the reason I left two-way. Also, I still do a lot of work for the same family I used to work for in two way industry and now have my own two way business! Anything else? Paul -Original Message- From: Kevin Custer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 10:02 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. Paul Finch wrote: I worked on a lot of Micors and GE's back when they first came out, I can't see a lot of similarity between the two. If the engineers copied anything I can't see it much! Which maybe explains why you no longer work on them? For goodness sake, the radios are so similar it isn't funny.. Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Paul, I read that. After looking at the VEETAC Manual I have here, I agree with you. The message I sent (see below) I wrote a couple of hours before I sent it. Your comment (also below) came in after I had sent mine out. Correct me if I am wrong, didn't GE finally own the two-way radio division of RCA? Neil Paul Finch wrote: Neil, As I said in a earlier email, RCA was sued successfully by GE because it was so obvious that RCA had copied the GE Master II design. The RCA looked almost exactly like the GE, what was RCA thinking! RCA would never recover and shortly after closed the radio division. Paul -Original Message- From: Neil McKie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 10:14 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. I believe the 1000 was the better known as the ML1000 ML for the RCA plant in Meadowlands. The 1000 or ML1000 was a larger (higher power version) of the Series 700 radios. With this discussion, I finally went out to my garage ... and went looking ... and found the following - all RCA: Three ML1000 manuals on 50 and 450 MHz bands. A Tac 200 (VEETAC) Fixed Stations manual (SM-8025626-1) 150 MHz (Signed and dated by the late Walt Braunstein, 9/80) The RF package (Transmitter/Receiver) at quick glance looks like a Mastr II ... careful study inside parts look like an early Motorola Syntor or 100 watt Mitrek. Uses a Temperature-Compensated Crystal Oscillator - TCXO that in the picture looks very like a take-off of a GE Integrated Circuit Oscillator Module - ICOM. The CTCSS 'Quiet Channel' module is immediately behind the front panel just like the Mastr II. The antenna relay is a take-off from a Micor. The receiver front end helical resonators are soldered to the circuit board. The control head looks like a cross between Micor and Mastr II control heads. Internally looks like a Mitrek control head. - I trust there a few folks who fondly remember the earlier RCA gear. For you, I found the following: An October 1978 Price Schedule for Replacement Parts and Accessories for RCA Mobile Communications Equipment. (2 copies) Advertising poop sheet for VEETAC control head stacking kits. Advertising poop sheet for the VEETAC High Band and UHF radios. Some TAC300 and TACTEC service info and a photocopied CMU-10A manual. Original factory supplied manuals: Super Carfone 450-470 mobile station. Remember the instant heating tubes? Carfone 450 CSU-15C ... base station used a 5894 in the final. Carfone CMV-4 ... the receiver crystal formula: Channel Freq - 0.915 Crystal Freq = -- = 11.62 - 13.3 Mc 13 The first LO crystal was used twice ... The receiver was 152-174 MHz ... The first IF was 12/.54 - 14.23 Mc (walking IF) The second IF was 915 Kc Used a relay to change channels - the relay contacts switched the crystals ... not crystal oscillators. Carfone Portlable Transmitter-Receiver CTR-1A weighed 44 Lbs. Fleetfone CMV-2EL, CMV-3EL, low band, used 1 or 2 807's in the final depending on the power output. I have two copies: one is stamped Mann C E on the front cover. Remember the RCA 'E Line'? E = Efficiency CMUE-15A2T with a Joe Olivera signature on the front. Super Basefone 25 - 54 MHz, 100 watt written on the front is Baldwin Hills (A CHP radio site in the Los Angeles area) Remember the FCC required 452-C tags - Transmitter Identification Tags to be stuck to every FCC licensed transmitter? I have a few of the original RCA labeled 452-C tags. Another place in my garage ... you remember the Motorola Service Station peel-off-the-back stickers you stuck on your your service truck? I have one that says RCA. You thought you collect stuff? Neil McKie - WA6KLA Kevin Custer wrote: You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? And the chief designer of the M2 was hired away by RCA. A while later a new RCA mobile came out (the name escapes me). The designer admitted that it could have been named the Mastr-3 as it was a Mastr II with all the bugs fixed. This was long before the actual GE M3 came out. Stop by your regional library some time and look in the periodical index for the Fortune magazine article abut the rush project the RCA mobile radio division had to get the new radio out the door. I whish I had kept that copy when my dad was a subscriber. Mike WA6ILQ If memory serves me correctly, that would be either the RCA TAC 200 and/or RCA 1000 built about 50 miles from my home. And yes the Chief Design Engineer was taken away from
RE: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Neil, As a matter of fact I think you are correct. I seem to remember something to that effect. Was that a part of the settlement with RCA? Maybe so. Paul -Original Message- From: Neil McKie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 11:06 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. Paul, I read that. After looking at the VEETAC Manual I have here, I agree with you. The message I sent (see below) I wrote a couple of hours before I sent it. Your comment (also below) came in after I had sent mine out. Correct me if I am wrong, didn't GE finally own the two-way radio division of RCA? Neil Paul Finch wrote: Neil, As I said in a earlier email, RCA was sued successfully by GE because it was so obvious that RCA had copied the GE Master II design. The RCA looked almost exactly like the GE, what was RCA thinking! RCA would never recover and shortly after closed the radio division. Paul -Original Message- From: Neil McKie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 10:14 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. I believe the 1000 was the better known as the ML1000 ML for the RCA plant in Meadowlands. The 1000 or ML1000 was a larger (higher power version) of the Series 700 radios. With this discussion, I finally went out to my garage ... and went looking ... and found the following - all RCA: Three ML1000 manuals on 50 and 450 MHz bands. A Tac 200 (VEETAC) Fixed Stations manual (SM-8025626-1) 150 MHz (Signed and dated by the late Walt Braunstein, 9/80) The RF package (Transmitter/Receiver) at quick glance looks like a Mastr II ... careful study inside parts look like an early Motorola Syntor or 100 watt Mitrek. Uses a Temperature-Compensated Crystal Oscillator - TCXO that in the picture looks very like a take-off of a GE Integrated Circuit Oscillator Module - ICOM. The CTCSS 'Quiet Channel' module is immediately behind the front panel just like the Mastr II. The antenna relay is a take-off from a Micor. The receiver front end helical resonators are soldered to the circuit board. The control head looks like a cross between Micor and Mastr II control heads. Internally looks like a Mitrek control head. - I trust there a few folks who fondly remember the earlier RCA gear. For you, I found the following: An October 1978 Price Schedule for Replacement Parts and Accessories for RCA Mobile Communications Equipment. (2 copies) Advertising poop sheet for VEETAC control head stacking kits. Advertising poop sheet for the VEETAC High Band and UHF radios. Some TAC300 and TACTEC service info and a photocopied CMU-10A manual. Original factory supplied manuals: Super Carfone 450-470 mobile station. Remember the instant heating tubes? Carfone 450 CSU-15C ... base station used a 5894 in the final. Carfone CMV-4 ... the receiver crystal formula: Channel Freq - 0.915 Crystal Freq = -- = 11.62 - 13.3 Mc 13 The first LO crystal was used twice ... The receiver was 152-174 MHz ... The first IF was 12/.54 - 14.23 Mc (walking IF) The second IF was 915 Kc Used a relay to change channels - the relay contacts switched the crystals ... not crystal oscillators. Carfone Portlable Transmitter-Receiver CTR-1A weighed 44 Lbs. Fleetfone CMV-2EL, CMV-3EL, low band, used 1 or 2 807's in the final depending on the power output. I have two copies: one is stamped Mann C E on the front cover. Remember the RCA 'E Line'? E = Efficiency CMUE-15A2T with a Joe Olivera signature on the front. Super Basefone 25 - 54 MHz, 100 watt written on the front is Baldwin Hills (A CHP radio site in the Los Angeles area) Remember the FCC required 452-C tags - Transmitter Identification Tags to be stuck to every FCC licensed transmitter? I have a few of the original RCA labeled 452-C tags. Another place in my garage ... you remember the Motorola Service Station peel-off-the-back stickers you stuck on your your service truck? I have one that says RCA. You thought you collect stuff? Neil McKie - WA6KLA Kevin Custer wrote: You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? And the chief designer of the M2 was hired away by RCA. A while later a new RCA mobile came out (the name escapes me). The designer admitted that it could have been named the Mastr-3 as it was a Mastr II with all the bugs fixed. This was long before the actual GE M3 came out. Stop by your regional library some time and look in the periodical index for the Fortune magazine article abut the rush project the RCA mobile radio
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000]
Gee Chuck, are you shure that you want to admit to it, After seeing how John has nothing to do but bash MOST ANY ONE THAT GETS IN HIS WAY? He has never ever gotten close as far as figuring me out. He has only shown himself up for evaluation and it didn't take but about two posts for me to besure about my eval of him. And he has enforced it with every post. 73 Chuck and I'm happy for your experiance. AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chuck Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe I'm reading more into this than I should, but it appears that the Spectrum was on the air from July 1976 until June 2001 -- 25 years -- before they purchased a couple of Micor repeaters. Like I said earlier, I had a Spectrum UHF, I believe it was the S7- R model, and it had the high stability oscillator options and the helical front end option. It ran for somewhere around 10 years with only very minor attention -- tweaked the frequency one time and had one solder problem. Prior to purchasing it, I checked with a couple of users that had Spectrum's in commercial service and got great reports from them. When I received the unit from the factory, I did have some issues with quality control -- mostly cosmetic -- and the factory took care of those issues. Obviously, I must have been the exception rather than the rule. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:56 PM Subject: Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000] ac0y5 wrote: I have been thinking about what has been said about this product and wonder if the problem isn't the low Q of the circuits. I have to do some testing and find out for my self. More reading on the subject: http://www.phil-mont.org/repeater.html Read the section July 1976 Kevin Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: GE Stuff.....
WHAT GE C O P I E D the MICOR? The engineers that told you that was on drugs! If the Micor was looked at it was on HOW NOT to build a radio. The Micor works but not as well as the MASTRII. (boy am I going to get killed for that) The MASTRII is a GREAT BASIC radio. The MASTR PRO must have been copied from the Micor also, because it to is modular. A receiver module , a Exciter/ PA module, and a power supply. All modules are solid components. It is more than SOME Micor repeaters that I've seen. I think the Progress Line was some what modular, and so was some of the pre Micor Motorola's (trying to use some Very rusty brain cells). 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Paul Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I look at it this way, they used the Micor to decide how not to build the kind of transmitter Motorola did, the Micor is one of the most over engineered radios ever. They over-engineered it so they (Motorola) could use it in everything from mobiles to paging transmitters and paging link receivers. I am not saying it's a bad radio, just has way to many things in it that can go wrong. One example, switching the ground to turn the High Band Micor transmitter on, WHY!? If I remember correctly they did not do that in the UHF version, again WHY!? By the way, If you switch A- to ground to key the exciter, why does taking the A- to the PA to ground take it off the air (output goes to zero)? (in a MSR2000. Some say that it is a cheep Micor) I worked on a lot of Micors and GE's back when they first came out, I can't see a lot of similarity between the two. If the engineers copied anything I can't see it much! Buying a competitors radio is a common practice, Quintron/Glenayre bought Motorola's radios and vise-versa, happens in every industry, not just with radios. When you get into someone coping a design the RCA people copied the GE Master II and had to pay big bucks when GE took them to court, RCA was pretty much out of business after that. Paul -Original Message- From: Kevin Custer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]
Sounds like a great deal Kevin! Where are you located? In Georgia? Where is Ackworth? will email you off board. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When ever you want. I was just trying to help. I have extra and could let it go to get you running. -Original Message- From: ac0y5 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:29 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Gee Kevin, That sounds like a great deal! I would like to take you up on that deal! I would like to play with this good looking machine for a while. How long do I have to take you up on your offer? I love to do Failure Analysis. 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If money is your limiting factor. I will trade you a mastr II mobile for the spectrum. Just so I can keep it off the air. I have been the recipient of interference from one of those at a site I use to manage. Kevin -Original Message- From: ac0y5 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:56 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]] Thanks for the input Tony. The primary reason that I'm going to try the Spectrum is It's what I can afford now and It's something I havn't ran into before. If this one gives as much trouble as indicated by thoes of you who have owned them then I'll do something different. But for now it sounds like a challange and it's real cheep -$0.00-. I unexpectedly came into two 2 meter pairs at the same time. Here in Central Florida getting a pair is like finding hens teeth so the first pair got the MASTRII and the second pair will get the Spectrum until I get tired of tweeking it or until I get a replacment, another MASTRII. I can only afford a little at a time. 73 Tony and Thanks AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Tony King - W4ZT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First let me start out by saying that I currently have an SCR1000 in service on 2 meters but the Mastr II is cooking on the bench and will replace the Spectrum as soon as I finish the box to move the CAT- 1000 into. At 08:43 PM 11/26/2003, ac0y5 wrote: It seems a lot of the complaints are from oscillator drift and tuning drift. I have a few questions Does anyone know if the main problem resides in the exciter, or the power amp? I have replaced the PA in this SCR1000 because the old one failed. This is a 75 watt model which has the power control board (which gives you high/low power switching). The manual tells you that you MUST re-align the exciter to make it work properly on the reduced voltage. I always found it to be a bit unstable so it always stayed on high power. If you tune the PA, you'll find some instability there also. I don't know the answer to the question of bad components or bad design. I'd rather stick with what I've got personal experience with. As for oscillator drift, the SCR1000 was available with a crystal oven but mine didn't come that way. It's lived its entire life in the house where there have been no extremes of heat and cold. Yet, it would still move around some. I did place a small light bulb (in series with a resistor) right in the oscillator portion of the exciter board and it seemed to become more stable. My plan would eliminate all problems related to the oscillator because the Tx and Rx will be generated from a pair of Numerically Controlled Oscillators well filtered. I have already designed the entire circuit. Now, if Anyone knows where the problem may lay then I will be able to take care of the problem an external PA that I have or an exciter that I can buy cheaply. The power supply should be okay I had problems with the power supply. In the 75 watt model the power resistors which are mounted on terminal strips between the transformer and the large heat sink on the back get so hot that they will melt their leads right out of the solder. That compounds the problem and led to erosion of a resistor lead and supply failure. The entire supply is horribly inefficient, generating more heat than the entire unit consumed in its electronics. I finally removed the transformer, the resistors and the large heat sink with the pass transistors and powered the unit externally. and it has been stated that the receiver is quite sensitive. If necessary I can add a 5 or 7 pole helical resonator to the front end. It's sensitive if you can get it tuned without desensitization. That's the biggest problem with the receiver. It isn't as sharp as commercial receivers like the
Re: [Re: [Re: [RE: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?]]]
At 06:00 PM 11/30/03 -0600, you wrote: A few people from this list are asking me what I was referring to in the statement below. My father recently died. John , Sorry to hear about the death of your Father , He sure did a lot in his lifetime and sure made this World a Little better place with His presence. Don KA9QJG Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Re: GE Stuff.....]
Wrong. The Mastr Pro came out several years BEFORE the Micor. ac0y5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNIP The MASTR PRO must have been copied from the Micor also, because it to is modular. A receiver module , a Exciter/ PA module, and a power supply. All modules are solid components. It is more than SOME Micor repeaters that I've seen. I think the Progress Line was some what modular, and so was some of the pre Micor Motorola's (trying to use some Very rusty brain cells). 73 AC0Y --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Paul Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I look at it this way, they used the Micor to decide how not to build the kind of transmitter Motorola did, the Micor is one of the most over engineered radios ever. They over-engineered it so they (Motorola) could use it in everything from mobiles to paging transmitters and paging link receivers. I am not saying it's a bad radio, just has way to many things in it that can go wrong. One example, switching the ground to turn the High Band Micor transmitter on, WHY!? If I remember correctly they did not do that in the UHF version, again WHY!? By the way, If you switch A- to ground to key the exciter, why does taking the A- to the PA to ground take it off the air (output goes to zero)? (in a MSR2000. Some say that it is a cheep Micor) I worked on a lot of Micors and GE's back when they first came out, I can't see a lot of similarity between the two. If the engineers copied anything I can't see it much! Buying a competitors radio is a common practice, Quintron/Glenayre bought Motorola's radios and vise-versa, happens in every industry, not just with radios. When you get into someone coping a design the RCA people copied the GE Master II and had to pay big bucks when GE took them to court, RCA was pretty much out of business after that. Paul -Original Message- From: Kevin Custer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 9:29 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff. In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec Virden Clark Beckman wrote: The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big thing in 72 when that idea debuted... You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the Mastr II? Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: 5 LARGE Helical resonators. 11 Meg I-F Dual Squelch Elementized Channel Oscillators Power sensing RF protection Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too early to remember them all Kevin Custer Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
