Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is accurate)

[ian wells]

hi again bob
i carnt receive any signal on 10 meg .
thansk ian
- Original Message -
From: "ian wells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is
accurate)


> ok thanks bob i will give it a go
> ian
> - Original Message -
> From: "Robert D. Mantell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 11:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is
> accurate)
>
>
> > It never fails - pose a simple question, and you get a series of overly
> > complicated answers involving
> > expensive equipment.  To calibrate a local frequency standard, one needs
> > a short wave rx with an
> > s meter (mechanical type), and a means of balancing the local standard
> > signal level with that of WWV
> > at 10 MHz.  All you need to do is adjust the local standard while
> > watching the s meter.  As it is
> > adjusted, you will notice the s meter flutter at a decreasing rate as
> > you reach 10 Mhz.  When you
> > are dead on, the s meter will drift slower and finally stop.  You are
> > there.  And please, do not argue
> > about doppler, selective fading, etc.  Sure you will be able to see
> > these effects, but they will not affect
> > the accuracy of this operation.  Just watch for the response when the
> > WWV or whatever signal is steady.
> >
> > I hope this helps
> >
> > Bob - W3TGG
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >Ian, you should have time standard frequencies in Australia on 5 10 and
> 15
> > >MHz. If you have a secondary receiver, tune in the 10 MHz and compare
it
> to the
> > >output of the 10 MHz timebase in your service monitor.
> > >
> > >This has  been one of my obsessions for a while now, to find a way of
> more
> > >accurately setting my 10 MHz timebase in my service monitor.
> > >
> > >Zero beating with our WWV signal will only get you within a cycle or
so.
> > >(i.e., one cycle off at 10 MHz equals 40 hertz error at 400 MHz) And
then
> there's
> > >trying to find a time when the signal is strong and doesn't fade too
> much.
> > >Since I live about 50 miles south of Ft Collins you would think I would
> have a
> > >strong signal all the time, but no.
> > >
> > >So I figure there must be a way to use a scope to compare two audio
> signals
> > >(X/Y like we do with PL tones) and be able to set it more accurately. I
> have
> > >tried comparing the 1000 cycle audio tone from an external receiver
when
> I
> > >generate a signal from the service monitor I kc off frequency from WWV.
> Then
> > >comparing that to the 1kc tone generated from the monitors own PL tone
> generator
> > >(phase locked to the 10 MHz time bases). You should be able to see a
slow
> drift
> > >between the two on the oscilloscope but so far no success, too much
noise
> to
> > >see much.
> > >
> > >Does someone have a way of getting closer than 1 cycle? (no I haven't
> bought
> > >a GPS timebase receiver yet but have drooled over them on Ebay.
> > >
> > >I've always wondered if a tuned RF receiver using 10 MHz crystals for
IF
> > >filters would give you a strong 10 MHz carrier that could be used for
> calibration.
> > >
> > >Hopefully this is still somewhat on topic since we all need to set our
> > >repeaters on frequency.
> > >
> > >Art - KC7GF
> > >Golden, CO
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >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] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is accurate)

[ian wells]

ok thanks bob i will give it a go
ian
- Original Message -
From: "Robert D. Mantell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is
accurate)


> It never fails - pose a simple question, and you get a series of overly
> complicated answers involving
> expensive equipment.  To calibrate a local frequency standard, one needs
> a short wave rx with an
> s meter (mechanical type), and a means of balancing the local standard
> signal level with that of WWV
> at 10 MHz.  All you need to do is adjust the local standard while
> watching the s meter.  As it is
> adjusted, you will notice the s meter flutter at a decreasing rate as
> you reach 10 Mhz.  When you
> are dead on, the s meter will drift slower and finally stop.  You are
> there.  And please, do not argue
> about doppler, selective fading, etc.  Sure you will be able to see
> these effects, but they will not affect
> the accuracy of this operation.  Just watch for the response when the
> WWV or whatever signal is steady.
>
> I hope this helps
>
> Bob - W3TGG
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Ian, you should have time standard frequencies in Australia on 5 10 and
15
> >MHz. If you have a secondary receiver, tune in the 10 MHz and compare it
to the
> >output of the 10 MHz timebase in your service monitor.
> >
> >This has  been one of my obsessions for a while now, to find a way of
more
> >accurately setting my 10 MHz timebase in my service monitor.
> >
> >Zero beating with our WWV signal will only get you within a cycle or so.
> >(i.e., one cycle off at 10 MHz equals 40 hertz error at 400 MHz) And then
there's
> >trying to find a time when the signal is strong and doesn't fade too
much.
> >Since I live about 50 miles south of Ft Collins you would think I would
have a
> >strong signal all the time, but no.
> >
> >So I figure there must be a way to use a scope to compare two audio
signals
> >(X/Y like we do with PL tones) and be able to set it more accurately. I
have
> >tried comparing the 1000 cycle audio tone from an external receiver when
I
> >generate a signal from the service monitor I kc off frequency from WWV.
Then
> >comparing that to the 1kc tone generated from the monitors own PL tone
generator
> >(phase locked to the 10 MHz time bases). You should be able to see a slow
drift
> >between the two on the oscilloscope but so far no success, too much noise
to
> >see much.
> >
> >Does someone have a way of getting closer than 1 cycle? (no I haven't
bought
> >a GPS timebase receiver yet but have drooled over them on Ebay.
> >
> >I've always wondered if a tuned RF receiver using 10 MHz crystals for IF
> >filters would give you a strong 10 MHz carrier that could be used for
calibration.
> >
> >Hopefully this is still somewhat on topic since we all need to set our
> >repeaters on frequency.
> >
> >Art - KC7GF
> >Golden, CO
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >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] Mitrek test

[Wayne]

 Hmm, this might be possible on RX.
 Not sure about TX though.
 Similar idea as to what has been done with many other units in the past,
using VFO instead of crystal.
 but for RX test, I'd think you'd also need another signal generator of some
kind.
 This is why they tell you to check it on its original frequency (or one
close to it) before modifying.

 Wayne WA2YNE
Outgoing and incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by NORTON 2004 anti-virus system


- Original Message - 
From: "Chuck Kelsey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mitrek test


> Although I've never tried it, I have heard some say that you can inject
the
> crystal frequency with a service monitor. Someone more familiar with the
> Mitrek could better advise, however.
>
> Chuck
> WB2EDV
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "fyreonhigh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:40 PM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Mitrek test
>
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Just wondering if it is possible to test a Mitrek mobile without
> > channel elements in it...I just want to verify that it is working
> > before I get the elements..I do have all cables/control
> > head/mic/speaker/keys, etc
> >
> > 73, Ken N2ZN
> >






 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is accurate)

[Burt Lang]

You don't even need an S-meter.  The background noise level will vary
inversely with the signal level and as you approach zero beat, the noise
will flutter slower until it rises and falls very slowly. It is just as
accurate as using an S-meter. I have used that technique many times on
my freq counter timebase.

Burt VE2BMQ>>

"Robert D. Mantell" wrote:
> 
> It never fails - pose a simple question, and you get a series of overly
> complicated answers involving
> expensive equipment.  To calibrate a local frequency standard, one needs
> a short wave rx with an
> s meter (mechanical type), and a means of balancing the local standard
> signal level with that of WWV
> at 10 MHz.  All you need to do is adjust the local standard while
> watching the s meter.  As it is
> adjusted, you will notice the s meter flutter at a decreasing rate as
> you reach 10 Mhz.  When you
> are dead on, the s meter will drift slower and finally stop.  You are
> there.  And please, do not argue
> about doppler, selective fading, etc.  Sure you will be able to see
> these effects, but they will not affect
> the accuracy of this operation.  Just watch for the response when the
> WWV or whatever signal is steady.
> 
> I hope this helps
> 
> Bob - W3TGG
>



 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000

[Larry Simon]

I have had a VHF one up on the air for over 2 years now and no problems.
You do have to use true DOS to program it; you can not use a DOS window
due to time sharing of windows running. As stated in a previous post
also you must use the RJ45 jack that is inside of the repeater to
program it.

Larry
KC7QJO
AFMARS AFA6BR
www.nellisrac.org

-Original Message-
From: feederclamp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 6:41 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000

Hi
I bought a Yaesu VXR-5000 repeater which was new in the box. After 
many attempts and two programming cables, it still won't programme! 
If Yaesu products are all like this! Have i spent money on something 
that's scrap? Some people say it's my computer but i don't think so.
Any help with this problem of a so called repeater would be most 
welcome.





 

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] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[Steve S. Bosshard \(NU5D\)]

Looks like full circle here.  Best memory serves me, Gates Radio was the
father of Quintron in Quincy, Ill, sold off to Glenayre, and now back to
ISC in Quincy.

Ssb






 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Repeater Preamp

[Steve S. Bosshard \(NU5D\)]

Howdy Dino regarding the preamp and
filter.

 

First thing that sticks out is sweeping
the line.  This is a good figure of merit for an antenna system and
cable.  The process involves running a sweep across the band and a
graphical representation of VSWR across the band.  The unit of measure is
called rho, or return loss, Measured in dB.  There is a direct relation
between return loss and VSWR, where a 25 dB return loss represents a very low
standing wave ratio, and ideal was 28 to 30 db on microwave antennas.

 

A good return loss or low standing wave is
an indication of a good antenna and feedline, needed for good duplex operation.

 

Noise figure is a measure of the inherent
noise generated in an amplifier, and the result of several stages in
cascade.  Each stage contributes gain and noise.  A low noise high
gain amplifier ahead of several noisy stages can dramatically improve the
overall noise figure of a receiver, and is one of the benefits of a low noise
preamp.

 

At UHF the most common filter would be
either a cavity or else a helical resonator.  A good quality BpBr duplexer
ahead of the preamp might be just AOK, or else an additional cavity ahead of
the preamp might be needed if there is much receiver desense.

 

A lot depends on other transmitters at the
same or near by locations, and lots of cut and try is needed.

 

Regards,

 

Steve

NU5D

 













Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Hi Paul,
Yes I use ISC, Have a 500 watt amp back there for repair now, they 
have been good. Was talking about Glenayre as a company, they left me 
and some others kinda high and dry, but thanks to ISC and some others 
I think we will be OK. I love Glenayre stuff wish they were still 
going strong..

Frank
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Finch" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank,
> 
> You can still get Glenayre equipment if you want it, check with 
Mike at ISC
> Technologies, it's in Quincy, I Illinois, guess why you can get 
equipment
> from them!
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:53 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> 
> 
> Paul
> I have some glenayre equipment, pricey hi tech stuff, but glenayre
> has gone out of the equipment building business, now just doing
> messaging software etc.Tech supportand parts will become very hard 
to
> get.
> Thanks,
> Frank
> 
> 
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Finch"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Glenayre  That is if you can afford them!!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:13 PM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> >
> >
> > I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and
> > squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of
> > determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good 
discussion
> > and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question
> was
> > if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that 
would
> > operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>)
> > Frank, KO5S
> >
> > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an
> > > arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the
> > public
> > > safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as
> > such
> > > links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal.
> If
> > you
> > > could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get
> voted
> > for
> > > retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone 
(users
> > of
> > > this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user
> > radio.
> > > As such, it is a rather highly secure link method.
> > >
> > > But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and 
have
> it
> > > send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode 
faster
> > than
> > > CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only
> > > drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the
> > transmit
> > > audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). 
Then,
> > just
> > > switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch 
the
> > logic
> > > in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than
> > > inactive.
> > >
> > > My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-)
> > >
> > > Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an
> ID
> > on
> > > it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule
> > book. :-)
> > >
> > > Joe M.
> > >
> > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full 
time
> > link
> > > > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and
> > fiddle
> > > > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as 
well.
> > > > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say 
that
> > > > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. 
My
> > copy
> > > > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I
> > KNEW you
> > > > would respond... 73,Lee
> > > >
> > > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: 
> > > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> > > >
> > > > > Lee,
> > > > >
> > > > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to
> > > > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to 
TX
> > > > 24/7/365.
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe M.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are
> > illegal !!!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[Paul Finch]

Frank,

You can still get Glenayre equipment if you want it, check with Mike at ISC
Technologies, it's in Quincy, I Illinois, guess why you can get equipment
from them!

Paul


-Original Message-
From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:53 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters


Paul
I have some glenayre equipment, pricey hi tech stuff, but glenayre
has gone out of the equipment building business, now just doing
messaging software etc.Tech supportand parts will become very hard to
get.
Thanks,
Frank


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Finch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glenayre  That is if you can afford them!!!
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:13 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
>
>
> I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and
> squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of
> determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good discussion
> and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question
was
> if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that would
> operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>)
> Frank, KO5S
>
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an
> > arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the
> public
> > safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as
> such
> > links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal.
If
> you
> > could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get
voted
> for
> > retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone (users
> of
> > this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user
> radio.
> > As such, it is a rather highly secure link method.
> >
> > But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and have
it
> > send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode faster
> than
> > CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only
> > drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the
> transmit
> > audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). Then,
> just
> > switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch the
> logic
> > in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than
> > inactive.
> >
> > My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-)
> >
> > Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an
ID
> on
> > it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule
> book. :-)
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > Lee Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full time
> link
> > > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and
> fiddle
> > > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as well.
> > > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say that
> > > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My
> copy
> > > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I
> KNEW you
> > > would respond... 73,Lee
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: 
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> > >
> > > > Lee,
> > > >
> > > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to
> > > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago.
> > > >
> > > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to TX
> > > 24/7/365.
> > > >
> > > > Joe M.
> > > >
> > > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are
> illegal !!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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/








 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Paul
I have some glenayre equipment, pricey hi tech stuff, but glenayre 
has gone out of the equipment building business, now just doing 
messaging software etc.Tech supportand parts will become very hard to 
get.
Thanks,
Frank


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Finch" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glenayre  That is if you can afford them!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:13 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> 
> 
> I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and
> squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of
> determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good discussion
> and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question 
was
> if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that would
> operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>)
> Frank, KO5S
> 
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an
> > arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the
> public
> > safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as
> such
> > links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal. 
If
> you
> > could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get 
voted
> for
> > retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone (users
> of
> > this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user
> radio.
> > As such, it is a rather highly secure link method.
> >
> > But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and have 
it
> > send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode faster
> than
> > CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only
> > drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the
> transmit
> > audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). Then,
> just
> > switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch the
> logic
> > in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than
> > inactive.
> >
> > My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-)
> >
> > Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an 
ID
> on
> > it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule
> book. :-)
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > Lee Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full time
> link
> > > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and
> fiddle
> > > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as well.
> > > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say that
> > > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My
> copy
> > > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I
> KNEW you
> > > would respond... 73,Lee
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: 
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> > >
> > > > Lee,
> > > >
> > > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to
> > > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago.
> > > >
> > > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to TX
> > > 24/7/365.
> > > >
> > > > Joe M.
> > > >
> > > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are
> illegal !!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] tx/rx can

[doug]

the TX/RX can listed has been sold.



thanks for the replies.



doug





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Repeater Preamp

[uplink28]

Thanks for your input Steve. I'm actually changing my duplexer setup to the Motorola T1500 series 4 can setup when the weather allows. I believe they're BpBR. I know that when the line was swept a few months ago that I have the noise figures. I have to get them again. Maybe that would be a good indicator of what I need. Regardless of needing a preamp or not I'm still planning on adding a filter or bandpass cavities in the receive side. I just don't know exactly which way to go cavity or filter? Do you have any suggestions? What kind of filter would you use? I'm also thinking about putting a circulator on the transmit side. Any thoughts? Thanks again.
 
Dino"Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Before you fix a receive problem be sure there is a problem. I have usedARR GasFet preamps for some time with excellent results. Be sure you havea filter or cavity ahead of the preamp, and that you do not have so muchout of band energy getting to the preamp that it goes into overload andbecomes a non-linear mixer. I have used GasFets in tower top systems (oneat 600 ft for over 15 years) with PolyPhaser's ahead of the amp.I also built a relay tree to bypass the preamp when power was removed. Therelays (GE Pro antenna relays) caused more trouble than they solved becausethere was no wiping action in the contacts.Aside from the obvious gain of the preamp, the very low noise figure aheadof a not so good front end amp can make a substantial improvement. Be the3rd order intercept point is as high as possible for intermodulationmixture
 products. Also test for receiver desentization with an isolatedtee incase there is not enough receiver protection from the transmitter.What worked before preamp now needs to be at least 15 db better with thepreamp. That is, if you had a little desensitization before adding thepreamp, it will probably get worse - double shielded cable and ground is amust.73,stevenu5dYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing









Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Repeater Preamp

[franknmiss]

Eric is correct, I always use a window filter in front of our preamps 
on UHF. Usually used with a receive multicoupler to over come losses 
in the spliters. Most modern repeaters don't need a lot of help in 
the sensivity dept. My first experiences with preamps just added 
noise and desense problems by me being greedy on the amplification. I 
now usually run the RX multicouplers on our repeater systems a little 
hot 3-5 dB just because I can't help myself :>) and it does help if 
you are careful.

Frank
KO5S 

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Eric Lemmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> Adding a preamp to some repeater systems does not always make 
it "hear"
> better; sometimes the receiver becomes more sensitive to overload,
> intermod, desense, and has a higher noise level.  You can mitigate 
some
> of these problems by placing a bandpass cavity immediately in front 
of
> the preamp.
> 
> Most bandpass/bandreject duplexers have surprisingly little bandpass
> effect, and will pass an awful lot of signal on either side of the
> receive frequency.  A dedicated bandpass cavity will act as a
> preselector to greatly limit the signal seen by the preamp, and that
> will significantly reduce the noise floor.
> 
> 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
> 
> uplink28 wrote:
> > 
> > I'm thinking about putting a receiver preamp in our system. Any 
words
> > of advice from anyone would be greatly appreciated. Brand, model, 
etc.
> > If you ahve one for sale let me know too. Thanks.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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] UHF Repeater Preamp

[Eric Lemmon]

That's a hard question to answer.  Some preselectors are based upon the
physical package used for mobile duplexers, and may work just fine- but
they are not flexible.  I prefer to use an 8 inch bandpass cavity that I
can tune for almost any selectivity and insertion loss that I want.  If
you have a good preamp with, say, 10 dB of gain, you can set up a
bandpass cavity to be extremely narrow but with 5 dB insertion loss, and
you will still be far better off (+5 dB) than without the preamp and you
will have reduced the vulnerability to overload and desense.  At UHF,
with a 5 MHz split, the playing field is a lot different from that at
2m, with a 600 kHz split.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000

[Eric Lemmon]

I have a VXR-5000 UHF repeater that I bought new in the box, and it has
worked perfectly from the git-go.  So, there's no issue of equipment
quality that I'm aware of.  Please check a few things:

1.  Ensure that you are using a genuine Vertex VPL-1 programming cable
and CE-8 software.
2.  Ensure that the modular plug is connected to J2008 on the CNTL-2
module, inside the repeater.
3.  Ensure that you have set the COM port on your laptop to 4800 baud.

The most common error reported by Vertex Tech Support seems to be a user
plugging the programming cable into the LINE jack on the outside of the
cabinet, instead of J2008 on the CNTL-2 module.  Follow the instructions
in Section 3 of your manual (EEPROM Programming Software Instructions),
and you should not have any problems.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY



feederclamp wrote:
> 
I bought a Yaesu VXR-5000 repeater which was new in the box. After many
attempts and two programming cables, it still won't program... Have I
spent money on something that's scrap? Some people say it's my computer
but I don't think so. Any help with this problem of a so called repeater
would be most welcome.




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is accurate)

[Ralph Mowery]

> It never fails - pose a simple question, and you get a series of overly
> complicated answers involving
> expensive equipment.  To calibrate a local frequency standard, one needs
> a short wave rx with an
> s meter (mechanical type), and a means of balancing the local standard
> signal level with that of WWV
> at 10 MHz.  All you need to do is adjust the local standard while
> watching the s meter.  As it is
> adjusted, you will notice the s meter flutter at a decreasing rate as
> you reach 10 Mhz.  When you
> are dead on, the s meter will drift slower and finally stop.  You are

I was wondering when someone would post this method.  If a service monitor
is used and you want to use wwv then all you have to do is hook it up to an
outside antenna and tune it to the highest wwv frequency you can hear.
Measuer the frequency directly and watch the meter on the monitor and adjust
the master oscillator directly.
.





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Yaesu VXR-5000

[Bob]

Programing software i use on my kenwoods and vertex radios will not 
work with windows xp i have to you dos on a 98 comp.

Bobby/N2BR


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Maire Company" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well that OS do you have in your computer?
> what color cable do you have?
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "feederclamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:40 PM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000
> 
> 
> > Hi
> > I bought a Yaesu VXR-5000 repeater which was new in the box. 
After
> > many attempts and two programming cables, it still won't 
programme!
> > If Yaesu products are all like this! Have i spent money on 
something
> > that's scrap? Some people say it's my computer but i don't think 
so.
> > Any help with this problem of a so called repeater would be most
> > welcome.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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] Yaesu VXR-5000

[Maire Company]

Well that OS do you have in your computer?
what color cable do you have?


- Original Message - 
From: "feederclamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:40 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000


> Hi
> I bought a Yaesu VXR-5000 repeater which was new in the box. After
> many attempts and two programming cables, it still won't programme!
> If Yaesu products are all like this! Have i spent money on something
> that's scrap? Some people say it's my computer but i don't think so.
> Any help with this problem of a so called repeater would be most
> welcome.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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] Mitrek test

[Chuck Kelsey]

Although I've never tried it, I have heard some say that you can inject the
crystal frequency with a service monitor. Someone more familiar with the
Mitrek could better advise, however.

Chuck
WB2EDV


- Original Message - 
From: "fyreonhigh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:40 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Mitrek test


> Hi guys,
>
> Just wondering if it is possible to test a Mitrek mobile without
> channel elements in it...I just want to verify that it is working
> before I get the elements..I do have all cables/control
> head/mic/speaker/keys, etc
>
> 73, Ken N2ZN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Mitrek test

[fyreonhigh]

Hi guys,

Just wondering if it is possible to test a Mitrek mobile without 
channel elements in it...I just want to verify that it is working 
before I get the elements..I do have all cables/control 
head/mic/speaker/keys, etc

73, Ken N2ZN





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Yaesu VXR-5000

[feederclamp]

Hi
I bought a Yaesu VXR-5000 repeater which was new in the box. After 
many attempts and two programming cables, it still won't programme! 
If Yaesu products are all like this! Have i spent money on something 
that's scrap? Some people say it's my computer but i don't think so.
Any help with this problem of a so called repeater would be most 
welcome.





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal alignment (how accurate is accurate)

[Robert D. Mantell]

It never fails - pose a simple question, and you get a series of overly 
complicated answers involving
expensive equipment.  To calibrate a local frequency standard, one needs 
a short wave rx with an
s meter (mechanical type), and a means of balancing the local standard 
signal level with that of WWV
at 10 MHz.  All you need to do is adjust the local standard while 
watching the s meter.  As it is
adjusted, you will notice the s meter flutter at a decreasing rate as 
you reach 10 Mhz.  When you
are dead on, the s meter will drift slower and finally stop.  You are 
there.  And please, do not argue
about doppler, selective fading, etc.  Sure you will be able to see 
these effects, but they will not affect
the accuracy of this operation.  Just watch for the response when the 
WWV or whatever signal is steady.

I hope this helps

Bob - W3TGG

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>Ian, you should have time standard frequencies in Australia on 5 10 and 15 
>MHz. If you have a secondary receiver, tune in the 10 MHz and compare it to 
>the 
>output of the 10 MHz timebase in your service monitor.
>
>This has  been one of my obsessions for a while now, to find a way of more 
>accurately setting my 10 MHz timebase in my service monitor.
>
>Zero beating with our WWV signal will only get you within a cycle or so. 
>(i.e., one cycle off at 10 MHz equals 40 hertz error at 400 MHz) And then 
>there's 
>trying to find a time when the signal is strong and doesn't fade too much. 
>Since I live about 50 miles south of Ft Collins you would think I would have a 
>strong signal all the time, but no.
>
>So I figure there must be a way to use a scope to compare two audio signals 
>(X/Y like we do with PL tones) and be able to set it more accurately. I have 
>tried comparing the 1000 cycle audio tone from an external receiver when I 
>generate a signal from the service monitor I kc off frequency from WWV. Then 
>comparing that to the 1kc tone generated from the monitors own PL tone 
>generator 
>(phase locked to the 10 MHz time bases). You should be able to see a slow 
>drift 
>between the two on the oscilloscope but so far no success, too much noise to 
>see much.
>
>Does someone have a way of getting closer than 1 cycle? (no I haven't bought 
>a GPS timebase receiver yet but have drooled over them on Ebay.
>
>I've always wondered if a tuned RF receiver using 10 MHz crystals for IF 
>filters would give you a strong 10 MHz carrier that could be used for 
>calibration.
>
>Hopefully this is still somewhat on topic since we all need to set our 
>repeaters on frequency.
>
>Art - KC7GF
>Golden, CO
>
>
>
> 
>
>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] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[Paul Finch]

Glenayre  That is if you can afford them!!!




-Original Message-
From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:13 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters


I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and
squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of
determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good discussion
and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question was
if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that would
operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>)
Frank, KO5S

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an
> arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the
public
> safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as
such
> links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal. If
you
> could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get voted
for
> retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone (users
of
> this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user
radio.
> As such, it is a rather highly secure link method.
>
> But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and have it
> send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode faster
than
> CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only
> drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the
transmit
> audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). Then,
just
> switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch the
logic
> in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than
> inactive.
>
> My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-)
>
> Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an ID
on
> it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule
book. :-)
>
> Joe M.
>
> Lee Williams wrote:
> >
> > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full time
link
> > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and
fiddle
> > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as well.
> > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say that
> > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My
copy
> > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I
KNEW you
> > would respond... 73,Lee
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> >
> > > Lee,
> > >
> > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to
> > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago.
> > >
> > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to TX
> > 24/7/365.
> > >
> > > Joe M.
> > >
> > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are
illegal !!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and 
squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of 
determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good discussion 
and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question was 
if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that would 
operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>)
Frank, KO5S

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an
> arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the 
public
> safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as 
such
> links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal. If 
you
> could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get voted 
for
> retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone (users 
of
> this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user 
radio.
> As such, it is a rather highly secure link method.
> 
> But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and have it
> send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode faster 
than
> CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only
> drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the 
transmit
> audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). Then, 
just
> switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch the 
logic
> in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than
> inactive.
> 
> My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-)
> 
> Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an ID 
on
> it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule 
book. :-)
> 
> Joe M.
> 
> Lee Williams wrote:
> > 
> > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full time 
link
> > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and 
fiddle
> > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as well.
> > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say that
> > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My 
copy
> > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I 
KNEW you
> > would respond... 73,Lee
> > 
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> > 
> > > Lee,
> > >
> > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to
> > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago.
> > >
> > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to TX
> > 24/7/365.
> > >
> > > Joe M.
> > >
> > > Lee Williams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are 
illegal !!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Lee,
No, the voter is for a commercial system, was looking for a way to 
keep out of the microwave business! Good tip on the delay at the 
receiver site with the tone generator.
Many thanks,
Frank

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Lee Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are illegal !!! If 
you
> are using tone control,put another tone generator at the receiver 
site
> and switch it inline when COS is inactive. Have the link transmitter
> follow the rx input with a short delay. This "fakes out" the voter
> since it still sees idle tone and the link isnt burning 24/7/365.
> 73,Lee,N3APP
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "franknmiss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:44 PM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> 
> 
> > Thanks Steve,
> > Was hoping to find a UHF link system I could run continuously to
> > eliminate the delay and noise (and not burn up!). Good info 
though,
> I
> > didn't think the voter would work well with the initial noise on
> > remote key up. I wanted to use the Doug Hall voter too.
> > I also like your initials ... SSB thats great to have in the ham
> > business!
> > Thanks,
> > Frank, KO5S
> >





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Hi Greg,
I have used a lot of Tait transmitters with great results, I have 
Used the T856 25 watt transmitter for several years with out a single 
failure. I was wondering about using this turned down to a low power 
level. Do you happen to know the model of the exciter module you are 
using? I would like to persue that as well.
Many thanks,
Frank, KO5S

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Gregg Lengling" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've done this with the link up all the time for some commercial 
systems we
> put in.BUT...we spend the money on the links.  We used TAIT 
modules, and
> actually bang for buck they were a good deal.  Got the 5 watt 
transmitters
> and ran them at 1-1/2 to 2 watts.  One system we installed was in 
1993 and
> it's still going strong, with 3 remote sites transmitting status 
tone back
> all the time.
> 
> 
> Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Retired
> Administrator http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org
> K2/100 S#3075 KX1 S# 57
> Politics is the art of appearing candid and completely open, while
> concealing as much as possible.   -States: The Bene Gesserit View
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:36 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> 
> Rich, 
> Is the link on all the time or just on when a signal is received?
> I was hoping someone had experience with  link equipment on UHF 
that 
> could be run continuously.
> Thanks,
> Frank
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Frank,
> > 
> > I use a Motorola Spectratac. I only use the tone encoder on the 
link
> > receivers at the comparitor site. The remote receiver to link tx 
is
> > cos/Pl activated.
> > 
> > Rich
> > 
> > On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:41 - "franknmiss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > writes:
> > > Does anyone in the group have experience with tone supervised 
UHF 
> > > links back to a voter? I was wondering what you used for the 
link 
> > > transmitter and do you operate it continuous duty? How much 
power 
> > > and 
> > > how far to the link receiver?
> > > Thanks,
> > > Frank, KO5S 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 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] OOT : HF Radio Interference

[george vagner]

try swapping the radials on the antenna so the hot is now the one that was
ground
plane, i know it sounds wierd but it worked for me.


- Original Message - 
From: "Abel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 10:09 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] OOT : HF Radio Interference


> Sorry for OutOfTopic Subject,
>
> I believe many amateur radio can help me here.
>
> My HF ( 0~30MHz) radio is making interference with my long range
> cordless telephone, while the hf radio is transmitting the cordless is
> unuseable,
> audio being carried by the hf radio is also present at cordless handset,
but
> the cordless base station did not get any interference at all.
>
> The hf riq is using an open dipole antenna.
>
> Any solution or suggestion is highly appreciated.
>
>
> 73, de YC6PPW, Abel
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Thanks Jeff


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff DePolo WN3A" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I set up a couple of low-power (12 watt) UHF Moxy's for broadcast 
telemetry
> use maybe 8 years ago and they've been running continuous key-down 
with no
> failures since.  They have a small muffin fan blowing on the 
heatsink and
> are turned down to a couple of watts.
> 
>   --- Jeff
> -
> Jeff DePolo WN3A
> Broadcast and Communications Consultant
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:41 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> >
> >
> > franknmiss wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Steve,
> > > Was hoping to find a UHF link system I could run continuously to
> > > eliminate the delay and noise (and not burn up!). Good info
> > though, I
> > > didn't think the voter would work well with the initial noise on
> > > remote key up. I wanted to use the Doug Hall voter too.
> > > I also like your initials ... SSB thats great to have in the ham
> > > business!
> > > Thanks,
> > > Frank, KO5S
> > >
> >
> > We've been using Maxar-80's turned down to abt 5-7W.
> > Also for low power HT-90/440's work well at abt 2-2.5W on a
> > 4W unit, or
> > 1W or less for the 2W units.
> >
> > --
> > Jim
> >
> > 
> > "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump."
> > -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Hi Greg,
I have used a lot of Tait transmitters with great results, I have 
Used the T856 25 watt transmitter for several years with out a single 
failure. I was wondering about using this turned down to a low power 
level. Do you happen to know the model of the exciter module you are 
using? I would like to persue that as well.
Many thanks,
Frank, KO5S

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Gregg Lengling" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've done this with the link up all the time for some commercial 
systems we
> put in.BUT...we spend the money on the links.  We used TAIT 
modules, and
> actually bang for buck they were a good deal.  Got the 5 watt 
transmitters
> and ran them at 1-1/2 to 2 watts.  One system we installed was in 
1993 and
> it's still going strong, with 3 remote sites transmitting status 
tone back
> all the time.
> 
> 
> Gregg R. Lengling, W9DHI, Retired
> Administrator http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org
> K2/100 S#3075 KX1 S# 57
> Politics is the art of appearing candid and completely open, while
> concealing as much as possible.   -States: The Bene Gesserit View
>  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:36 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
> 
> Rich, 
> Is the link on all the time or just on when a signal is received?
> I was hoping someone had experience with  link equipment on UHF 
that 
> could be run continuously.
> Thanks,
> Frank
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Frank,
> > 
> > I use a Motorola Spectratac. I only use the tone encoder on the 
link
> > receivers at the comparitor site. The remote receiver to link tx 
is
> > cos/Pl activated.
> > 
> > Rich
> > 
> > On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:41 - "franknmiss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > writes:
> > > Does anyone in the group have experience with tone supervised 
UHF 
> > > links back to a voter? I was wondering what you used for the 
link 
> > > transmitter and do you operate it continuous duty? How much 
power 
> > > and 
> > > how far to the link receiver?
> > > Thanks,
> > > Frank, KO5S 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[franknmiss]

Jim, 
How long have you been running them?
Frank, KO%s

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> franknmiss wrote:
> 
> > Thanks Steve,
> > Was hoping to find a UHF link system I could run continuously to 
> > eliminate the delay and noise (and not burn up!). Good info 
though, I 
> > didn't think the voter would work well with the initial noise on 
> > remote key up. I wanted to use the Doug Hall voter too.
> > I also like your initials ... SSB thats great to have in the ham 
> > business!
> > Thanks,
> > Frank, KO5S  
> > 
> 
> We've been using Maxar-80's turned down to abt 5-7W.
> Also for low power HT-90/440's work well at abt 2-2.5W on a 4W 
unit, or 
> 1W or less for the 2W units.
> 
> -- 
> Jim
> 
> 
> "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump."
> -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Backplane on Micor Bases

[John Sichert]

Correction:
Depending on the band the base station is on, the PA may be continuous or 
intermittent duty.
It does not necessarily follow what type of chassis it is.

John


At 01:02 PM 12/5/03, you wrote:
>Jim,
>   the base with the flex cable is called a non-unified chassis. It has a
>separate control shelf (back plane).
>
>The other type is a unified chassis. Unified chassis' are generally not
>continuous duty, They utilize
>a mobile style heat sink.
>
>A unified chassis has the control shelf between the exciter and receiver
>interconnect boards.
>The units shipped as repeaters have additional filtering on the
>interconnect boards for duplex operation.
>
>The non-unified units have an additional filtering shield that attaches
>between the flex and the
>interconnect boards.
>
>John
>
>
>At 12:26 PM 12/5/03, Jim Cicirello wrote:
> >Hello to Kevin and the group:
> >
> >Can you tell me if the difference in the physical appearance of the
> >backplanes on the Micor Base Stations effect the conversion
> >instructions posted on this site?
> >I am referring to the difference in appearance between two Micor
> >Units I have looked at. One has the backplace in the center and I am
> >told that is a Cont. Duty Base. The other Micor Base has ribbon cable
> >from the TX to the RX to the Backplane. The backplanes is on the
> >bottom of the cabinet and is much shorter in height.
> >Will the same conversion instructions posted apply to both backplains?
> >
> >Thanks and 73
> >
> >JIM   KA2AJH
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >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] Passive - glass

[RSGilmore]

Recall a similar thread on the LMR list some time back...   
someone mentioned that an astute Fire Inspector observed that his radio
didn't work inside that environment & held up the occupancy permit...   
ooops.

R Scott Gilmore  N8BQN   Saginaw   MI  USA

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.
Give him the internet, and he'll leave you alone for weeks.



On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 08:13:08 -0800 Mike Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Many modern buildings are using a coated glass - if you are
> outside and looking at the building and at certain angles the
> glass looks a grey or bronze color then you have that coating.
> 




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Backplane on Micor Bases

[John Sichert]

Jim,
  the base with the flex cable is called a non-unified chassis. It has a 
separate control shelf (back plane).

The other type is a unified chassis. Unified chassis' are generally not 
continuous duty, They utilize
a mobile style heat sink.

A unified chassis has the control shelf between the exciter and receiver 
interconnect boards.
The units shipped as repeaters have additional filtering on the 
interconnect boards for duplex operation.

The non-unified units have an additional filtering shield that attaches 
between the flex and the
interconnect boards.

John


At 12:26 PM 12/5/03, Jim Cicirello wrote:
>Hello to Kevin and the group:
>
>Can you tell me if the difference in the physical appearance of the
>backplanes on the Micor Base Stations effect the conversion
>instructions posted on this site?
>I am referring to the difference in appearance between two Micor
>Units I have looked at. One has the backplace in the center and I am
>told that is a Cont. Duty Base. The other Micor Base has ribbon cable
>from the TX to the RX to the Backplane. The backplanes is on the
>bottom of the cabinet and is much shorter in height.
>Will the same conversion instructions posted apply to both backplains?
>
>Thanks and 73
>
>JIM   KA2AJH
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>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] UHF Repeater Preamp

[uplink28]

Will it be better to use a bandpass can or an actual preselector? I'm trying to get the NF when the line was swept so I can give it to you to see if I do need a preamp. As far as I can remember it was pretty good I just wanted to improve on it. Thanks.Eric Lemmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Adding a preamp to some repeater systems does not always make it "hear"better; sometimes the receiver becomes more sensitive to overload,intermod, desense, and has a higher noise level. You can mitigate someof these problems by placing a bandpass cavity immediately in front ofthe preamp.Most bandpass/bandreject duplexers have surprisingly little bandpasseffect, and will pass an awful lot of signal on either side of thereceive frequency. A dedicated bandpass cavity will act as apreselector to greatly limit the signal seen by the preamp, and thatwill significantly reduce the noise floor.73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLYuplink28 wrote:> > I'm thinking about putting a receiver preamp in our system. Any words> of advice from anyone would be greatly appreciated. Brand, model, etc.> If you ahve one for sale let me know
 too. Thanks.> > > > 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/ 
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now









Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Repeater-Builder] Backplane on Micor Bases

[Jim Cicirello]

Hello to Kevin and the group:

Can you tell me if the difference in the physical appearance of the 
backplanes on the Micor Base Stations effect the conversion 
instructions posted on this site?
I am referring to the difference in appearance between two Micor 
Units I have looked at. One has the backplace in the center and I am 
told that is a Cont. Duty Base. The other Micor Base has ribbon cable 
from the TX to the RX to the Backplane. The backplanes is on the 
bottom of the cabinet and is much shorter in height.
Will the same conversion instructions posted apply to both backplains?

Thanks and 73

JIM   KA2AJH






 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

I set up a couple of low-power (12 watt) UHF Moxy's for broadcast telemetry
use maybe 8 years ago and they've been running continuous key-down with no
failures since.  They have a small muffin fan blowing on the heatsink and
are turned down to a couple of watts.

--- Jeff
-
Jeff DePolo WN3A
Broadcast and Communications Consultant

> -Original Message-
> From: Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 9:41 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters
>
>
> franknmiss wrote:
>
> > Thanks Steve,
> > Was hoping to find a UHF link system I could run continuously to
> > eliminate the delay and noise (and not burn up!). Good info
> though, I
> > didn't think the voter would work well with the initial noise on
> > remote key up. I wanted to use the Doug Hall voter too.
> > I also like your initials ... SSB thats great to have in the ham
> > business!
> > Thanks,
> > Frank, KO5S
> >
>
> We've been using Maxar-80's turned down to abt 5-7W.
> Also for low power HT-90/440's work well at abt 2-2.5W on a
> 4W unit, or
> 1W or less for the 2W units.
>
> --
> Jim
>
> 
> "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump."
> -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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] Re: Passive repeaters

[Mike Perryman]

We joke about our building being a Faraday Cage...
Same glass, with a metal roof...  not much sneaking through the masonry.
I have also noticed odd things regarding the same glass and it's effects on 
our FLIR camera...

mikey

At 08:13 AM 12/05/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>Many modern buildings are using a coated glass - if you are
>outside and looking at the building and at certain angles the
>glass looks a grey or bronze color then you have that coating.
>
>I was working in a building in downtown Los Angeles and the
>glass men were replacing a broken window.  I could stand
>in the middle of the room and through the window opening
>see the mountain that the repeater was on and use my HT
>just fine (TX and RX).  An hour later the glass was reinstalled
>and I was totally out of communications.  I asked the glass
>guys if there was something special about the glass and they
>said that it was a low-E glass with an additional sunlight
>reflective coating.
>
>Mike WA6ILQ
>
>At 03:18 PM 12/5/03 +, you wrote:
>
> >I agree, it depends on the building.  We have a metal-skinned
> >building 2 miles from a UHF repeater, which is working just fine.  It
> >is very difficult to access this repeater from inside this building,
> >while the same portable can access the repeater 15-20 miles away
> >outside.
> >
> >I know this answer doesn't directly address the original question,
> >but the point here is that a perfectly fine repeater can be difficult
> >to work from inside some buildings, no matter the distance.
> >
> >Laryn K8TVZ
> >
> >
> >--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ralph Mowery"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > It all depends on the building.  I work at a place that is only
> >about 3 air
> > > miles from a 100 watt two meter repeater.  If it was not for the
> >walls I
> > > could see the repeater antenna.  There is nothing wrong with the
> >repeater
> > > system.  On the second floor on the side near the repeater and only
> >about 3
> > > walls away from the outside I can not hear or access the repeater.
> >Tried
> > > several HTs that are known to be working fine.  I can access the
> >repeater
> > > from atleast 10 air miles away with them.  The building has lots of
> > > stainless steel panels and machinery and other big ammounts of
> >moter
> > > control circuitry.  I can walk about 30 feet to an outside door and
> >open it
> > > and access the repeater just fine on the low power setting and even
> >300
> > > miliwatts one rig puts out.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >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/

-
   Mike PerrymanCavell, Mertz & Davis, Inc.
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   Consulting Engineers
   http://www.cmdconsulting.com 7839 Ashton Avenue
   K5JMPManassas, VA 20109   USA
   (703) 392-9090; (703) 392-9559 fax;  DC Line (202) 332-0110
- 




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Passive repeaters

[Mike Morris]

Many modern buildings are using a coated glass - if you are
outside and looking at the building and at certain angles the
glass looks a grey or bronze color then you have that coating.

I was working in a building in downtown Los Angeles and the
glass men were replacing a broken window.  I could stand
in the middle of the room and through the window opening
see the mountain that the repeater was on and use my HT
just fine (TX and RX).  An hour later the glass was reinstalled
and I was totally out of communications.  I asked the glass
guys if there was something special about the glass and they
said that it was a low-E glass with an additional sunlight
reflective coating.

Mike WA6ILQ

At 03:18 PM 12/5/03 +, you wrote:

>I agree, it depends on the building.  We have a metal-skinned
>building 2 miles from a UHF repeater, which is working just fine.  It
>is very difficult to access this repeater from inside this building,
>while the same portable can access the repeater 15-20 miles away
>outside.
>
>I know this answer doesn't directly address the original question,
>but the point here is that a perfectly fine repeater can be difficult
>to work from inside some buildings, no matter the distance.
>
>Laryn K8TVZ
>
>
>--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ralph Mowery"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It all depends on the building.  I work at a place that is only
>about 3 air
> > miles from a 100 watt two meter repeater.  If it was not for the
>walls I
> > could see the repeater antenna.  There is nothing wrong with the
>repeater
> > system.  On the second floor on the side near the repeater and only
>about 3
> > walls away from the outside I can not hear or access the repeater.
>Tried
> > several HTs that are known to be working fine.  I can access the
>repeater
> > from atleast 10 air miles away with them.  The building has lots of
> > stainless steel panels and machinery and other big ammounts of
>moter
> > control circuitry.  I can walk about 30 feet to an outside door and
>open it
> > and access the repeater just fine on the low power setting and even
>300
> > miliwatts one rig puts out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>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/ 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Passive repeaters

[Laryn Lohman]

I agree, it depends on the building.  We have a metal-skinned 
building 2 miles from a UHF repeater, which is working just fine.  It 
is very difficult to access this repeater from inside this building, 
while the same portable can access the repeater 15-20 miles away 
outside.  

I know this answer doesn't directly address the original question, 
but the point here is that a perfectly fine repeater can be difficult 
to work from inside some buildings, no matter the distance.

Laryn K8TVZ


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ralph Mowery" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It all depends on the building.  I work at a place that is only 
about 3 air
> miles from a 100 watt two meter repeater.  If it was not for the 
walls I
> could see the repeater antenna.  There is nothing wrong with the 
repeater
> system.  On the second floor on the side near the repeater and only 
about 3
> walls away from the outside I can not hear or access the repeater.  
Tried
> several HTs that are known to be working fine.  I can access the 
repeater
> from atleast 10 air miles away with them.  The building has lots of
> stainless steel panels and machinery and other big ammounts of   
moter
> control circuitry.  I can walk about 30 feet to an outside door and 
open it
> and access the repeater just fine on the low power setting and even 
300
> miliwatts one rig puts out.




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] OOT : HF Radio Interference

[Abel]

Sorry for OutOfTopic Subject,

I believe many amateur radio can help me here.

My HF ( 0~30MHz) radio is making interference with my long range
cordless telephone, while the hf radio is transmitting the cordless is
unuseable,
audio being carried by the hf radio is also present at cordless handset, but
the cordless base station did not get any interference at all.

The hf riq is using an open dipole antenna.

Any solution or suggestion is highly appreciated.


73, de YC6PPW, Abel




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF MSR-2000 to Ham conversion

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

We have lots of UHF MSR-2000 Repeaters that were originally on 465/460 MHz
that we moved to the UHF 440-450 MHz Ham Band. No "Conversion" is
necessary, just have the Channel Elements recrystalled and retune the radio
per the instructions in the MSR-2000 service manual.
LJ


Original Message:
-
From: Michael Singewald N1PLH [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 14:43:29 -
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] UHF MSR-2000 to Ham conversion


I have seen the info on the repeater-builder site for VHF 
conversions, but is there any info around on the UHF radio?

It is rated 450-470 now and I am looking for 446.700 rx and 441.700 
tx.




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .





 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Repeater-Builder] UHF MSR-2000 to Ham conversion

[Michael Singewald N1PLH]

I have seen the info on the repeater-builder site for VHF 
conversions, but is there any info around on the UHF radio?

It is rated 450-470 now and I am looking for 446.700 rx and 441.700 
tx.




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters

[Jim]

franknmiss wrote:

> Thanks Steve,
> Was hoping to find a UHF link system I could run continuously to 
> eliminate the delay and noise (and not burn up!). Good info though, I 
> didn't think the voter would work well with the initial noise on 
> remote key up. I wanted to use the Doug Hall voter too.
> I also like your initials ... SSB thats great to have in the ham 
> business!
> Thanks,
> Frank, KO5S  
> 

We've been using Maxar-80's turned down to abt 5-7W.
Also for low power HT-90/440's work well at abt 2-2.5W on a 4W unit, or 
1W or less for the 2W units.

-- 
Jim


"The higher you are, the harder it is to pump."
-Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Repeater Preamp

[Steve S. Bosshard \(NU5D\)]

Before you fix a receive problem be sure there is a problem.  I have used
ARR GasFet preamps for some time with excellent results.  Be sure you have
a filter or cavity ahead of the preamp, and that you do not have so much
out of band energy getting to the preamp that it goes into overload and
becomes a non-linear mixer.  I have used GasFets in tower top systems (one
at 600 ft for over 15 years) with PolyPhaser's ahead of the amp.

I also built a relay tree to bypass the preamp when power was removed.  The
relays (GE Pro antenna relays) caused more trouble than they solved because
there was no wiping action in the contacts.

Aside from the obvious gain of the preamp, the very low noise figure ahead
of a not so good front end amp can make a substantial improvement.  Be the
3rd order intercept point is as high as possible for intermodulation
mixture products.  Also test for receiver desentization with an isolated
tee incase there is not enough receiver protection from the transmitter.
What worked before preamp now needs to be at least 15 db better with the
preamp.  That is, if you had a little desensitization before adding the
preamp, it will probably get worse - double shielded cable and ground is a
must.

73,

steve
nu5d






 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Communication Monitor

[mch]

Thanks, but I'm not in the market right now. I just wanted to point out
that some 1200Ss do not support the tracking generator option - for
those interested in one. Newer ones are upgradable, but all are not.

Joe M.

Chris Bunting - K1CWB wrote:
> 
> Hello mch,
> 
> Check eBay, there are 1000S's going for around $1000 and 1200s's for a
> lot more. Also there are a lot of other brands for sale on there.
> 
> Thursday, December 4, 2003, 11:25:23 PM, you wrote:
> 
> m> Received: from n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.101])
> m> by mail.fission2.com (Merak 6.2.1) with SMTP id CPA74271
> m> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:19:33 -0500
> m> X-eGroups-Return:
> m> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> m> Received: from [66.218.66.158] by n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com with
> m> NNFMP; 05 Dec 2003 06:04:36 -
> m> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> m> X-Apparently-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> m> Received: (qmail 19465 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
> m> Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
> m>   by m18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
> m> Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.198.39)
> m>   by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
> m> Received: from nb.net
> m> (c-24-3-218-91.client.comcast.net[24.3.218.91])
> m>   by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with SMTP
> m>   id <2003120504272301500bpe9se>; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 04:27:23 +
> m> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> m> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win98; U)
> m> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> m> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> m> X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 204.127.198.39
> m> From: mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> m> X-Yahoo-Profile: ncc74656_uss_voyager
> m> MIME-Version: 1.0
> m> Mailing-List: list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com; contact
> m> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> m> Delivered-To: mailing list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> m> Precedence: bulk
> m> List-Unsubscribe:
> m> 
> m> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:25:23 -0500
> m> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Communication Monitor
> m> Reply-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> m> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> m> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> m> BUT, the Tracking Gen CANNOT be added to just ANY
> m> IFR-1200Ss - only those after a certain serial number.
> 
> m> Joe M.
> 
> m> Eric Lemmon wrote:
> >>
> >> Ken,
> >>
> >> You can buy an IFR-1200S for less than $5,000 these days, and it is a
> >> very capable service monitor.  The "S" includes the spectrum analyzer as
> >> standard, but you definitely want the tracking generator option.  The
> >> high-stability time base is another desirable option.  My 1200S has all
> >> the options, and I have no reason to change to a different brand or
> >> model.
> 
> 
> 
> m> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> m> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> --
> Best regards,
>  Chrismailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 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[2]: [Repeater-Builder] Communication Monitor

[Chris Bunting - K1CWB]

Hello mch,

Check eBay, there are 1000S's going for around $1000 and 1200s's for a
lot more. Also there are a lot of other brands for sale on there.

Thursday, December 4, 2003, 11:25:23 PM, you wrote:

m> Received: from n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.101])
m> by mail.fission2.com (Merak 6.2.1) with SMTP id CPA74271
m> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:19:33 -0500
m> X-eGroups-Return:
m> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
m> Received: from [66.218.66.158] by n33.grp.scd.yahoo.com with
m> NNFMP; 05 Dec 2003 06:04:36 -
m> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
m> X-Apparently-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
m> Received: (qmail 19465 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
m> Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
m>   by m18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
m> Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.198.39)
m>   by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 06:04:34 -
m> Received: from nb.net
m> (c-24-3-218-91.client.comcast.net[24.3.218.91])
m>   by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with SMTP
m>   id <2003120504272301500bpe9se>; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 04:27:23 +
m> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
m> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (Win98; U)
m> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
m> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
m> X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 204.127.198.39
m> From: mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
m> X-Yahoo-Profile: ncc74656_uss_voyager
m> MIME-Version: 1.0
m> Mailing-List: list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com; contact
m> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
m> Delivered-To: mailing list Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
m> Precedence: bulk
m> List-Unsubscribe:
m> 
m> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:25:23 -0500
m> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Communication Monitor
m> Reply-To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
m> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
m> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

m> BUT, the Tracking Gen CANNOT be added to just ANY
m> IFR-1200Ss - only those after a certain serial number.

m> Joe M.

m> Eric Lemmon wrote:
>> 
>> Ken,
>> 
>> You can buy an IFR-1200S for less than $5,000 these days, and it is a
>> very capable service monitor.  The "S" includes the spectrum analyzer as
>> standard, but you definitely want the tracking generator option.  The
>> high-stability time base is another desirable option.  My 1200S has all
>> the options, and I have no reason to change to a different brand or
>> model.



 

m> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
m> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




-- 
Best regards,
 Chrismailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/