Re: [Repeater-Builder] Battery Back-up Question

[Kris Kirby]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Kevin & Natalia wrote:
> These are 2volt cells, 460amp/hr over 10hrs. What is written on them So 
> we have 6 cells connected together to give 12volts.

I came up with some contrived math and seems like it ought to work, but I 
have no idea if my ideas are right. If we take a battery that is putting 
out 7A per hour over 14 hours, that's 7A*12V = 84W, then 84W*14hr to get 
1.176kW/hr. If we divide that 1.176kW/hr (basically, some idea as to the 
total storage capacity of the battery over time) by 24 hours, we can draw 
49W per hour to totally discharge the battery in 24 hours. That's 4.08A 
per hour. 

Now, applying that math to the big battery listed above, we get...

460A * 12V = 5,520 W per hour for 10 hours
5,520W * 10h = 55.2kW/hr
55.2kW/hr divided by 24 hours = 2300W
2300W / 12V = 191A per hour for 24 hours to depletion.

Ok... trying that from a different angle...

10A * 12V = 120W
55.2kW/hr divided by 120W = 460 hours. 
460 h divided by 24 hours = 19.167 days
19.167 days divided by 7 days = 2.738 weeks. 

> As a rough caculation, I am guessing the batteries should last for around 
> 400+ hours.

You really want to be more specific as to which week it will fail? ;-)

--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!"
 This message brought to you by the US Department of Homeland Security




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Decibel Products Duplexer

[n4rpd]

Greetings,
I am in desperate need of technical help.  I have been attempting to
repair a VHF repeater for a non-profit organization that needs this
box for a portable setup to support parades and special events.  The
setup is two Motorola mobiles tied together with a controller running
the interface.  The TX is set to about 30 watts of RF.  There is about
1.5 Mhz of seperation in the input and output frequencies. 

The repeater radios used to work fine when using two antennas
separated about 15' a part, but over time the RX has been becoming
deaf or desensed from the TX.  I have an old Decibel Products Duplexer
model# DB4055SP that I don't know if it can be used as a repeater
duplexer. I don't have the technical ability or equipment to retune
the duplexer and need someone who can do this for a nominal fee and
quick turn around time.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Rob, N4RPD
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Battery Back-up Question

[Kevin & Natalia]

G'Day All,

I am about to install a set of back-up batteries for our repeater. Designed 
for back-up use.

These are 2volt cells, 460amp/hr over 10hrs. What is written on them
So we have 6 cells connected together to give 12volts.

We are pulling , when everything is running, no more then 10amps.

As a rough caculation, I am guessing the batteries should last for around 
400+ hours.

Anyone got a full caculation to find out how long they will last?

Regards

Kevin.





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: Radio quality (was RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power)

[no6b]

At 2/12/2006 08:24, you wrote:
> > Did you try the V7A with AIP on?
>
>No, I didn't, but I'll do that later today if I get a chance.  The other ham
>rig in my truck is the other Kenwood dual bander (TM-708?  getting old and
>don't remember model #'s like I used to).  I'm not sure but I think that has
>the AIP function too.  I never dug into it to see how it's designed - is the
>AIP feature just a switchable attenuator or something else?

Sort of.  I think it controls the gain of the 1st RF amp.  I do know that 
the increase in spur free dynamic range is greater than the reduction in 
S/N when activated.

Bob






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Power

[Kevin King]

That has nothing to do with what is under the hood! :>

but now I have digressed beyond the horizon!

Kevin King SCSA BSCIS
ARS KC6OVD
GMRS KAG0378
EIEIO 2722
Acworth Georgia


While we are digressing, I guess all them sleeping truckers are Wet 
Stacking too.







 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Power

[nj902]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
. I have an Elmer here ... He's been trying, unsuccessfully, for the
past 5 years to get coordination on a 2m repeater because his location
is 97 miles from another repeater (in a different state) and the other
coordinator is holding real tight onto the minimum 100 mile rule..."


Your friend should contact the trustee [holder of coordination] of the
other system.  Explain the situation.  The other party may readily
agree to sign off on a "short-spacing" agreement.  Send that to the
coordinator & you should get coordianted.  

If the other system's trustee is unsure or has concerns, offer to
create an MOU - a Memorandum Of Understanding whereby the short-spaced
system trustee would agree to resolve any interference issues.

I have done exactly that with a couple of very nice folks with the
result that I have systems coordinated that would otherwise be
rejected "by rule"








 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Chuck Kelsey]

I was planning on using natural gas ;-)

Chuck
WB2EDV




Kris Kirby wrote:

>On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Chuck Kelsey wrote:
>  
>
>>typical mobile installation? Maybe not. Do we DESIRE to run a certain 
>>level because we can? Sure, just like we may want to install a 100KW 
>>generator on site to run 3KW of load. That's fine if you can afford it, 
>>I suppose. My point was "is it needed?"
>>
>>
>
>This is digressing, but if it's a diesel, you don't want a 100KW generator 
>running a 3KW load or it will wet stack. 
>
>http://www.allworlddieselgen.com/faq.htm (sales page)
>
>Quote:
>2) A diesel engine is subject to "wet stacking" or over fueling if run for 
>long periods of time with ultra light loads (less than 40% of the rated 
>output). "Wet Stacking" causes the engine to smoke and run rough because 
>the injectors become carbonized. Running a heavy load will usually clean 
>up the over-fuel condition and allow the engine to perform normally. 
>Diesel engines operate better and more fuel efficient when loaded (70-80% 
>is optimum).
>
>But again, I digress. 
>
>  
>





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Brett]

Variable 1 amp to 100 amp.
12v to 60volt.
Brett

- Original Message - 
From: "Dave VanHorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:31 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink


> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>>
>> Anybody want to write up an article for repeater-builder.com
>> on the power supply test load?
> 
> 
> Are you looking for something like a constant current sink?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Dave VanHorn]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anybody want to write up an article for repeater-builder.com
> on the power supply test load?


Are you looking for something like a constant current sink?








 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Power

[Dave VanHorn]

> > >Chances are nobody will notice.  But then again, they 
> > probably wouldn't
> > >notice if you put a 3 dB pad between your duplexer and 
> > receiver either...

I have tried the experiment of going up to the site for a couple hours, 
and not even opening the door..  Then ask if anyone notices any 
difference in performance.   :)  You get a feeling for who is going to 
always report problems, and who will report big improvements, where 
there are none.









 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Power

[wb8art]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kris Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Chuck Kelsey wrote:
> > typical mobile installation? Maybe not. Do we DESIRE to run a 
certain 
> > level because we can? Sure, just like we may want to install a 
100KW 
> > generator on site to run 3KW of load. That's fine if you can 
afford it, 
> > I suppose. My point was "is it needed?"
> 
> This is digressing, but if it's a diesel, you don't want a 100KW 
generator 
> running a 3KW load or it will wet stack. 
> 
> http://www.allworlddieselgen.com/faq.htm (sales page)
> 
> Quote:
> 2) A diesel engine is subject to "wet stacking" or over fueling if 
run for 
> long periods of time with ultra light loads (less than 40% of the 
rated 
> output). "Wet Stacking" causes the engine to smoke and run rough 
because 
> the injectors become carbonized. Running a heavy load will usually 
clean 
> up the over-fuel condition and allow the engine to perform 
normally. 
> Diesel engines operate better and more fuel efficient when loaded 
(70-80% 
> is optimum).
> 
> But again, I digress. 
> 
> --
> Kris Kirby, KE4AHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>"BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!"
>  This message brought to you by the US Department of Homeland 
Security
>
While we are digressing, I guess all them sleeping truckers are Wet 
Stacking too.







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Jay Urish]

I don't think that "wet stacking" is an issue on newer Cummins gensets. 
The 5.9L ISB is PCM/ECM controlled and the injectors are electronically 
fired. They run clean no mater what the load or how long.



Kris Kirby wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Chuck Kelsey wrote:
>> typical mobile installation? Maybe not. Do we DESIRE to run a certain 
>> level because we can? Sure, just like we may want to install a 100KW 
>> generator on site to run 3KW of load. That's fine if you can afford it, 
>> I suppose. My point was "is it needed?"
> 
> This is digressing, but if it's a diesel, you don't want a 100KW generator 
> running a 3KW load or it will wet stack. 
> 
> http://www.allworlddieselgen.com/faq.htm (sales page)
> 
> Quote:
> 2) A diesel engine is subject to "wet stacking" or over fueling if run for 
> long periods of time with ultra light loads (less than 40% of the rated 
> output). "Wet Stacking" causes the engine to smoke and run rough because 
> the injectors become carbonized. Running a heavy load will usually clean 
> up the over-fuel condition and allow the engine to perform normally. 
> Diesel engines operate better and more fuel efficient when loaded (70-80% 
> is optimum).
> 
> But again, I digress. 
> 

--
Jay Urish W5GM
DCARA President ARRL Life Member
Denton County ARRL VEC
N5ERS VP/Trustee

Monitoring 1292.30Ghz PL-100.0  441.375 PL-88.5 and 444.850 PL-88.5




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Kris Kirby]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Paul Yonge wrote:
> The policy of some repeater coordination councils to insist on a 100- 
> mile co-channel separation for UHF (and 120 miles for the lower- 
> frequency bands) regardless of the ERP seems like overkill to me.  In 
> fairness, they do allow the consideration of terrain/ERP factors at 
> locations below 3000 feet AMSL (and more stringent requirements for 
> "very high profile" locations above the 3000-foot elevation).
> 
> In the broadcast radio industry, we only worry about avoiding any  
> overlap of the 60 db protected contour with another co-channel   
> station's 40 db interference contour.  Is it time to re-think the  
> coordination guidelines?

Some areas may do this. It would not be a bad idea to do a terrain-based 
coordination factoring in AMSL and HAAT. It would be more important to 
have accurate fixes on the location of the entity being coordinated, with 
the understanding that said information would be protected. 

--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!"
 This message brought to you by the US Department of Homeland Security




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Kris Kirby]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006, Chuck Kelsey wrote:
> typical mobile installation? Maybe not. Do we DESIRE to run a certain 
> level because we can? Sure, just like we may want to install a 100KW 
> generator on site to run 3KW of load. That's fine if you can afford it, 
> I suppose. My point was "is it needed?"

This is digressing, but if it's a diesel, you don't want a 100KW generator 
running a 3KW load or it will wet stack. 

http://www.allworlddieselgen.com/faq.htm (sales page)

Quote:
2) A diesel engine is subject to "wet stacking" or over fueling if run for 
long periods of time with ultra light loads (less than 40% of the rated 
output). "Wet Stacking" causes the engine to smoke and run rough because 
the injectors become carbonized. Running a heavy load will usually clean 
up the over-fuel condition and allow the engine to perform normally. 
Diesel engines operate better and more fuel efficient when loaded (70-80% 
is optimum).

But again, I digress. 

--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!"
 This message brought to you by the US Department of Homeland Security




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Controllers - Best bang for the buck?

[Jay Urish]

Timothy V Horvath wrote:
> I like the CAT Controllers. I have the CAT-1000 on 2 meter, CAT-700B used
> with Icom 706 as a HF 
> remote link setup on UHF and a CAT-200 with a Peet Bros weather station.
> I have had repeaters for 
> a few years but not as knowledgeable as most of the Repeater Builders are
> here.  I know I can Call 
> Ron at CAT for Help support. A lot of others talk like you should know
> what you are doing. I can't say enough 
> good about them. To me that's worth a lot and then some.
> 

I echo your sentiments 100% Ron is a diamond in the rough!

However that being said,
I am now advocation arcom controllers. They are way cheaper and are a 
million percent more flexible than anything catauto sells. On top of 
that, Ken Arck provides the best support ever with email turnaround in 
under 10min in most instances.

The true gem is his software. I have played with the software for the 
CAT controllers and I think it sucks. You have to go through 10 hops to 
upload and download and do it in these tiny little chunks. >>>LAME<<


With the Arcom, you can upload and download at will, in one big heap and 
you also can tweek and click apply and just upload your changes in a 
snap! The best difference though is that you don't have to unlock the 
controller with a DTMF code before you interact with the serial port.. I 
don't know what narcotic CAT was smoking when they dreamed that up but 
IMHO its downright stupid and a PITA.



> 
> Tim WA3QCV 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 14:43:11 -0800 Bob Dengler
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At 2/9/2006 10:37 AM, you wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I figured that this may be just the spot to ask such a question.
>>>
>>> I am looking for a controller that can manage up to two full 
>> duplex
>>> ports as well as a port for remote control. It would need the 
>> option
>>> to be able to program the ports independently such that while the
>>> primary repeater port would have ID & Hang time, I would need to 
>> be
>>> able to disable both on a secondary.
>>>
>>> Also, it would need to have the ability to be managed via DTMF
>>> control over the secondary or other port.
>>>
>>> I've briefly looked at the LinkComm's the NHRC's, and the old 
>> ACC's
>>> but am not sure which would provide the best serivce for the cost.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts or is this really not the place for this?
>> I recommend the LinkComm RLC-1+.  The NHRC-10 would be good too.  
>> ACC 
>> controllers have not been manufactured for many years, so support 
>> would be 
>> an issue.
>>
>> Bob NO6B
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Jay Urish W5GM
DCARA President ARRL Life Member
Denton County ARRL VEC
N5ERS VP/Trustee

Monitoring 1292.30Ghz PL-100.0  441.375 PL-88.5 and 444.850 PL-88.5




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Maire-Radios]

three miles?   the guy should get it.


- Original Message - 
From: "Ray Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power


> - Original Message - 
> From: "Paul Yonge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> The policy of some repeater coordination councils to insist on a 100-
>> mile co-channel separation for UHF (and 120 miles for the lower-
>> frequency bands) regardless of the ERP seems like overkill to me.  In
>> fairness, they do allow the consideration of terrain/ERP factors at
>> locations below 3000 feet AMSL (and more stringent requirements for
>> "very high profile" locations above the 3000-foot elevation).
>>
>> In the broadcast radio industry, we only worry about avoiding any
>> overlap of the 60 db protected contour with another co-channel
>> station's 40 db interference contour.  Is it time to re-think the
>> coordination guidelines?
>
>  Absolutely. I have an Elmer here (okay, he's only 4 years older than
> me but he's a lifetime ARRL member and QCWA member) and he
> was putting up repeaters back in the 70's. He's been trying, 
> unsuccessfully,
> for the past 5 years to get coordination on a 2m repeater because his
> location is 97 miles from another repeater (in a different state) and the
> other coordinator is holding real tight onto the minimum 100 mile rule.
>
>  Where do we sign up? :-)
>
>_Ray_KBØSTN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Ray Brown]

- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Yonge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> The policy of some repeater coordination councils to insist on a 100-
> mile co-channel separation for UHF (and 120 miles for the lower-
> frequency bands) regardless of the ERP seems like overkill to me.  In
> fairness, they do allow the consideration of terrain/ERP factors at
> locations below 3000 feet AMSL (and more stringent requirements for
> "very high profile" locations above the 3000-foot elevation).
>
> In the broadcast radio industry, we only worry about avoiding any
> overlap of the 60 db protected contour with another co-channel
> station's 40 db interference contour.  Is it time to re-think the
> coordination guidelines?

  Absolutely. I have an Elmer here (okay, he's only 4 years older than
me but he's a lifetime ARRL member and QCWA member) and he
was putting up repeaters back in the 70's. He's been trying, unsuccessfully,
for the past 5 years to get coordination on a 2m repeater because his
location is 97 miles from another repeater (in a different state) and the
other coordinator is holding real tight onto the minimum 100 mile rule.

  Where do we sign up? :-)

_Ray_KBØSTN






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Controllers - Best bang for the buck?

[Timothy V Horvath]

I like the CAT Controllers. I have the CAT-1000 on 2 meter, CAT-700B used
with Icom 706 as a HF 
remote link setup on UHF and a CAT-200 with a Peet Bros weather station.
I have had repeaters for 
a few years but not as knowledgeable as most of the Repeater Builders are
here.  I know I can Call 
Ron at CAT for Help support. A lot of others talk like you should know
what you are doing. I can't say enough 
good about them. To me that's worth a lot and then some.


Tim WA3QCV 





On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 14:43:11 -0800 Bob Dengler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 2/9/2006 10:37 AM, you wrote:
> 
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I figured that this may be just the spot to ask such a question.
> >
> >I am looking for a controller that can manage up to two full 
> duplex
> >ports as well as a port for remote control. It would need the 
> option
> >to be able to program the ports independently such that while the
> >primary repeater port would have ID & Hang time, I would need to 
> be
> >able to disable both on a secondary.
> >
> >Also, it would need to have the ability to be managed via DTMF
> >control over the secondary or other port.
> >
> >I've briefly looked at the LinkComm's the NHRC's, and the old 
> ACC's
> >but am not sure which would provide the best serivce for the cost.
> >
> >Any thoughts or is this really not the place for this?
> 
> I recommend the LinkComm RLC-1+.  The NHRC-10 would be good too.  
> ACC 
> controllers have not been manufactured for many years, so support 
> would be 
> an issue.
> 
> Bob NO6B
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Kevin Custer]

Chuck Kelsey wrote:

>Alright, I believe your numbers. A repeater receiver with a high-end 
>preamp vs. a ham grade mobile receiver averages just under 6 dB better.
>
>I still contend that in a mobile environment, under motion, that the 
>user will not detect the 6 dB difference. It will be barely 
>distinguishable most of the time.
>
>Is it enough to justify 140 watts (or more) transmit power? I'm not so sure.
>
>I guess I'll modify the challenge. Drop the 200 watt transmitter by 6 dB 
>and see if it gets noticed. Bench tests are a good yardstick. Real world 
>applications can be different.
>

Over a period of 16 years, I have had some difficulty keeping a 4EF5A1 
(330 watt tube amplifier) running at one of my sites.  Lightning took 
its toll once, as well as other failures that have kept that amplifier 
off line for some periods of time.  I can tell you that the users of 
that repeater know full well when I'm on the back-up 100 watt unit.  
Stations never see the difference but mobiles know right away.  The 
repeater runs 250 watts transmitter power, so in this case the 
difference is not even 6 dB but rather 4 dB.  If the signal is full 
scale, you won't tell a difference, but mobiles in fringe areas will 
benefit from the extra 4 dB.

If you don't believe me do a simple test.  Take a signal that is barely 
copyable and reduce it by 4 or 6 dB, it'll no longer be intelligible.  
The 4 dB can make the difference between 'making the trip' and not  
This is especially true on UHF where the nulls can be very deep.

Kevin Custer






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Paul Yonge]

The policy of some repeater coordination councils to insist on a 100- 
mile co-channel separation for UHF (and 120 miles for the lower- 
frequency bands) regardless of the ERP seems like overkill to me.  In  
fairness, they do allow the consideration of terrain/ERP factors at  
locations below 3000 feet AMSL (and more stringent requirements for  
"very high profile" locations above the 3000-foot elevation).

In the broadcast radio industry, we only worry about avoiding any  
overlap of the 60 db protected contour with another co-channel   
station's 40 db interference contour.  Is it time to re-think the  
coordination guidelines?

Paul "Noah" Yonge, CBT
W2ARK  WQDT219
MIDLAKES REPEATER


On Feb 12, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Kevin Custer wrote:

> By the same token, there is nothing wrong with a repeater that out- 
> hears
> the transmitter.  If you feel there is no reason to run more than  
> 50 or
> 100 watts, then fine, but some of us have the site conditions and
> equipment to allow greater sensitivity to be met with more power.  I
> have a repeater running 5 watts, and it works fine.
  




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: controller question

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Nate, Wy0X

Don't want to leave IRLP are bunch of old foggies.  IRLP is 
excellent system.  We have 3 or 4 here in Tampa area and many enjoy 
the operation.  However, some did get turned off when certain 
subjects came up.

We have a few Echolink stations also.  IRLP and Echolink are, in my 
opion, great for ham radio.  Some of my repeater users don't think 
so, but that is what make us.

73, ron, n9ee/r


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator wrote:
> > Chris,
> > 
> > I think some of the responses about echolink to IRLP are correct.
> > 
> > IRLP is much more restrictive with their web police terminating
> > connections if the subject matter such as politics and religion 
are
> > discussed.
> 
> Maybe one or two owners might act that way, but lumping all of the 
nice 
> folks that make up IRLP into your personal problem with someone, 
isn't fair.
> 
> Besides, just like a repeater owner can choose who they want on 
their 
> repeaters, reflector owners can do the same thing.
> 
> Nate WY0X
>








 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Re: power supply loads

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Hi all,

I've use hair dryers and heat guns to test 120 volt small 
generator.  Works great.  Even used a small heater I bought for my 
son about 14 years ago that provides for a 500, 1000 & 1500 W 
swithcable load at 120 VAC.

A 1000 W hair dryer (typical) at 120 VAC RMS thats 14.4 Ohms.  At 
13.8 VDC (not many hair dryers operate on 13.8), where so much 
testing of power supplies is these days 13.8/14.4 Ohms is 0.96 A.  

I use up to four 3 Ohm, 100 W resistors allowing for selecting a 
pretty good load down to .75 Ohm if needed or 18.4 A.  

ron, n9ee/r


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "skipp025" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Surplus Resistors often work well for power supply 
> test loads, but I like to use hair dry heating elements, 
> which are cheap if not free from a dead hair dryer. 
> 
> Nichrome wire elements work very well. 
> They're also very handy with large value low voltage 
> caps when zapping dead NiCad Batteries back to life. 
> Put a hair dryer heater in series with a high current 
> low voltage power supply to your zap cap bank to work 
> much faster through the dead battery bank. 
> 
> cheers,
> skipp
>









 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Repeater-Builder] Quintron Paging Transmitter - manuals needed

[Dennis Wade]

Hello everyone,

I've been given a compete Quintron paging transmitter
currently on 43 mhz.  The 6 foot rack includes a synthesized exciter,
control, metering and (heavy) power supply.  Although I find serial
numbers on all the individual modules and the entire rack, I can't
seem to find a model number for the whole system.  Web searches
suggest, but not with certainty. that it is a QT-350.  Others
suggestions are a QT-7080.  (Anyone know how to determine for sure?).

 This is the RF deck that uses a single 4-400 and I am told is
rated at about 300-350 watts CCS in class C.

 I need whatever manuals (for the exciter, PLL and PS in
particular) can find for this unit to begin designing a conversion. 
Any info is appreciated.  Reasonable copy costs are gladly paid.

   Thanks!

  Dennis

--
Dennis L. Wade
KG6ZI
Carmichael, CA







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Kevin Custer]

If we went around putting 3 dB pads on our repeaters until someone 
noticed, we'd soon have a repeater that no one would be able to use.  In 
this forum, most of us strive for the best operation we can afford, or 
set-up up to our best ability.  A matched system is one that works as 
well in one direction as it does the other.  With the results of Jeff's 
testing, which match closely my own, the numbers speak for themselves.  
A repeater receiver with -125+ dB of sensitivity needs 150+ watts to 
remain a matched system.

By the same token, there is nothing wrong with a repeater that out-hears 
the transmitter.  If you feel there is no reason to run more than 50 or 
100 watts, then fine, but some of us have the site conditions and 
equipment to allow greater sensitivity to be met with more power.  I 
have a repeater running 5 watts, and it works fine.

To each his own...

Kevin Custer

Jeff DePolo WN3A wrote:

>And mine too.  Just because the unwashed masses don't notice it doesn't make
>it right, better, worse, or otherwise.
>
>  
>
>>And that's my whole point.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>  
>>>
I'd be interested in someone actually trying this with a UHF system that is 
running 200+ watts. Drop it to 100 watts without telling anyone. Leave it 
there for a week or two and see if anyone notices.
   



>>>Chances are nobody will notice.  But then again, they probably wouldn't 
>>>notice if you put a 3 dB pad between your duplexer and receiver either...
>>>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Micheal Salem]

I built an electronic load several years ago using two big heat sinks to 
which I fixed some 2N3055 type transistors that I bought at BG Micro.  I 
fitted the two heatsinks into a tunnel just like this heat sink and put 
a 12 v. muffin fan at one end.  The load can be set for just about any 
current between 0 and 40 amps.  I also put a milliamp meter across the 
.1 ohm emitter resistor of one of the transistors (I put .1 ohm 
resistors in each emitter lead of the transistors before paralleling 
them)  to monitor the current.  I used another miliamp meter with a 
series resistor to measure the voltage.  I drive the six transistors 
with a single power transistor which drives the parallel bases of the 
power transistors.  I also fitted a shroud over the heat sink to help 
channel the air through from the fan. 

I built this from an article in 73 Magazine with some variations.  This 
was not complicated, but if you want some pictures, the schematic and a 
description, I can probably put this together.  I mounted it on a piece 
of wood.  I custom made the meter faces so that they were calibrated.  
It can disipate 35 -40 amps for a good long period so that I can test 
Astron, Micor, and other power supplies.   I didn't spend a great deal 
of time on it since it was an occasional test tool.

Micheal Salem N5MS





Jeff DePolo WN3A wrote:

>I picked up an electronic load on Ebay a number of years ago, and have
>gotten more use out of it than I ever thought I would.  Here's a well-done
>article on building an electronic load.  The general design could be easily
>expanded to handle higher current by using a beefier transistor and/or
>multiple devices.
>
>http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_30506/article.html
>
>
>
>   --- Jeff
>
>  
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony King, W4ZT
>>Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 9:06 AM
>>To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
>>
>>
>>Here is my version of a 12 Volt dummy load: 
>>
>>
>>And, for those of you that are like me and would like to load 
>>test HIGH 
>>VOLTAGE supplies, here's my high voltage dummy load: 
>>
>>
>>Careful... either of them can burn you... BAD.  The high 
>>voltage dummy 
>>load can KILL you if you get into it.
>>
>>73, Tony W4ZT
>>
>>
>>Mike Morris wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Years ago I saw a homebrew version of that:
>>>
>>>Twenty tungsten auto headlights in a metal box, with a switch
>>>for each bulb, and a couple of heater blowers.  Bulbs were
>>>50 cents at the auto junkyard, as were the headlight switches. 
>>>They were wired so that the parking light position (half-way out)
>>>lit up the low beam, and the headlight position (all the way out)
>>>lit up the high beam as well.
>>>
>>>A regular wall thermostat was used along with a relay to run
>>>the heater blowers (off of the 12v input).
>>>
>>>Cheap to build and worked just fine
>>>
>>>Mike WA6ILQ
>>>
>>>
>>>At 10:46 PM 2/11/06, you wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
Brett, I have a copy of a commercial "Load Bank" which is 


>>nothing more 
>>
>>
than
a bunch of large resistors in a case controlled by switches.
I'll dig it out and scan it for you
 
These people get $3,000.00 for this package !  I have the stuff to 
build one
and have about $75.00 invested so far.
 
73 John VE3AMZ

- Original Message -
From: Brett 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

Hi guys does anyone have that circuit diagram I need 


>>to build one
>>
>>
to test 12 to 60 volt supply.
Thanks in advance.
Brett
 
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

In a message dated 2/11/2006 3:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  writes:
http://www.ve3tjd.com/pictures/tech%20stuff/

What a perfect heatsink for that variable power supply 


>>load that was 
>>
>>
bouncing around on R-B about a year or two ago. You could 


>>vary the Amp 
>>
>>
Load on your power supply using a variable pot control.
Gary  K2UQ


>>
>>
>>
>  
>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Maire-Radios]

was and still have a lot of 
Micro repeaters on the air (same receiver as the TAC units)  and been 
changing to Kenwood TKR-840 repeaters.  Find the Kenwood TKR-840 will do 
better that the Micors and even a factory tuned TKR-850.   Have all 
three on the same tower, on the same antenna's .
all UHF 460 to 470 
band.
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  N9WYS 

  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 7:04 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF 
  Power
  
  
  For what it’s worth - 
  and since this thread started because of my mention of the 150W transmitter – 
  I should note that the RX sensitivity on the Kenwood that I am currently 
  running IS about .25uv…  However, when I get the remote RX site(s) 
  operating, I’ll be using Micor (AKA: SpectraTAC) units, so I’m hoping for a 
  bit better RX sensitivity.
   
  Mark – 
  N9WYS
   
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Kevin 
  CusterSent: Saturday, 
  February 11, 2006 5:33 PMTo: 
  Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF 
  Power
   
  I disagree that a typical ham rig will have better 
  sensitivity than a repeater receiver with a good preamp.  I have tested 
  many repeaters with a good preamp, and many typical Japanese mobile radios, 
  and there is about a 3 to 6 dB of difference in most cases, sometimes even 
  more, with the repeater always being better.  If not, something is way 
  wrong (deaf repeater receiver).A few weeks ago, Scott and I tested a 
  220 Micor conversion with a good preamp (ARR).  It breaks squelch at -133 
  dBm and has a 12 dB SINAD rating of -128 dBm.  Most of my UHF repeaters 
  have similar sensitivity.  Most of my Japanese mobiles make 12 dB SINAD 
  at .25 uV or -119 dBm.  This relates to a 9 dB greater receiver 
  capability, not including site conditions, or anything else, just basic 
  sensitivity.  Even if it were only 6 dB better, (very typical), you would 
  need 140 watts for a matched system (considering a 35 watt mobile), or 200 
  watts, considering a 50 watt mobile.The math is simple, and with good 
  repeater site conditions, this better receiver sensitivity can be 
  realized.Besides the math, in real practice it's easy to see how well 
  matched a properly working 200 watt repeater operates.  If it didn't make 
  a difference, no one would pay the price to run this much RF.  The 
  equipment costs more, as well as the electric bill, and I don't know anyone 
  around here that would enjoy running a repeater that out-talks the 
  receiver.Kevin













  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Power

[Mark Tomany]

Why use Heliax?  'Cause we can!  hehehe  (In my case, I have someone else footing the bill, and they have SPOOLS of Heliax available, so...)   Just another observation regarding my use of the power I mentioned: I have an area where even mobile coverage is poor, and the extra power has allowed me to obtain better coverage in the area in question.  BTW - this region is only about 15 miles WNW from the tower...    Everyone, please don't worry about offending me - I'm always willing to learn!  Besides, I'm enjoying this thread!  Mark - N9WYS     Laryn Lohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  We could all probably save a lot of money by using RG142 or RG214going up the tower. Why does anyone use Heliax anyway?? Just athought...Chuck, I
 suspect that many users may not notice a 6db drop. But somewill. It'll depend on where they operate within the coverage area. And just because some don't, doesn't mean that I will not be on aconstant mission to make and keep any repeater that I take care of thebest, RF-wise, that I can.Laryn K8TVZ













  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[Repeater-Builder] power supply loads

[skipp025]

Surplus Resistors often work well for power supply 
test loads, but I like to use hair dry heating elements, 
which are cheap if not free from a dead hair dryer. 

Nichrome wire elements work very well. 
They're also very handy with large value low voltage 
caps when zapping dead NiCad Batteries back to life. 
Put a hair dryer heater in series with a high current 
low voltage power supply to your zap cap bank to work 
much faster through the dead battery bank. 

cheers,
skipp 







 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

> I have enjoyed this thread and hope that no one has taken 
> anything to be any kind of personal attack on how anyone runs their 
> repeater.

Of course not.  No matter how much I or anyone else nit-picks technical
details, it's still supposed to be a fun hobby.

> My point was "is it needed?"

I think you were debating the issue from the "functional" standpoint, while
I was looking at it from the "technical" standpoint.  All things being
equal, I guess I'm more comfortable comparing numbers than trying to
ascertain what users might perceive.

> Thank you to all.

Thank you for motivating me to go tinker with ham radio stuff for a change;
it was a nice diversion from what was otherwise a paperwork-laden
work-at-home weekend.

--- Jeff





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Chuck Kelsey]

Jeff, Kevin, Mike and others

Thank you for your insights and, especially to Jeff for the sensitivity 
tests. I have enjoyed this thread and hope that no one has taken 
anything to be any kind of personal attack on how anyone runs their 
repeater.

Jeff's comment below pretty much sums up the heart of what I was getting 
at. And what I was getting at was separating "need" from "desire." Do we 
NEED to run XXX watts of power to match the receive coverage, assuming a 
typical mobile installation? Maybe not. Do we DESIRE to run a certain 
level because we can? Sure, just like we may want to install a 100KW 
generator on site to run 3KW of load. That's fine if you can afford it, 
I suppose. My point was "is it needed?"

We have answered that.

Thank you to all.

Chuck
WB2EDV




Jeff DePolo WN3A wrote:

>>I still contend that in a mobile environment, under motion, that the 
>>user will not detect the 6 dB difference. It will be barely 
>>distinguishable most of the time.
>>
>>
>
>I'm not arguing this point.  There have been times when I've had a 75 watt
>Micor PA die and I've had to run the output of the low-level amp (about 1.5
>watts) to the antenna for a few days.  A few users noticed, but most didn't.
>
>The point is that the system should be designed to be balanced, and unless
>your coverage needs or limitations dictate otherwise, we try to build
>repeaters that perform as well as possible.  We worry about fractions of a
>dB of insertion loss when tuning a duplexer, spend more money to run 7/8"
>instead of 1/2" to the antenna, buy a SuperStationmaster for $750 rather
>than a two-bay for $250, even though we know that few users would ever
>notice the difference.
>
>   --- Jeff
>  
>





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: Radio quality (was RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power)

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

> Did you try the V7A with AIP on?  

No, I didn't, but I'll do that later today if I get a chance.  The other ham
rig in my truck is the other Kenwood dual bander (TM-708?  getting old and
don't remember model #'s like I used to).  I'm not sure but I think that has
the AIP function too.  I never dug into it to see how it's designed - is the
AIP feature just a switchable attenuator or something else?

--- Jeff





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Radio quality (was RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power)

[no6b]

At 2/11/2006 19:50, you wrote:

>OK, here are the results of my quick bench measurements for whatever it's
>worth.

>MOBILE RECEIVERS
>

>Kenwood TM-V7A (my most-hated radio): -125.0 dBm (0.13 uV)

>1.3 dB to 6.6 dB.  Personally I'd argue that the TM-V7A should be
>disqualified too; it has to have the most intermod-prone receiver of any UHF
>radio I've ever used.

Did you try the V7A with AIP on?  I have a G707 (very similar RF 
construction IIRC) & found it's performance similar: very sensitive RX but 
horrible IMD performance: spur free dynamic range with AIP off is only 61 
dB, which is on par with some of my HTs.  Turning on AIP raises it to ~70 
dB while only losing maybe 3 dB of sensitivity, which is OK but my 
FT-8500's SFDR is a couple dB better than that.

It does make for a nice travel radio, since when I get out of the metro 
areas I can turn AIP off & get maximum sensitivity where I need it, in the 
middle of nowhere.  I just wish AIP had more effect.  & of course I wish it 
did "split tone" (different CTCSS encode/decode tones, not Yaesu's 
incorrect definition).

Speaking of which, I look with despair at Yaesu's newest offering, the 
FT-1802, which STILL doesn't have split tone.  We need more complaints sent 
into the "big 3" about this.

Bob NO6B






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Andrew connector on Eupen cable

[Eric Lemmon]

Jeff,
 
Yes.  I have a VHF system using Andrew LDF5-50 Heliax 
with Eupen connectors, and also a UHF system using Eupen 7/8 feedline with 
Andrew Heliax connectors.  No problems, either with the connector 
installation or the longterm performance.  Be careful to follow the cable 
preparation instructions packed with the connector, because the dimensions are 
not exactly the same between connectors.  This is more important at UHF, to 
avoid an "impedance bump" at the connector.

73, Eric Lemmon 
WB6FLY 


From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff 
CorkrenSent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 11:16 PMTo: 
Repeater BuilderSubject: [Repeater-Builder] Andrew connector on Eupon 
cable

Does anyone know if a Andrew 7/8 
inch connector (type L5PNF) will fit Eupen 7/8 inch heliax cable ? 
Thanks in advance for your reply.
 
Jeff Corkren/W5PPB
Raymond, Mississippi 













  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

I picked up an electronic load on Ebay a number of years ago, and have
gotten more use out of it than I ever thought I would.  Here's a well-done
article on building an electronic load.  The general design could be easily
expanded to handle higher current by using a beefier transistor and/or
multiple devices.

http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_30506/article.html



--- Jeff

> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony King, W4ZT
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 9:06 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
> 
> 
> Here is my version of a 12 Volt dummy load: 
> 
> 
> And, for those of you that are like me and would like to load 
> test HIGH 
> VOLTAGE supplies, here's my high voltage dummy load: 
> 
> 
> Careful... either of them can burn you... BAD.  The high 
> voltage dummy 
> load can KILL you if you get into it.
> 
> 73, Tony W4ZT
> 
> 
> Mike Morris wrote:
> > Years ago I saw a homebrew version of that:
> > 
> > Twenty tungsten auto headlights in a metal box, with a switch
> > for each bulb, and a couple of heater blowers.  Bulbs were
> > 50 cents at the auto junkyard, as were the headlight switches. 
> > They were wired so that the parking light position (half-way out)
> > lit up the low beam, and the headlight position (all the way out)
> > lit up the high beam as well.
> > 
> > A regular wall thermostat was used along with a relay to run
> > the heater blowers (off of the 12v input).
> > 
> > Cheap to build and worked just fine
> > 
> > Mike WA6ILQ
> > 
> > 
> > At 10:46 PM 2/11/06, you wrote:
> > 
> >> Brett, I have a copy of a commercial "Load Bank" which is 
> nothing more 
> >> than
> >> a bunch of large resistors in a case controlled by switches.
> >> I'll dig it out and scan it for you
> >>  
> >> These people get $3,000.00 for this package !  I have the stuff to 
> >> build one
> >> and have about $75.00 invested so far.
> >>  
> >> 73 John VE3AMZ
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: Brett 
> >> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> >> 
> >> Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:28 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
> >>
> >> Hi guys does anyone have that circuit diagram I need 
> to build one
> >> to test 12 to 60 volt supply.
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >> Brett
> >>  
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> >> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> >> 
> >> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:01 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
> >>
> >> In a message dated 2/11/2006 3:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  writes:
> >> http://www.ve3tjd.com/pictures/tech%20stuff/
> >>
> >> What a perfect heatsink for that variable power supply 
> load that was 
> >> bouncing around on R-B about a year or two ago. You could 
> vary the Amp 
> >> Load on your power supply using a variable pot control.
> >> Gary  K2UQ
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] dB224 4 bay 220 MHz Antenna on VERY LARGE TOWER face

[Roger White]

>Another repeater in the area had a DB224 mounted about 2'  
off the side of a smaller tower about 400 ft up with the dipoles 
>arranged omni with reasonable coverage.  They went out to about 4' 
off the side and pointed the dipoles in towards the tower >inline.  
Performance dropped drastically, didn't take long for them to go back to the 
other arrangement.  
 
I am 
tending more to keep the dipoles set up for omni and go at that. We can 
only go up the tower once a year when there is tower maintenance, so we have 
to live with the setup a year! 
 
Roger 
W5RD

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  kf0m 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  
  Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 12:08 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] dB224 4 
  bay 220 MHz Antenna on VERY LARGE TOWER face
  
  I 
  can't speak to 220 Mhz but can provide info on the history of our club 2 meter 
  repeater at 1200 ft on a triangle TV station tower.
   
  single DB224 on one leg about 2-3' out.  mounted straight out form 
  the point of the leg.  Worked great 60-70 miles out  where you could 
  see the antenna but on the opposite side in the shadow of the tower maybe 20 
  miles range at best. Not a significant different between omni arrangment in 
  line mounting of dipoles pointed away from the tower.
   
  Three DB224 one on each tower leg dipoles in line pointed away 
  from the legs antennas close mounted about 4" off the tower leg. You 
  could hear the repeater well in certain areas on all sides of the tower but 
  lots of nulls in the pattern.  One of which went right across the major 
  population center. antennas fed in phase with a 3X divider.  Bad 
  news setup.
   
  DB228 close mounted on one leg of the tower about 2" dipoles in line 
  punted straight out from the point of the triangle. Faces the major 
  population area.   DB224 close mounted on one of the other 
  tower legs dipoles in line perpendicular to the tower face and pointed 
  opposite the DB228. 
  Both antennas fed in phase with a 2X power divider.  70 mile radius 
  coverage for mobiles no nulls found in pattern. Everyone is happy with the 
  performance.
   
  As a 
  side note to another thread it takes 250- 300W Tx power to balance the 
  repeater Rx coverage for mobiles stations.
   
  Another repeater in the area had a DB224 mounted about 2'  off the 
  side of a smaller tower about 400 ft up with the dipoles arranged omni 
  with reasonable coverage.  They went out to about 4' off the side 
  and pointed the dipoles in towards the tower inline.  Performance 
  dropped drasticaly, didn't take long for them to go back to the other 
  arrangement.   
  John Lock KF0MWichita KS kf0m at arrl dot 
  net 
  
-Original Message-From: 
Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Roger 
WhiteSent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 7:40 AMTo: 
Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comSubject: [Repeater-Builder] dB224 
4 bay 220 MHz Antenna on VERY LARGE TOWER face
Monday, I am having this antenna put up on a 
triangular tower, whose face is greater than 20 ft. across where the antenna 
is going on one leg. I know from years of operation on this tower (or 
any tower that is this large), the antenna pattern will have 
many nulls around the tower. Does anyone have any experience on 
mounting an antenna on a large tower to minimize the nulls? The antenna 
will be mounted on a leg (not in the center of the face which may be more 
preferably). I have the choice of placing the dipoles equally around the 
antenna mast, all facing the tower or all facing away from the tower. Any 
suggestions (or does it really matter on a tower of this size)?
 
Roger W5RD













  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

> I still contend that in a mobile environment, under motion, that the 
> user will not detect the 6 dB difference. It will be barely 
> distinguishable most of the time.

I'm not arguing this point.  There have been times when I've had a 75 watt
Micor PA die and I've had to run the output of the low-level amp (about 1.5
watts) to the antenna for a few days.  A few users noticed, but most didn't.

The point is that the system should be designed to be balanced, and unless
your coverage needs or limitations dictate otherwise, we try to build
repeaters that perform as well as possible.  We worry about fractions of a
dB of insertion loss when tuning a duplexer, spend more money to run 7/8"
instead of 1/2" to the antenna, buy a SuperStationmaster for $750 rather
than a two-bay for $250, even though we know that few users would ever
notice the difference.

--- Jeff





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Andrew connector on Eupon cable

[Jeff DePolo WN3A]

Title: Message





I'm 
almost sure it does, as I've used those connectors before on either Andrew or 
Cablewave 7/8" foam.  If you have an older Tessco catalog (say, from 3 or 4 
years ago), I'm pretty sure they had a chart in there that showed which 
connectors work on which cable.  Most of the 1/2" and 7/8" heliax 
connectors are interchangable between cable manufacturers; it's when you get 
above 7/8" and/or go to air dielectric line that there are more 
differences.  An exception to this is Andrew LDF5-50A versus LDF5-50B; the 
center conductors are slightly different diameter, and although you can 
generally make the connectors for one work on the other, the fit of the center 
pin isn't perfect.
 
The 
odd varieties 7/8" cables like Andrew VXL series and Commscope uncorrugated 
cable require connectors specific to those types.
 
    
--- Jeff
 

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Jeff CorkrenSent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 
  2:16 AMTo: Repeater BuilderSubject: [Repeater-Builder] 
  Andrew connector on Eupon cable
  Does anyone know if a Andrew 7/8 
  inch connector (type L5PNF) will fit Eupen 7/8 inch heliax cable ? 
  Thanks in advance for your reply.
   
  Jeff Corkren/W5PPB
  Raymond, Mississippi 













  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Rod Lane]

I do.  However I mentioned that to one of the West Mountain Radio guys at a
flea market and he sounded a little concerned that there might be some
possibility of an oscillation between the regulation loops in the CBA vs.
the one in a power supply.  I haven't observed that, but I do tend to put a
scope across the source when I do it just to make sure.  I guess a big cap
would swamp out any oscillation pretty effectively.

Your mileage may vary.

73

Rod Lane
Amateur Callsign N1FNE


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 8:26 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

I wonder if the West Mountain Radio "Computerized Battery Analyzer, CBA II"
could be somehow used as a load bank for power supply testing?

http://www.westmountainradio.com/CBA_ham.htm

73, Joe, K1ike

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> Re> variable power supply load.  Info should be in archives  section.  I
do 
> have a hand drawn schematic somewhere in one of  my paper piles.  Will
take a 
> look. Maybe someone can direct Brett to a  better source for the
schematic.
> Gary K2UQ
>  





 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 








 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[Tony King, W4ZT]

Here is my version of a 12 Volt dummy load: 


And, for those of you that are like me and would like to load test HIGH 
VOLTAGE supplies, here's my high voltage dummy load: 


Careful... either of them can burn you... BAD.  The high voltage dummy 
load can KILL you if you get into it.

73, Tony W4ZT


Mike Morris wrote:
> Years ago I saw a homebrew version of that:
> 
> Twenty tungsten auto headlights in a metal box, with a switch
> for each bulb, and a couple of heater blowers.  Bulbs were
> 50 cents at the auto junkyard, as were the headlight switches. 
> They were wired so that the parking light position (half-way out)
> lit up the low beam, and the headlight position (all the way out)
> lit up the high beam as well.
> 
> A regular wall thermostat was used along with a relay to run
> the heater blowers (off of the 12v input).
> 
> Cheap to build and worked just fine
> 
> Mike WA6ILQ
> 
> 
> At 10:46 PM 2/11/06, you wrote:
> 
>> Brett, I have a copy of a commercial "Load Bank" which is nothing more 
>> than
>> a bunch of large resistors in a case controlled by switches.
>> I'll dig it out and scan it for you
>>  
>> These people get $3,000.00 for this package !  I have the stuff to 
>> build one
>> and have about $75.00 invested so far.
>>  
>> 73 John VE3AMZ
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: Brett 
>> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>> 
>> Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
>>
>> Hi guys does anyone have that circuit diagram I need to build one
>> to test 12 to 60 volt supply.
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Brett
>>  
>> - Original Message -
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>> 
>> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:01 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink
>>
>> In a message dated 2/11/2006 3:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  writes:
>> http://www.ve3tjd.com/pictures/tech%20stuff/
>>
>> What a perfect heatsink for that variable power supply load that was 
>> bouncing around on R-B about a year or two ago. You could vary the Amp 
>> Load on your power supply using a variable pot control.
>> Gary  K2UQ




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cheap "Tunnel" Heatsink

[k1ike_mail]

I wonder if the West Mountain Radio "Computerized Battery Analyzer, CBA II" 
could be somehow used as a load bank for power supply testing?

http://www.westmountainradio.com/CBA_ham.htm

73, Joe, K1ike

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
> Re> variable power supply load.  Info should be in archives  section.  I do 
> have a hand drawn schematic somewhere in one of  my paper piles.  Will take a 
> look. Maybe someone can direct Brett to a  better source for the schematic.
> Gary K2UQ
>  





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Andrew connector on Eupon cable

[k1ike_mail]

I don't remember if they are interchangeable, but I may have a 7/8" Eupen 
connector somewhere.  Tessco was pushing Eupen years ago when they had the 
falling out with Andrew.  Their older catalogues may mention compatibility, 
look around 1996 or so if you can find an old copy.

73, Joe, K1ike

 Jeff Corkren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> Does anyone know if a Andrew 7/8 inch connector (type L5PNF) will fit Eupen 
> 7/8 inch heliax cable ? Thanks in advance for your reply.
> 
> Jeff Corkren/W5PPB
> Raymond, Mississippi 





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power

[Steve Bosshard]

Thanks Jeff for taking the time to do some pretty detailed research.  The
results seem right in line.

In real life the effective sensitivity will be somewhat less due to external
noise sources.  I usually will terminate a system into a dummy load and take
a relative isolated tee measurement, then replace the load with the antenna
system at the site, and see how much noise degradation occurs.  This test
will also reve3al noisy antennas and other noise sources.

Best 73,
Steve NU5D


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff DePolo WN3A
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:50 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power


OK, here are the results of my quick bench measurements for whatever it's
worth.  All receivers were on the same frequency (448.800 MHz).  Signal
  

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/257 - Release Date: 2/10/2006
 





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: controller question

[Nate Duehr]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 2/11/2006 19:49, you wrote:
>> Bob Dengler wrote:
>>
>>> Where was their "web police" last FD when we had a simplex IRLP node 
>> with a
>>> broken RX connected to a reflector TXing all day on 223.50 & the reflector
>>> admin refused to disconnect it?  Quite a mess that was.
>> Who did you contact Bob?
> 
> Don't recall the call, but he was in Alaska.

Ah ok.

>>   I never saw an e-mail to any of the usual
>> addresses asking for assistance with it, or the IRLP mailing list?
> 
> I contacted him directly over the reflector by using another local node to 
> connect to the reflector.  I explained the situation to him & he responded 
> by saying he didn't know who I was & wasn't going to disconnect the node 
> even though it was out of control & causing local interference.

Bad call on his part, I guess.  In cases like that you can always 
escalate a bit... other Reflector owners might not want the project seen 
as unwilling to help out in the case of interference.

On the flip side, IRLP's not responsible for the operation of any ham's 
transmitter, and we can't hear what's going on at the node end.  You 
could have just been someone who had an axe to grind with some other 
local ham, and there's virtually no way for anyone operating a Reflector 
to have ANY idea what's really going on "out there".

> FWIW, in part because of the above incident our local 220 MHz coordinator 
> is reviewing our local bandplan; I expect the new plan to explicitly state 
> where internet linking is allowed.

Which is EXACTLY where it should be handled.  At the local level.

Sounds like the outcome was the correct one.  And other coordination 
bodies should be learning and taking action also, to plan appropriately 
for similar issues instead of waiting to react to them.

Internet linking isn't exactly new at this point -- what, five years 
now?  That should be enough time for any coordination body to make up 
their minds on what they want to do with it in the local bandplans.

Nate WY0X






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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