Re: [Repeater-Builder] Radio Tone Control

[Vincent Caruso]

Some info can be found on the Midian site in pdf at the following link

http://www.midians.com/pdf/tone_signaling.pdf

Telex has some info on their site as well, but most common commercial 
gear only interfaces to certain radios for multiple channel control 
otherwise you are limited to one two or four channel remotes.


Vince

Kent Chong wrote:

Hello,
 
Would like to control ICOM, and Vertex radio remotelly by using the 
tone, for example, change channel, PTT etc. Anybody know the remote 
control tone standard? Where could I find the informtion?
 
Best Regards,
 
Chong Kwan Meng 

Send instant messages to your online friends 
http://asia.messenger.yahoo.com 

[Repeater-Builder] Radio Tone Control

[Kent Chong]

Hello,

Would like to control ICOM, and Vertex radio remotelly by using the tone, for 
example, change channel, PTT etc. Anybody know the remote control tone 
standard? Where could I find the informtion?

Best Regards,

Chong Kwan Meng

Send instant messages to your online friends http://asia.messenger.yahoo.com 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: DB413 Antenna Question

[Laryn Lohman]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rubeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> UPDATE
> 
> Thank you guys for your suggestions. I went out to the site today,
and as a temporary solution, I switched the transmitter antenna
(DB413) from the top at 250 ft with the receiver antenna (DB408) at
180 ft. So now my system is transmitting from the DB408 and receiving
with the DB413 (That I goofed up by rearranging the loops)

Hmmm... Can't help you with the DB420.

I'd consider keeping the DB413.  It has 12dbd gain in front and still
has 6dbd gain in the back, not shabby back there.  Perhaps you have an
area where you would like to receive a little better with handhelds,
just a thought.  By the way, it is  to receive on your
best/highest antenna.  Repeater range is almost always limited by
talkback.  *So what* if you can hear it but can't get into it

Laryn K8TVZ

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Ken Arck]

At 07:34 PM 1/8/2007, you wrote:



>It is nice to know that the TKR-751 can be programmed down to 144 MHz and
>still meet all specs. Just out of curiosity, is Kenwood going to make a
>TKR-751 that is designed for 136-150 MHz, to replace the TKR-750K2? How
>about the 70cm band?

<---The word I have from Kenwood is that the 751/851 are actually an 
"absorbed" Euro design, although I haven't been able to find out 
exactly what that means. As for other freq ranges, I don't know but I 
can see if I can get some more info from KW about it tomorrow.

I'll share what I find out and am able to.

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories.
http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net

Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB413 Antenna Question

[Steve Rubeck]

UPDATE

Thank you guys for your suggestions. I went out to the site today, and as a 
temporary solution, I switched the transmitter antenna (DB413) from the top at 
250 ft with the receiver antenna (DB408) at 180 ft. So now my system is 
transmitting from the DB408 and receiving with the DB413 (That I goofed up by 
rearranging the loops)
This thing is like a whole new system again, I have great talk out from the 
DB408 and the talk in is sufficient for now, but I suddenly have coverage where 
I didn't before. I even have coverage with the reception on the DB413, where I 
had nothing at all when it was transmitting out. That is a little strange, but 
that is what makes this a fun hobby.
Thanks again for all the input. By the way, anybody know of a DB420 for sale or 
trade?

Steve


r_s_s_i <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  Hello Group,
 
 Just put into service a DB413 antenna for the repeater transmitter atop
 the tower at 250 feet. I re-arranged the dipoles trying to get a more
 omni-radiation pattern, but now it seems that the output power is down.
 Is there a "CORRECT" way to re-arrange the dipole loops?
 
 I took the top two at 0 degrees, the next two down at 90 degrees, the
 next two at 180 degrees, and the last two at 270 degrees.
 
 Was this the best way to make this an omni antenna, or is there a
 better way to operate this antenna?  Maybe I should have left it the
 way it was?
 
 
 
   

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: DB 4072 Duplexer, Knowledge, will they tune the 440 Mhz Ham Band?

[Mathew Quaife]

Thanks Ron, I will pass that along to my friend. 
   
  Mathew
  

"Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Mathew,

I have a DB4072, the 6 cavity in the chassis/box, that was tuned by DB 
Products to 503 MHz. We retuned to 443/448 MHz with no problem or 
changes.

As with most all duplexers the cabling is cut to length to get best 
performance so would be best if had correct cabling, but this might be 
little hard to replace with all the BNCs. We typically see about a 5 
db improvement with proper cables, but will work especially at 30 watts.

We do cut the internect cable from tx and rx to multiple 1/2 wave 
lengths.

73, ron, n9ee/r

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have a fellow ham who has a set of DB 4072 duplexers, wants to use 
> them on a 440 repeater at about 30 watts output. Has anyone any 
> expierience tuning these duplexers, and how well if they will, work. 
> They are currently set on 463 Mhz, and are designed for 450-470 Mhz.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Mathew
>



 

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Eric Lemmon]

Ken,

Thanks for the quick response.  I made the distinction about the TKR-750K2
because some readers of this list are used to radios that can be programmed
out of band with no hiccups, which list may include the TKR-750K1.  Other
brands or models of programmable repeaters- the Motorola MTR-2000 comes to
mind- cannot be programmed even one Hertz out of band.

It is nice to know that the TKR-751 can be programmed down to 144 MHz and
still meet all specs.  Just out of curiosity, is Kenwood going to make a
TKR-751 that is designed for 136-150 MHz, to replace the TKR-750K2?  How
about the 70cm band?

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Arck
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:16 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF
repeater

At 07:04 PM 1/8/2007, you wrote:

>I beg to differ. I downloaded the brochure and data sheet for the TKR-751,
>and it appears that it is intended for the European market, since it has
the
>5-Tone signaling capability. It also is designed with the low end of its
>tuning to be 146 MHz, which doesn't help Amateurs who need a repeater in
the
>144-146 MHz segment.

<-True but even the VHF K version has no issues in moving down to 
144 MHz (while we generally try to supply a K2, occasionally someone 
insists on a K because they may want to move it higher at some 
point). And they 100% meet (or exceed) spec.

Brochures are fine but experience with the beast is better :-).

As for the 5 tone, ok, you got me! Minor for most applications however.

>The TKR-750K2, on the other hand, was designed for 136-150 MHz and
>completely covers the 2m Amateur band, out of the box. I am not suggesting
>that the TKR-751 cannot be tuned or programmed to operate out of band, but
>some of us Hams like to buy equipment that we know is designed to work over
>the entire 2m band, without tweaking, bit-banging, or modification.

<---No mod needed. Even the VCOs are quite happy.

>Let's not forget that BOTH the TKR-750 and the TKR-751 must have their
>helical front ends tuned manually to cover whatever frequency is chosen for
>operation. This caveat is in the fine print of the brochure and the service
>manual.

<---Yep, which is why we spec the TKR's that go through here 
"programmed AND tuned").

Ken

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[Mathew Quaife]

Very interesting.  Well I have located a 66 split reciever and will see what it 
does with the High Side Split.  Thanks.
   
  Mathew
  

DK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  I happened to be looking at an old LBI for VHF this morning and 
it had notes about a mod kit available for high side injecton on receivers 
before a certain version number. So what I gathered was on the early versions 
they had to be mod’d for HS. 
  
  Then later versions would go HS , LS as shipped? I gathered from all the 
recent post that it was a stock deal to go HS or LS? Clear as mudd now 
  
73
  Don
  W5DK

  
-
  
  From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
Mathew Quaife
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:04 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for 
mobile radio

  
  Actually I have several 56 splits.  When I ordered the xtal, I 
ordered for high side injection, and it does not want to tune up real well.  
Put a 147.78 LSI, and it tunes to better than -110 dBm.  So this is the reason 
I want to try a 66 split and see if it will do any better.



Mathew



"Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Mathew,

I've used lots and lots of the 66s to go down to 145/146/147 with no 
problem. Tunes to GE spec. I have found lots of 56s from Canada. 
Seems their commerical band is in the 140-150 range unlike the USA in 
150-170. Both tuned with no problem.

I will not say all 66s will tune down, but 98% do and meet spec. If 
56 is not tuning then I would say it has a problem. 66s are easier 
to find, the easiest, but there are 56s out there.

73, ron, n9ee/r

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around 
they 
> would be willing to part with? I have a 56 split, having problems 
> getting it to goto 147.885 receive. Best I can get is about -70 
dBm 
> at 12 dB sinad. So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job.
> 
> Mathew
>


  
   __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 




  

 

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Ken Arck]

At 07:04 PM 1/8/2007, you wrote:

>I beg to differ. I downloaded the brochure and data sheet for the TKR-751,
>and it appears that it is intended for the European market, since it has the
>5-Tone signaling capability. It also is designed with the low end of its
>tuning to be 146 MHz, which doesn't help Amateurs who need a repeater in the
>144-146 MHz segment.

<-True but even the VHF K version has no issues in moving down to 
144 mHz (while we generally try to supply a K2, occasionally someone 
insists on a K because they may want to move it higher at some 
point). And they 100% meet (or exceed) spec.

Brochures are fine but experience with the beast is better :-).

As for the 5 tone, ok, you got me! Minor for most applications however.


>The TKR-750K2, on the other hand, was designed for 136-150 MHz and
>completely covers the 2m Amateur band, out of the box. I am not suggesting
>that the TKR-751 cannot be tuned or programmed to operate out of band, but
>some of us Hams like to buy equipment that we know is designed to work over
>the entire 2m band, without tweaking, bit-banging, or modification.


<---No mod needed. Even the VCOs are quite happy.


>Let's not forget that BOTH the TKR-750 and the TKR-751 must have their
>helical front ends tuned manually to cover whatever frequency is chosen for
>operation. This caveat is in the fine print of the brochure and the service
>manual.

<---Yep, which is why we spec the TKR's that go through here 
"programmed AND tuned").

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories.
http://www.ah6le.net/arcom/index.html
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Eric Lemmon]

I beg to differ.  I downloaded the brochure and data sheet for the TKR-751,
and it appears that it is intended for the European market, since it has the
5-Tone signaling capability.  It also is designed with the low end of its
tuning to be 146 MHz, which doesn't help Amateurs who need a repeater in the
144-146 MHz segment.

The TKR-750K2, on the other hand, was designed for 136-150 MHz and
completely covers the 2m Amateur band, out of the box.  I am not suggesting
that the TKR-751 cannot be tuned or programmed to operate out of band, but
some of us Hams like to buy equipment that we know is designed to work over
the entire 2m band, without tweaking, bit-banging, or modification.

Let's not forget that BOTH the TKR-750 and the TKR-751 must have their
helical front ends tuned manually to cover whatever frequency is chosen for
operation.  This caveat is in the fine print of the brochure and the service
manual.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Arck
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 3:00 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF
repeater

RE: [Repeater-Builder] micor channel element help

[Jeff DePolo]

447.900 versus 444.800 is a LONG LONG LONG way to go.  Or did you really
mean 444.790 versus 444.800?  That sounds more realistic.

There is a fixed cap, typically in the range of 20 to 39 pF, located more or
less behind the trimmer.  I can send you a pic if necessary to confirm which
cap it is.  You'll need to replace that cap with a different value (probably
a few pF less if you're only 10 kHz off at present).  Usually this cap is
NP0 temperature coefficient, but not always.  DO NOT put in some random cap
with poor thermal stability; stick with an NP0 and hope that it remains
stable under temperature variations.  If you really want accurate
compensation, you should send the element to ICM and have them do it.

--- Jeff


> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:08 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] micor channel element help
> 
> does any one have a how to change the range of channel 
> element knx1052a 
> when the warp virable cap is not enough ? here is what i have the 
> element was org for 414.000 and i want to move it to 444.800 but can 
> only get 447.900 out the channel element . i have no drawings on the 
> channel element, but have a couple of service manuals but there is no 
> mention of how to move the thing..
> 
> any information would be great
> 
> nice group keep up the great work
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Keith va3kmc
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.7/619 - Release 
> Date: 1/7/2007
>  
> 

[Repeater-Builder] VHF Duplexer

[K4SLB Steve Butler]

Like almost everyone, I am looking for a Duplexer for my 147.210 box here in 
Central Florida. I am currnetly using vertical seperation on system snd 
would like to get the system running off the one antenna.  Any out there? 
Resonable?

73
K4SLB
Steve 

[Repeater-Builder] desktrac repeater

[Leo]

is there anyone out there that can help me connect a computer to a 
desktrac repeater to use as a controller
Leo

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: identifying origin of signal in large link systems

[wmers5]

Another linked system that uses the CAT-200 300 500 400  is the Lake Superior 
Amateur Coalition (LSAC). Also S-Com 7k units used as  well.
 
_http://www.catauto.com/index.html_ (http://www.catauto.com/index.html) 
 
_http://www.qrz.com/database?callsign=kb0qyc_ 
(http://www.qrz.com/database?callsign=kb0qyc) 
_http://www.qrz.com/database?callsign=kb0tnb_ 
(http://www.qrz.com/database?callsign=kb0tnb) 
 
_http://repeaterlink.org/result.php?repeater_sys=9_ 
(http://repeaterlink.org/result.php?repeater_sys=9) 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] linked repeaters question

[Phil]

a "bump" if you will as site traffic has increased and the holidays are basicly 
over.. tnx.

radiomog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Hi.

I'd like to know if there is a technology using COTS products to take 
multiple repeater audio's at site A and send them via RF link to site 
B, to be broken back out to respective repeaters and vice versa. 

"home" to-
link 1 = 29 miles
link 2 = 50 miles
link 3 = 54 miles

presently we're using a vhf link between home and link 2

and uhf to link 1/3.

we'd like to add additional links, but would like to keep additonal 
antennae off the tower if possible.

if we can combine them on one link, it would be ideal.

it's pretty flat terrain with some tall vegetation. but we have 
tower height to sail over it. (100' minimum at 1/2/3, home is over 
300)



 

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Repeater-Builder] micor channel element help

[Keith]

does any one have a how to change the range of channel element knx1052a 
when the warp virable cap is not enough ? here is what i have the 
element was org for 414.000 and i want to move it to 444.800 but can 
only get 447.900 out the channel element . i have no drawings on the 
channel element, but have a couple of service manuals but there is no 
mention of how to move the thing..

any information would be great

nice group keep up the great work

Thanks


Keith va3kmc

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz duplexer to 220Mhz

[Jeff DePolo]

> 2) The connectors used on the ResLok duplexers are easily uncrimped 
> and shortened, which means no additional expense for RG-142 cabling.

I've had good luck re-using those "in-line" tee connectors that Sinclair
likes to use by slicing the crimp ferrules length-wise using a Dremmmel and
then peeling them off.  Replacement ferrules for RG-142B can be had had from
Tessco and other places.  The OEM of those connectors was probably Delta
Electronics - http://www.deltarf.com/results/p60.pdf.

--- Jeff

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz duplexer to 220Mhz

[ve7ltd]

I am fairly good at making documentation, and if this project works, 
I will create a PDF complete with pictures and dimensions to help 
others who may want to do this in the future.

I have learned:

1) I do not need to cut down the casing. The only reason to do this 
would be for sizing.

2) The connectors used on the ResLok duplexers are easily uncrimped 
and shortened, which means no additional expense for RG-142 cabling.

3) The loops may not need to be modified, as their orientation 
defines their resonance within the cavity. So turning them a bit may 
be all that is needed to get the proper loss/notch depth required for 
this 220 project.

I have a nice camera, so I will document along the way.

Dave Cameron
VE7LTD

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Wright, Skywarn 
Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mike,
> 
> On the 220 cavity conversion this would be excellent posting on the 
> board info sheets.  Might consider giving it to the board 
moderators 
> or posting in the FILES section.
> 
> 73, ron, n9ee/r
> 
> 
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Mullarkey"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi David,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I just finished modifying 6 900MHz 10" cavities to use at 440MHz 
> for a 3
> > channel receive combiner. Sinclair engineers will send you a PDF 
of 
> such
> > cavity at 220 and the loop length. At first they will be hesitant 
> but they
> > will eventually send it to you. For the loops just make new loops 
> and solder
> > them to the connector. For the internal rod. Unsolder the tower 
and 
> leave
> > the finger stock alone if possible to.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Oregon Repeater Linking Group
> > 
> > Mike Mullarkey
> > 
> > 6539 E Street
> > 
> > Springfield, OR 97478
> > 
> > k7pfj@
> > 
> > www.orlg.org
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ve7ltd
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:22 PM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 
144Mhz 
> duplexer
> > to 220Mhz
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I have recently aquired a functional high-split (148-174) 
Sinclair 
> > Q2220E. Since it does not have enough isolation for my 100W VHF 
> > repeater, and I already have a good working Q202 on there now, I 
am 
> > planning to convert this over to a Q2221E for 220Mhz.
> > 
> > I am pretty aware of how duplexers work and the coupling harness 
> and 
> > 1/4 wave characteristics, so my questions are very specific. I 
have 
> a 
> > Q3330C (compact UHF 6 cavity) and the Q202 that I have looked at 
> for 
> > comparing loops and such. I have already determined how I have to 
> > reduce the length of the interconnecting harness with the 
velocity 
> > factor and such.
> > 
> > The only questions I have are:
> > 1) The coupling loop (with the connector and the variable 
> capactior) 
> > on the Q2220E is obviously sized for 148-174. How should the 
> > dimensions be changed to work to 220? The reason I am confused is 
> the 
> > UHF is the same length, but not as spread open. and made from 
wider 
> > copper stock. The Q202 is much more spread open and larger. What 
is 
> > the electrical/RF characteristics of this loop supposed to be?
> > 
> > 2) I know I have to cut down the hollow rod support and the 
finger 
> > stock on the internals of the duplexer to accomodate the 1/4 wave 
> > resonance inside for 220. No problem. But, does the depth of the 
> > cavity matter? Do I have to shorten the casing as well? I know in 
> the 
> > past when I removed the bottom of the large Q202 cans, the bottom 
> > being in place or not had little effect on the tuning. If I left 
> the 
> > casing alone, would I still be able to tune it to 220?
> > 
> > Thanks for your insight.
> > 
> > Dave Cameron
> > VE7LTD
> >
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: IOTA Power Supplies

[fineshot1]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Paul Metzger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't know about IOTA switching supplies, but my Newmar PM-12-70  
> switching supply causes birdies all through my HF gear here at home.  
> I also used a bank of five brand new 12V batteries tied to a Vector  
> VEC1093A battery charger instead of the Newmar, and that charger as  
> well is a switcher that also caused birdies all through my HF gear. I  
> should have kept my old 70 Ampere non switching supply. Oh well, a  
> lesson learned.
> 
> Paul Metzger
> KQ6EH
>

Paul - I cant speak to the switchers that you mentioned above but the
IOTA's are very well designed and some of the fellas I know that have
used them & the older Todd switching supplies to power there HF
equipment have never had a problem with them causing birdies. Heck,
alot of HF gear now a days has switching supplies some of which are
built in as an option. Many repeaters that I am aware of have
switching supplies powering them. This is not as uncommon as you make
it sound..dan n2aym

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[DK]

I happened to be looking at an old LBI for VHF this morning and it had notes
about a mod kit available for high side injecton on receivers before a
certain version number. So what I gathered was on the early versions they
had to be mod'd for HS. 

 

Then later versions would go HS , LS as shipped? I gathered from all the
recent post that it was a stock deal to go HS or LS? Clear as mudd now 

 

73

Don

W5DK

  _  

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mathew Quaife
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:04 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for
mobile radio

 

Actually I have several 56 splits.  When I ordered the xtal, I ordered for
high side injection, and it does not want to tune up real well.  Put a
147.78 LSI, and it tunes to better than -110 dBm.  So this is the reason I
want to try a 66 split and see if it will do any better.

 

Mathew



"Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Mathew,

I've used lots and lots of the 66s to go down to 145/146/147 with no 
problem. Tunes to GE spec. I have found lots of 56s from Canada. 
Seems their commerical band is in the 140-150 range unlike the USA in 
150-170. Both tuned with no problem.

I will not say all 66s will tune down, but 98% do and meet spec. If 
56 is not tuning then I would say it has a problem. 66s are easier 
to find, the easiest, but there are 56s out there.

73, ron, n9ee/r

--- In Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around 
they 
> would be willing to part with? I have a 56 split, having problems 
> getting it to goto 147.885 receive. Best I can get is about -70 
dBm 
> at 12 dB sinad. So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job.
> 
> Mathew
>

 

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Ken Arck]

At 01:46 PM 1/8/2007, you wrote:

>If you were going to buy a new repeater/base... you might just want
>to jump up to the available tkr-751. We Kenwood Dealers normally
>have sales and service areas in and around our physical location.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[Ken Arck]

At 01:46 PM 1/8/2007, you wrote:

>If you were going to buy a new repeater/base... you might just want
>to jump up to the available tkr-751. We Kenwood Dealers normally
>have sales and service areas in and around our physical location.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] MVP - PLL

[Bob Dengler]

At 1/5/2007 07:47 AM, you wrote:
> >
> >Mention was made of how to deal with compensation.  I've built ovens of
> >various types, and even used PTC thermistors soldered directly to the case
> >of the crystal as a heater, with good results.  I think Bob NO6B did the
> >same - you QRV Bob?

Yes, I've been soldering 50 °C PTC thermistors to crystal cases for some 
time.  On my last project using a rather unstable crystal I discovered that 
the PTC thermistors don't provide as much thermal stability as I thought 
(transition not sharp enough?), so I built up a feedback controller based 
on a design out of an old National Semiconductor databook using a dual op 
amp.  I used thermal epoxy to mount a 51 ohm heater resistor & LM34 
temperature sensor onto the crystal.  The circuit is able to hold the 
temperature at the LM34 within +/- 0.2 °F.  Now the only thermal drift I 
see is due to the temperature effect on the oscillator transistor on the 
exciter board.

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[Bob Dengler]

At 1/8/2007 02:03 PM, you wrote:
>Actually I have several 56 splits.  When I ordered the xtal, I ordered for 
>high side injection, and it does not want to tune up real well.  Put a 
>147.78 LSI, and it tunes to better than -110 dBm.  So this is the reason I 
>want to try a 66 split and see if it will do any better.
>
>Mathew

Mathew:

The 56 split RXs were made specifically to cover the 2 meter band, so you'd 
be better off ordering low-side LO crystals for those receivers instead of 
switching to 66 RXs.  66s are much more common, so if you still decide to 
switch I'm sure there are many here that will gladly accept an even trade  :)

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[Mathew Quaife]

Actually I have several 56 splits.  When I ordered the xtal, I ordered for high 
side injection, and it does not want to tune up real well.  Put a 147.78 LSI, 
and it tunes to better than -110 dBm.  So this is the reason I want to try a 66 
split and see if it will do any better.
   
  Mathew
  

"Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Mathew,

I've used lots and lots of the 66s to go down to 145/146/147 with no 
problem. Tunes to GE spec. I have found lots of 56s from Canada. 
Seems their commerical band is in the 140-150 range unlike the USA in 
150-170. Both tuned with no problem.

I will not say all 66s will tune down, but 98% do and meet spec. If 
56 is not tuning then I would say it has a problem. 66s are easier 
to find, the easiest, but there are 56s out there.

73, ron, n9ee/r

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around 
they 
> would be willing to part with? I have a 56 split, having problems 
> getting it to goto 147.885 receive. Best I can get is about -70 
dBm 
> at 12 dB sinad. So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job.
> 
> Mathew
>



 

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Kenwood TKR-751 now... was TKR-750 VHF repeater

[skipp025]

If you were going to buy a new repeater/base... you might just want 
to jump up to the available tkr-751.  We Kenwood Dealers normally 
have sales and service areas in and around our physical location. 

A new tkr-751 repeater is real "sweet!"

So the proper way to start out would be to ask your local Kenwood 
Dealer for help and information.  If they don't promptly provide 
the info and prices you can easily find other dealers by phone and 
email who will gladly help you. 

And we are happy to help you... 

cheers, 
skipp 
skipp025 at yahoo.com 
www.radiowrench.com 
[Northern California]

ps: I also answered Tom's questions direct. 

> panneer pcp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> i want to purchase kenwood tkr750 verson 2 at low cost with warendy 
>   want deatails.
>
>   
> D Chubski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Tom.  I have several TKR-750 VHF Version 2 (
136-150)  repeaters or base stations.What information do you need?
>
>   Dave
>   PennCAP 4
> 
> Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   Anyone have any experience with the versions 1 and 2 of this
repeater 
> and its programming?
> 
> NB2A
> Tom
>

RE: [Repeater-Builder] IOTA Power Supplies

[Andrew G.]

Thanks Jeff and all those who replied. Appreciate the help. I think I'll pick 
one up and give it a try. If anything they will be easier to change than the GE 
MASTR 2 Supplies I have in my cabinets.
   
  Andy KC2GOW
  http://www.sirepeater.com  

 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
 __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[Juan Tellez]

My preference will be RLC-4 from Link-comm….

 

http://www.link-comm.com/controllers/about.htm  

 

Juan

 

  _  

De: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de allenittiyavira
Enviado el: domingo, 07 de enero de 2007 11:56
Para: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

 

Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good 
with conventional.

I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters (conventional)
to work as one channel. Are link radios the best method? (no cabling 
is available). If so, which is the best repeater controller I can use 
to connect three link radios from master site?

Your replay is highly appriciated.

Regards

Allen

 

__ Información de NOD32, revisión 1963 (20070108) __

Este mensaje ha sido analizado con NOD32 antivirus system
http://www.nod32.com

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Trade repeater stuff for UHF mobile

[Jeff DePolo]

> Give us an idea of what you have.  Repeaters use lots of stuff, nuts, 
> bolts, connectors, duplexers, power supplys, etc, hi.

Yes, all of that, plus a lot more.

> You might find some will buy what you have and get plenty of money to 
> buy not only what rigs some have, but what you want, new in the box 
> with warranty from AES or HRO, etc.  

I have a trade set up with someone, so I'm covered on the UHF rig.  I just
wanted something basic to set up at a tower site that I'm at on a regular
basis.
 
> When it comes to repeater stuff Hams will pay for it no matter how 
> old.  

Really?  You've met hams that will pay good money?  Is this on a different
planet or plane of existance or something?  ;-) ;-) ;-)

> Repeater stuff never goes out of style unlike most Ham rigs.

Kind of like wing tips, single-malt scotch, and tall blondes.

Later.

--- Jeff

[Repeater-Builder] Re: dual band antenna

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Paul,

I have a 2 meter 20 watts out of the duplexer repeater with DB224 
sharing 1-5/8" feedline at 1175 ft above ground with UHF DB408.  I 
have Comet duplexers (really crossband couplers) at top and bottom.  
Been installed for 10 years since 1996.  They both work great.  

The UHF is in the commerical band.  The only thing I worry about is 
the Comet duplexers.  They are holding up, but wished we had gone 
with the commerical units that most often can handle 100 Ws per port, 
a real 100 Ws not like Ham specs.  In the past I have had problems 
with continous higher power with the Comets and Diamond duplexers, 
but not on this system.

It is a good way to get a site.  Lots of UHF/800 MHz stuff up high 
and if you know someone with this who will let you share the feedline 
great way to go.  Of course works well is all is Ham also.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Holm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I realize that from time-to-time this subject has come up: the want 
of a commercial-grade dual band antenna.  The DB314 is one option 
that has been mentioned before, but the gain figures are not what 
we'd like them to be.  And we'd really like to find something other 
than a multiple-section ham dual bander.
> 
> Our ham club is wanting to add 440 capabilities to our current 
repeater site.  The tower is a golfball-on-a-tee style water tower, 
and we are allowed only one mounting location.  So we find ourselves 
in this same situation.  We are currently using a commercial 
fiberglass stick on the low end of it's 2:1 curve for VHF and we are 
allowed to replace it with whatever we want to pay for. hi hi
> 
> Has anyone ever tried 'interlacing' a DB224 and a DB408 or DB420(or 
similar) on a common mast?  and use suitable diplexers at the top and 
bottom ends of the line?  or would there be too much interaction 
between the bays, using that physical arrangement?  or would it 
result in goofy patterns?
> 
> Or is the DB314 the only workable method of doing this? and is it 
worth it at ~1200 bucks?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 73  Paul
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Trade repeater stuff for UHF mobile

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Jeff,

Give us an idea of what you have.  Repeaters use lots of stuff, nuts, 
bolts, connectors, duplexers, power supplys, etc, hi.

You might find some will buy what you have and get plenty of money to 
buy not only what rigs some have, but what you want, new in the box 
with warranty from AES or HRO, etc.  

When it comes to repeater stuff Hams will pay for it no matter how 
old.  

Repeater stuff never goes out of style unlike most Ham rigs.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff DePolo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> Need a basic UHF mobile rig.  Must be a ham rig (VFO), not 
commercial.  25
> watts or more.  PL encode; decode not really necessary.  Will 
consider a
> dual bander if I can't find anything else.  Have tons of repeater-
related
> stuff in storage - let me know what you've got and what you're 
looking for
> in trade.  Thanks.
> 
>   --- Jeff
>

[Repeater-Builder] RF modems for remote sites

[Tom]

Anyone have any experience using one to remotely program or do 
software changes on controllers via an RF link of some kind?

What type was successful?

Thanks
NB2A

[Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Mathew,

One other note on the crystals.  We order from Bomar or International 
and we just give freq and they deliever their standard for the exec 
II.  Never had a problem except when I ordered the wrong freq, my 
doing, hi.  We are never ask hi or low side injection.  We have had 
very good luck with both these manufactures, tuning wise and staying on 
freq and netting the freq easily.

Bomar has a $50 min so if one crystal might be expensive.  
International is $19.95 for 3 weeks.  Bomar is $10 ea 3 weeks, but 
still have $50 min.  Get one set for $60 (w/shipping) or 3 sets at 3 
weeks for $70.  If I have to order for 2 repeaters (4 xtals) I order a 
3rd set for what might be used in the future.  But then again I have an 
unusual situation.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around 
they 
> would be willing to part with?  I have a 56 split, having problems 
> getting it to goto 147.885 receive.  Best I can get is about -70 dBm 
> at 12 dB sinad.  So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job.
> 
> Mathew
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz duplexer to 220Mhz

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Mike,

On the 220 cavity conversion this would be excellent posting on the 
board info sheets.  Might consider giving it to the board moderators 
or posting in the FILES section.

73, ron, n9ee/r


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Mullarkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Hi David,
> 
>  
> 
> I just finished modifying 6 900MHz 10" cavities to use at 440MHz 
for a 3
> channel receive combiner. Sinclair engineers will send you a PDF of 
such
> cavity at 220 and the loop length. At first they will be hesitant 
but they
> will eventually send it to you. For the loops just make new loops 
and solder
> them to the connector. For the internal rod. Unsolder the tower and 
leave
> the finger stock alone if possible to.
> 
>  
> 
> Mike
> 
>  
> 
> Oregon Repeater Linking Group
> 
> Mike Mullarkey
> 
> 6539 E Street
> 
> Springfield, OR 97478
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> www.orlg.org
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ve7ltd
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:22 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz 
duplexer
> to 220Mhz
> 
>  
> 
> I have recently aquired a functional high-split (148-174) Sinclair 
> Q2220E. Since it does not have enough isolation for my 100W VHF 
> repeater, and I already have a good working Q202 on there now, I am 
> planning to convert this over to a Q2221E for 220Mhz.
> 
> I am pretty aware of how duplexers work and the coupling harness 
and 
> 1/4 wave characteristics, so my questions are very specific. I have 
a 
> Q3330C (compact UHF 6 cavity) and the Q202 that I have looked at 
for 
> comparing loops and such. I have already determined how I have to 
> reduce the length of the interconnecting harness with the velocity 
> factor and such.
> 
> The only questions I have are:
> 1) The coupling loop (with the connector and the variable 
capactior) 
> on the Q2220E is obviously sized for 148-174. How should the 
> dimensions be changed to work to 220? The reason I am confused is 
the 
> UHF is the same length, but not as spread open. and made from wider 
> copper stock. The Q202 is much more spread open and larger. What is 
> the electrical/RF characteristics of this loop supposed to be?
> 
> 2) I know I have to cut down the hollow rod support and the finger 
> stock on the internals of the duplexer to accomodate the 1/4 wave 
> resonance inside for 220. No problem. But, does the depth of the 
> cavity matter? Do I have to shorten the casing as well? I know in 
the 
> past when I removed the bottom of the large Q202 cans, the bottom 
> being in place or not had little effect on the tuning. If I left 
the 
> casing alone, would I still be able to tune it to 220?
> 
> Thanks for your insight.
> 
> Dave Cameron
> VE7LTD
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Mathew,

I've used lots and lots of the 66s to go down to 145/146/147 with no 
problem.  Tunes to GE spec.  I have found lots of 56s from Canada.  
Seems their commerical band is in the 140-150 range unlike the USA in 
150-170.  Both tuned with no problem.

I will not say all 66s will tune down, but 98% do and meet spec.  If 
56 is not tuning then I would say it has a problem.  66s are easier 
to find, the easiest, but there are 56s out there.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around 
they 
> would be willing to part with?  I have a 56 split, having problems 
> getting it to goto 147.885 receive.  Best I can get is about -70 
dBm 
> at 12 dB sinad.  So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job.
> 
> Mathew
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: DB 4072 Duplexer, Knowledge, will they tune the 440 Mhz Ham Band?

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Mathew,

I have a DB4072, the 6 cavity in the chassis/box, that was tuned by DB 
Products to 503 MHz.  We retuned to 443/448 MHz with no problem or 
changes.

As with most all duplexers the cabling is cut to length to get best 
performance so would be best if had correct cabling, but this might be 
little hard to replace with all the BNCs.  We typically see about a 5 
db improvement with proper cables, but will work especially at 30 watts.

We do cut the internect cable from tx and rx to multiple 1/2 wave 
lengths.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have a fellow ham who has a set of DB 4072 duplexers, wants to use 
> them on a 440 repeater at about 30 watts output.  Has anyone any 
> expierience tuning these duplexers, and how well if they will, work.  
> They are currently set on 463 Mhz, and are designed for 450-470 Mhz.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Mathew
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: identifying origin of signal in large link systems

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Chris,

In the Cincinnati, OH, area is the 145.19 with many linked repeaters 
and remote receive sites.  Last I heard over 30 linked sites.

We used a CW character as a tail beep for each.  Such as a C for 
Connersville.  I built a CW tail beep unit that had 24 inputs each 
with its own CW character.  This worked fine until we got more than 
24 links.  We then changed the tone from 1000 Hz to 500 Hz and used 
the CW character/tail beep and the tone to ID the linked unit.  This 
worked well for there was a voter at the main tx site so was easy to 
set up.

If you do not have this one site to do all then a few controllers 
allow programming a CW character for the tail beep.  One can then set 
the tail beep to a character associated with the linked repeater.

But all depends on how you are linking.  If linking with transceivers 
from the distant repeaters one would have to put a tail beep on each 
link tx to ID itself.

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chris Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm involved in a large linked system (about 15 repeaters at 
present).  
> One of the goals of the system is that, regardless of the repeater, 
the 
> user should hear a different courtesy tone for each site in the 
system.
> 
> I'm just curious, are there any large link systems that do this, 
and if 
> so, what method do you use to propagate the site IDs?
> 
> We have a method today, which works, but is not really supported by 
any 
> of the controller manufacturers.  So, we've come up with some kind 
of 
> buggy custom macros for the SCOM 7K, whwhich don't transfer well to 
> other controllers.  This means we're constantly looking for used 
7Ks on 
> ebay to add more repeaters to the system.
> 
> We've added one RC210, and would like to add more, but it has its 
own 
> problems.
> 
> I'll be happy to describe what we're doing, and some ideas we've 
had for 
> improvement, in a separate email, but for now, I'm curious to know 
what 
> other systems are doing.
> 
> Thanks,
> Chris, KG0BP
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wide area coverage

[Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator]

Allen,

One methode is to use a hub repeater and have a transceiver at the 
other repeaters linking to the hub.  This hub can be one of the 
repeaters in the system (one hub with the others having tranceivers 
on this hub freq) or have a dedicated hub repeater on another band.

The least expensive way is one of the 4 repeaters act as the hub.  
The disadvantage is this one repeater must be up at all times 
avialable to provide the link.  Often one wishes to de-link when 
traffic becomes heavy tying up the whole system.  The other repeaters 
can de-link on their own, but the hub must stay on.

There are many controllers that have remote base or link ports.  This 
is now a common of many controllers.

I sell a controller that is probably one of the least expensive with 
a remote base port.  It is a repeater controller with a controlable 
link/remote base ment to be connected to a transceiver for linking.

The link radio, no matter which controller you get, does not have to 
be full duplex and will be seen by the hub repeater as simply another 
user.  Linked repeater gets input keys link and when link gets input 
keys repeater.  The repeater still acts on its own as a full duplexed 
repeater.  Many have had great success doing this and has been done 
in USA for few decades now.

Another method that has some success is Echolink or IRLP using the 
internet.  In the transceiver method the link must be able to get 
into the hub.  If distance is a problem then using the internet is 
another choice.  It of course will require an internet connection at 
the repeater(s).

73, ron, n9ee/r



--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "allenittiyavira" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
> I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.
> 
> I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good 
> with conventional.
> 
> I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters 
(conventional)
> to work as one channel.  Are link radios the best method? (no 
cabling 
> is available).  If so, which is the best repeater controller I can 
use 
> to connect three link radios from master site?
> 
> Your replay is highly appriciated.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Allen
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Kenwood TKR-750 VHF repeater

[panneer pcp]

i want to purchase kenwood tkr750 verson 2 at low cost with warendy

  want deatails.
   
  
D Chubski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Tom.  I have several TKR-750 VHF Version 2 ( 136-150)  
repeaters or base stations.What information do you need?
   
  Dave
  PennCAP 4

Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Anyone have any experience with the versions 1 and 2 of this repeater 
and its programming?

NB2A
Tom




  __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

 

 Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo! Messenger. Download 
Now! http://messenger.yahoo.com/download.php

Re: [Repeater-Builder] back after being gone a while

[Kevin Custer]

Chris Peterson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I used to be on the list for a number of years, but I dropped off for a 
> while.
>
> Now, I decided to rejoin...

Welcome back, Chris.

Kevin Custer

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[Steve Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have used Spoke and Hub system.  Several 146 Mhz repeaters cross connected
to 440 Mhz control stations, all looking at the same 440 repeater for
distrubution between the different 144 Mhz repeaters.  Steve NU5D


On 1/7/07, allenittiyavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good
with conventional.




--
Ham Radio Spoken Here.NU5D

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Digest Number 4107

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Laryn,
Each "set" (the pair as it were) on this db420 is 90 deg.s from the one
above.  Not the normal stacked 4 pair, then the bottom stacked 4 pair
turned 90 deg of the one above.  A friend of mine had given me the
antenna to use for a future repeater move.  Just wondering if anyone
has done this and how it played.  

Sounds like from what Jeff said...if db products thought it would have
worked they would have offered it that way.

Thanks,
Robert




4d. Re: DB413 Antenna Question
Posted by: "Laryn Lohman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] larynl2
Date: Sun Jan 7, 2007 1:34 pm ((PST))

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "georgiaskywarn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I wonder about a db420 which has had that done to. 

Hmmm  Had  done to?

 Each loop if 90
> deg off of each other.  The loops are riveted in place.  I have seen
> this on a db408 in omni form...maybe this is like "stacked" db408's?
> 
> Wonder how the above setup would play.
> Robert
> 

I'm not clear on this Robert.  As you know, the dipoles are on
opposite sides in a DB408.  Could you explain?

Laryn K8TVZ





FREE Reminder Service  - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com
Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd

[Repeater-Builder] wanted tkr750k2

[panneer pcp]

want purchase new tkr 750k2 repeater at low cost, also dealar info 73.

[Repeater-Builder] back after being gone a while

[Chris Peterson]

Hi all,

I used to be on the list for a number of years, but I dropped off for a 
while.

Now, I decided to rejoin...

Thanks,
Chris, KG0BP

[Repeater-Builder] identifying origin of signal in large link systems

[Chris Peterson]

Hi all,

I'm involved in a large linked system (about 15 repeaters at present).  
One of the goals of the system is that, regardless of the repeater, the 
user should hear a different courtesy tone for each site in the system.

I'm just curious, are there any large link systems that do this, and if 
so, what method do you use to propagate the site IDs?

We have a method today, which works, but is not really supported by any 
of the controller manufacturers.  So, we've come up with some kind of 
buggy custom macros for the SCOM 7K, whwhich don't transfer well to 
other controllers.  This means we're constantly looking for used 7Ks on 
ebay to add more repeaters to the system.

We've added one RC210, and would like to add more, but it has its own 
problems.

I'll be happy to describe what we're doing, and some ideas we've had for 
improvement, in a separate email, but for now, I'm curious to know what 
other systems are doing.

Thanks,
Chris, KG0BP

[Repeater-Builder] Almost done.....

[Ian M. Divertie]

I finished the last tests of the bad Maxtracs saturday and they are 
one hundred percent!!  A year ago when I started this I was unsure.  
I have alot of other responsibilities and could not devote full time 
to the radios.  The Sabers are all good but the range problem.  I 
have the EN looking everywhere for the RSS stuff.  It looks like the 
US tech expert helping them with the purchase of these radios 15 
years ago forgot to specify as a deliverable for the contract the 
RSS.  Same tech expert for got to specify the RSS for some newer 
radios purchased 7 years ago.  Its all a nightmare.  Motorola 
supplied the radios directly, I can't imagine what they must think 
about the US contingents technical expertise here?  The EN are 
clueless, and at the mercy of us/me/we, if we aren't on the ball.  
As you might guess I've learned alot more about the background of 
how the radios got here.  The US gov't didn't supply the radios with 
the ships, but did specify the radios as an upgrade to the ships, as 
they were doing the same to their own ships.  So the radios were 
added here.  So when they were purchased, the purchase was filtered 
through the US tech advisors here available at the time.  
Unfortunately, the advisor responsible is not competent, and has 
since been promoted to being the responsible advisor for all RF 
systems here, including radar and EW equipment  So, its just 
not a very pleasant situation.   

[Repeater-Builder] Wide area coverage

[allenittiyavira]

Hello all,
I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member.

I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good 
with conventional.

I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters (conventional)
to work as one channel.  Are link radios the best method? (no cabling 
is available).  If so, which is the best repeater controller I can use 
to connect three link radios from master site?

Your replay is highly appriciated.

Regards

Allen

Re: [Repeater-Builder] New Member

[Eddie]

Thanks Kevin,

I haven't been on the airways in about 10 years because I can't hear very well. 
That left me with only the internet but I sure do miss the audio. I was one of 
the first guys to get the West Texas Connection on line which was back in the 
late 1970's. What we had was actually the begining of cellular I guess. Now I 
am lost in a big high tech world that I know little about but I still remember 
the basics and still have some outdated gear. Guess it's time to fire it back 
up and hook up some earphones to hear.

Thanks again for the welcome,
Eddie (WB5HHZ) and also http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~cope/

  - Original Message - 
  From: Kevin Custer 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:17 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] New Member


  A BIG Texas howdy to you Eddie, and welcome to the list.

  Kevin Custer
  List Owner

  Eddie wrote: 

Hello,
My name is Eddie Cope and I am a new (but old) member WB5HHZ. I am in Fort 
Stockton Texas.

   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] IOTA Power Supplies

[Paul Metzger]

I don't know about IOTA switching supplies, but my Newmar PM-12-70  
switching supply causes birdies all through my HF gear here at home.  
I also used a bank of five brand new 12V batteries tied to a Vector  
VEC1093A battery charger instead of the Newmar, and that charger as  
well is a switcher that also caused birdies all through my HF gear. I  
should have kept my old 70 Ampere non switching supply. Oh well, a  
lesson learned.

Paul Metzger
KQ6EH