Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120 (IMTS phone war stories)

[Steve Bosshard (NU5D)]

My first job in the business was as a service tech for an RCC.  We had a GE
IMTS terminal with hand wired 5th Selector Level stroger switches on the
direct inward dial trunks complete with sleeve lead control.  There were 4
selector switches, and one block on 1000 numbers.  In addition to the GE
IMTS terminal there was also a Motorola LO9DAL dial access paging terminal
that used code plan 'S'  The code plan determined which 2 groups of tones
were used in two tone sequential.  The pagers were Bell and Howell and KEL -
that used either alkaline or mercury batteries.

The IMTS system had about 20 T1433AE full duplex FACTS (fully automated car
telephone system) radios and control heads.  (there were fewer than 50
pagers in Temple, TX in 1975).   Drew about 2 amperes while idle.  Took a
channel element like you described (radio was similar to a Mocom 70) and ran
it up to about 40 watts VHF before it hit the varactor tripler and the
duplexer.

There was one Moto base station and one GE PRO series station - (we had only
3 channels to start with) I never will forget the day when it got so hot at
the site in Temple - south of Waco abt 30 miles that the plastic relay
covers on the Moto melted and kept the TX from keying - no isulation or
anything - just a tin shed on a hill top in a corn field.

When the stations were keyed via remote control phone line, the station
would change the load resistance to tell the terminal that it had come up to
full power, else there was a remote fail indicator at the terminal.

Next came the customer owned and maintained units - Moto Pulsars and GE /
Secode Mark 5 heads.  We also has some Secode DID1 terminals and VP1 control
heads, but these were on VHF with the TLD1100's.

Interesting, the TLD1100 also drew 2 amperes in standby, due to the 5894 PA
and driver tubes, not like the T1433AE with the all PNP transistor
supervisory logic pack.

All this for just $3.50 an hour just out of tech school.  1/2 a day
Saturdays at overtimeyou could almost make a living.

When I left the RCC in 1981 for a microwave / T1 transmission job at Centel
in 1981 there were 600 pagers and 40 some odd mobile phones.  We implemented
metered service in 1979 - cost went from $72.60 per month unlimited to the
same plus $0.20 per minute or portion there of.  I remember seeing some $300
phone bills - we got about 1/2 the rental phones back - and continued to
make the same revenue with 1/2 the equipment in the field.  Tone and voice
pagers were running $15 per month, and tone only were $9 per month.  Those
were the days.

Steve NU5D


We
On 3/26/07, Milt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


If it was a copper colored square channel element, then the radio should
have been about 2ft long, 6"high, and 15" wide and weighed enough to
eliminate the need for the extra couple of sandbags in the trunk in the
winter.  TLD-1100 comes to mind but that was the VHF version.  Based on a
Motrac, the VHF units still used 3 tubes to get up to 50 watts before the
duplexing filter.  The UHF  was solid state and ran about 18-20 watts out.
They were very popular with the telephone company folks around MD.



--
Ham Radio Spoken Here.NU5D
Visit the Temple Ham Club Website
http://www.tarc.org
www.yahoogroups.com/group/Temple_arc
www.yahoogroups.com/group/60meter

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120 (IMTS phone war stories)

[Milt]

If it was a copper colored square channel element, then the radio should 
have been about 2ft long, 6"high, and 15" wide and weighed enough to 
eliminate the need for the extra couple of sandbags in the trunk in the 
winter.  TLD-1100 comes to mind but that was the VHF version.  Based on a 
Motrac, the VHF units still used 3 tubes to get up to 50 watts before the 
duplexing filter.  The UHF  was solid state and ran about 18-20 watts out. 
They were very popular with the telephone company folks around MD.

Then there were the people who discovered they could make a mint by 
packaging an old TLD-1100 radio with new fancy looking control head

Pulsar 120's and Pulsar II's were the same box as I recall, just different 
control heads.  Very nice radios.

Milt
N3LTQ



- Original Message - 
From: "Ken Arck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:39 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120 (IMTS phone war stories)


>I don't remember if it was the Pulsar 120 or not but I did indeed
> build a repeater in the late 70's, based on a Pulsar. One channel
> element (square "copper" as I remember) and a 5 mHz 1st IF made it a
> piece of cake. It worked surprisingly well for what it was. As this
> was in SoCal where UHF splits are upside down (low in, high out ham
> repeaters), the Pulsar was a natural.
>
> The biggest problem was that it used germanium RF devices.
> Fortunately for us, there was a MSS nearby to keep us stocked in
> those devices (which was needed!).
>
> Ken
> --
> President and CTO - Arcom Communications
> Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories.
> http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
> Coming soon - the most advanced repeater controller EVER.
> Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
> we offer complete repeater packages!
> AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
> http://www.irlp.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

At 04:59 PM 03/26/07, you wrote:
There is a lot more that comes into consideration than height when 
you begin to predict the range and/or coverage. I would suggest that 
anybody wanting to make predictions of coverage obtain a copy of 
GE's DF-10003-1 "VHF and UHF Propagation". There are a lot of 
graphs, but It will help you get within 5 - 10 percent of your 
coverage. From a retired engineer, don't forget to include 
obstruction losses, buildings, trees, ground metal deposits, etc.

Fred W5VAY


What form is that ?  A computer program, charts/nomographs, or a 
slide rule device?

If it's not a slide rule, it could go on repeater-builder

BTW, this may help...


Nate, you will be happy to know that the "obnoxious math or physics
teacher" problem was resolved by the original author.

Mike

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 4 bay folded j pole questions

[skipp025]

 
> The characteristic impedance of a folded dipole is 300 ohms. 

Depends on who you ask really.  The impedance of what most people 
call a classic folded dipole is about 300 ohms.  But measure the 
various dipoles by Decibel and Sinclair you'll probably find they 
are not all standard size dipoles.  

What Decibel does to match their dipole arrays is nothing like the 
method used by Sinclair. 

cheers, 
skipp 

> 4 of them, fed in-phase, will present an impedance of 75 ohms at the 
> feedpoint of the phasing harness, which will present an acceptable 
> 1.5:1 SWR to a 50-ohm transmitter.  As Nate mentioned, some 
> manufacturers build the phasing harness with different impedances of 
> coax to transform the antenna array's impedance to 50 ohms.
> 
> As far as frequency goes, if you're saying that the length of an 
> element, from the center of the top bend to the center of the bottom 
> bend is 34 inches, it's definitely a high-band antenna.  The larger 
> the element tubing diameter, the broader the frequency range the 
> antenna will cover, so you may get that to perform acceptably at 2 
> meters.  See the construction article on the Repeater Builder website 
> at www.repeater-builder.com/projects/exposeddipole.html -  it's 
> pretty much the antenna you have.
> 
> George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

[FHS]

There is a lot more that comes into consideration than height when you begin to 
predict the range and/or coverage. I would suggest that anybody wanting to make 
predictions of coverage obtain a copy of GE's DF-10003-1 "VHF and UHF 
Propagation". There are a lot of graphs, but It will help you get within 5 - 10 
percent of your coverage. From a retired engineer, don't forget to include 
obstruction losses, buildings, trees, ground metal deposits, etc.
Fred W5VAY
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 6:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance


  That sounds about right to me Nate. I have a repeater with a low 
  antenna (abt 65 ft) in the flatland around the Dallas area that does 
  about 12 miles, so not a bad rule of thumb for that low antenna. But I 
  also have a repeater with an antenna at about 300 ft in that area that 
  does a lot better than the 27 or so miles the rule of thumb would 
  suggest. More like about 35 miles to the best of my knowledge. So maybe 
  the rule does not work all the time - (or the tower is taller than I 
  think it is)

  73 - Jim W5ZIT

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 3:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

  On 3/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  >
  >
  > as far as range goes.. take the square root of the distance from 
  the ground to the base of your antenna and multiply it by 1.5 and that 
  would be your range higher mo better allen

  In what units, Allen? Didn't you have an obnoxious math or physics
  teacher holler at you about providing the proper units (or deriving
  them) for a particular problem in school?

  Distance from the ground to base of antenna in ... Feet? Inches?
  Miles? (that last one's a joke... but I can do it with a couple of
  repeaters here, if you count the mountain they're sitting on...)

  That will be your range in what... miles? Kilometers? Inches?
  Astronomical Units?

  Need to be a little more specific there to help him out...

  I did some fast numbers to try to figure out how your rule of thumb
  works... I decided to try the "tower" hight in feet...

  Assuming...

  A 5000' tower (mountain)... that gives a number of unknown units of 
  70.7106781.

  Multiply that by 1.5, you get... 106.06601715.

  So ... assuming the height WAS supposed to be given in feet, it would
  appear to me that the "answer" is in miles?

  106 miles of coverage is the only thing even close to being in the
  ballpark for one of our mountaintop systems. I can tell the answer's
  not in Feet or AU's! (GRIN)

  Nate WY0X
  __
  Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and 
  industry-leading spam and email virus protection.


   

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Moto Pulsar 120

[Ralph Hogan]

Riley,

I remember seeing a pulsar mod on the web, it might have been this one:
http://www.phreak.org/radio/mods/pulsar.txt

Have a couple of pulsars sitting here I haven't had time to mess with. Was
planning on digging out the duplexers in them. Anyone know how they fair on
the spec anal test bench?

As someone else stated when building a repeater with one of these the
transmit is high and receive is low which is opposite the norm. May be a
problem if your states rptr coordinator bandplan doesn't allow an upside
down pair.

Ralph W4XE



-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Riley Frazee
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 8:09 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Moto Pulsar 120


I have a Motorola Pulsar 120 S Mobile Telephone that was used before
cellular phones. I am told that one can modify this radio to become a
repeater. I know nothing about this radio/phone. How many watts,
channels, VHF OR UHF, or even if this spefic model can be modified to a
repeater. I have searched google and yahoo and msn to see what I could
find out about this 120 S model and I was very unsuccessful. If anyone
has any information that they could pass along to me that would be
great.

Riley.






Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

[w5zit]

That sounds about right to me Nate. I have a repeater with a low 
antenna (abt 65 ft) in the flatland around the Dallas area that does 
about 12 miles, so not a bad rule of thumb for that low antenna. But I 
also have a repeater with an antenna at about 300 ft in that area that 
does a lot better than the 27 or so miles the rule of thumb would 
suggest. More like about 35 miles to the best of my knowledge. So maybe 
the rule does not work all the time - (or the tower is taller than I 
think it is)

73 - Jim W5ZIT

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

On 3/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> as far as range goes.. take the square root of the distance from 
the ground to the base of your antenna and multiply it by 1.5 and that 
would be your range higher mo better allen

In what units, Allen? Didn't you have an obnoxious math or physics
teacher holler at you about providing the proper units (or deriving
them) for a particular problem in school?

Distance from the ground to base of antenna in ... Feet? Inches?
Miles? (that last one's a joke... but I can do it with a couple of
repeaters here, if you count the mountain they're sitting on...)

That will be your range in what... miles? Kilometers? Inches?
Astronomical Units?

Need to be a little more specific there to help him out...

I did some fast numbers to try to figure out how your rule of thumb
works... I decided to try the "tower" hight in feet...

Assuming...

A 5000' tower (mountain)... that gives a number of unknown units of 
70.7106781.

Multiply that by 1.5, you get... 106.06601715.

So ... assuming the height WAS supposed to be given in feet, it would
appear to me that the "answer" is in miles?

106 miles of coverage is the only thing even close to being in the
ballpark for one of our mountaintop systems. I can tell the answer's
not in Feet or AU's! (GRIN)

Nate WY0X

Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and 
industry-leading spam and email virus protection.

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

[Nate Duehr]

On 3/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> as far as range goes..   take the square root of the distance  from the 
> ground to the base of your antenna and multiply it by 1.5 and that  would be 
> your range higher mo betterallen

In what units, Allen?  Didn't you have an obnoxious math or physics
teacher holler at you about providing the proper units (or deriving
them) for a particular problem in school?

Distance from the ground to base of antenna in ... Feet?  Inches?
Miles?  (that last one's a joke... but I can do it with a couple of
repeaters here, if you count the mountain they're sitting on...)

That will be your range in what... miles?  Kilometers?  Inches?
Astronomical Units?

Need to be a little more specific there to help him out...

I did some fast numbers to try to figure out how your rule of thumb
works... I decided to try the "tower" hight in feet...

Assuming...

A 5000' tower (mountain)... that gives a number of unknown units of 70.7106781.

Multiply that by 1.5, you get... 106.06601715.

So ... assuming the height WAS supposed to be given in feet, it would
appear to me that the "answer" is in miles?

106 miles of coverage is the only thing even close to being in the
ballpark for one of our mountaintop systems.  I can tell the answer's
not in Feet or AU's!  (GRIN)

Nate WY0X

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 4 bay folded j pole questions

[ka3hsw]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "chuckmf1135" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
>  I received a 4 bay (folded j pole or dipole) it has 34" folded 
elements
> and total boom length around 20'. I wangt to use this for amateur 
radio
> use, however no one knows what freq their business was on.
>  I havent seen a setup like this before, two folded elements feed 
> w/coax - 50 ohm i guess to a tee then the two tees feed one tee 
which
> feeds a single coax w/ N male connector, are the individual elements
> 50 ohm?
>


The characteristic impedance of a folded dipole is 300 ohms.  4 of 
them, fed in-phase, will present an impedance of 75 ohms at the 
feedpoint of the phasing harness, which will present an acceptable 
1.5:1 SWR to a 50-ohm transmitter.  As Nate mentioned, some 
manufacturers build the phasing harness with different impedances of 
coax to transform the antenna array's impedance to 50 ohms.

As far as frequency goes, if you're saying that the length of an 
element, from the center of the top bend to the center of the bottom 
bend is 34 inches, it's definitely a high-band antenna.  The larger 
the element tubing diameter, the broader the frequency range the 
antenna will cover, so you may get that to perform acceptably at 2 
meters.  See the construction article on the Repeater Builder website 
at www.repeater-builder.com/projects/exposeddipole.html -  it's 
pretty much the antenna you have.

George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Distance

[n8oku]

as far as range goes..   take the square root of the distance  from the 
ground to the base of your antenna and multiply it by 1.5 and that  would be 
your range higher mo betterallen



** AOL now offers free email to everyone. 
 Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120

[nj902]

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "JOHN MACKEY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
" I'll bet they are VERY large and have POOR receiver sensitivity
(like .8 uV)."
-

Sorry, but you've got your head stuck in the 60's.  Those old 
TLD1100, TLD1470 type transceivers were huge.

The first generation of the Pulsar transceiver looks just like a 
Mocom 70 and measures 13 3/8" D. x 10 3/8" W x 4" H.  Substantially 
smaller than a Micor at 17 1/2" D. x 13" W. x 3 3/8" H.

The second generation Pulsar transceiver, introduced at the same 
time as the Pulsar II head, is a much better box and is unique in 
appearance [as compared to any other Motorola transceiver package].  
These are about the same size as a Micor at 17 1/4" D. x 12 1/4" W. 
x 4 5/8" D.  These weigh 30 lbs. vs. the Micor at 25 lbs.

The first generation transceiver was a case of too soon, too far and 
had a poor reliability track record. We always thought that was why 
they changed the appearance of the product to make sure there was no 
association with the earlier units.  Accordingly, the second 
generation transceivers are the most desireable for use in repeater 
projects.

The VHF Micor has a rated receive sensitivity of 0.50 uv. for 20 dBq 
whereas the second generation Pulsar drawer is rated at 0.55 uv for 
20 dBq [at the antenna port through the duplex filter] with no more 
than 0.05 degradation when the transmitter is activated.

After the Pulsar II head came the Pulsar 100 and 120 models which 
offered less features at a lower price.
 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Motorola test set

[ldgelectronics]

Wow, that was fast. 

They are both spoken for. Thanks,

Dwayne Kincaid

>
> Hi,
> 
> I've got a couple of the older Motorola test sets that need to find a 
> good home. These are S1056A. One has the interface cable and one has 
> the crystal set strip. 
> 
> They go for about $10 on e-bay, so it's not much of a value. Just 
> thought I'd check here to see if someone wanted one before they go 
into 
> the dumpster.
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Power-Pole connectors

[Bob Dengler]

At 3/24/2007 02:57 PM, you wrote:
>Reasons not to solder PowerPoles:
>
>1) It is very hard to control the wicking of solder into a stranded
>wire.  Allowing this to happen can create a failure point in
>applications where vibration is present.  And there can be a
>surprising amount of vibration in a rack mounted piece of electronic gear.

Funny, that's the reason I don't like crimping.  I guess there's no "solid" 
solution (pun intended).


>2)Heating up a metal object that is intended to function as a spring
>loaded contact changes the metal and makes is softer.  This is not
>conducive to reliability.

Doesn't it have to get hotter than normal soldering temperature for a few 
seconds in order to have an effect on elasticity?


>3) A properly crimped powerpole more reliable than a soldered powrpole.

Overall I've had better reliability with soldered connections, but that's 
just me.


>4) Aircraft connectors are not soldered.  Be thankful of that the next
>time you are in a airliner at 30,000'.

Crimping is much faster than soldering, hence less expensive & making $128 
+ taxes roundtrip airfare from SoCal to MDW (for Dayton) possible  :)

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Radio Words & IWCE This week!

[Bob Dengler]

At 3/26/2007 09:30 AM, you wrote:
>Re: IWCE
>
>Once again a quick blurb about the Las Vegas located IWCE (two-way
>radio) Convention.
>
>Drop me an email direct (very quick like) If you need free tickets
>to save the $60 each entry fee... which you could spend on junk food.

FWIW Roger Coude VE2DBE, author of "Radio Mobile", will be attending IWCE 
this year.  Wish I could go, but have my plans set on Dayton in 52 days.


>Plus you might get to meet me.. the short fat guy with red hair.

Funny, not what I remember; guess that's age setting in...

Bob NO6B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola test set

[Jim McLaughlin]

Dwaye,

I would like the S1056A with the interface cable. Let me know how you want to 
do it. Tnx

Jim-   WA9FPT
  - Original Message - 
  From: ldgelectronics 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 12:11 PM
  Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola test set


  Hi,

  I've got a couple of the older Motorola test sets that need to find a 
  good home. These are S1056A. One has the interface cable and one has 
  the crystal set strip. 

  They go for about $10 on e-bay, so it's not much of a value. Just 
  thought I'd check here to see if someone wanted one before they go into 
  the dumpster.

  Dwayne Kincaid
  WD8OYG



   

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120 (IMTS phone war stories)

[Ken Arck]

I don't remember if it was the Pulsar 120 or not but I did indeed 
build a repeater in the late 70's, based on a Pulsar. One channel 
element (square "copper" as I remember) and a 5 mHz 1st IF made it a 
piece of cake. It worked surprisingly well for what it was. As this 
was in SoCal where UHF splits are upside down (low in, high out ham 
repeaters), the Pulsar was a natural.

The biggest problem was that it used germanium RF devices. 
Fortunately for us, there was a MSS nearby to keep us stocked in 
those devices (which was needed!).

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
Coming soon - the most advanced repeater controller EVER.
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net

[Repeater-Builder] Re:IWCE This week!

[Ken Arck]

Wish I could make IWCE this year. Unfortunately, I'm going to board a 
plane to LA in a few hours so you know where *I'll* be spending part 
of IWCE week

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of the world famous RC210 Repeater Controller and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
Coming soon - the most advanced repeater controller EVER.
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net

[Repeater-Builder] Motorola test set

[ldgelectronics]

Hi,

I've got a couple of the older Motorola test sets that need to find a 
good home. These are S1056A. One has the interface cable and one has 
the crystal set strip. 

They go for about $10 on e-bay, so it's not much of a value. Just 
thought I'd check here to see if someone wanted one before they go into 
the dumpster.

Dwayne Kincaid
WD8OYG

[Repeater-Builder] Radio Words & IWCE This week!

[skipp025]

Darn it Kevin,

... and I was getting ready to use the word "irregardless". 

Re: IWCE 

Once again a quick blurb about the Las Vegas located IWCE (two-way 
radio) Convention. 

Drop me an email direct (very quick like) If you need free tickets 
to save the $60 each entry fee... which you could spend on junk food. 

Plus you might get to meet me.. the short fat guy with red hair.


cheers, 
skipp

> THE moderators(s) were hoping that the (class) would just get over it.  
> Everyone that responds, including you Dave, is adding to SPAM.
> Move on
> Kevin Custer
> OWNER

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Pulsar 120 (IMTS phone war stories)

[skipp025]

Great to see someone describe the Pulsar well.  They came into 
the SF Motorola Service Station well through the 80's. I don't 
remember ever having to really repair one other than small stupid 
user things and some control reprogramming. 

Built like a fort with a pretty neat internal duplexer hams used 
to get fooled & excited about using it for amateur repeater work. 
No cigar big boy... 

I used to say they were a hybrid style of Mocom 70 just because they 
looked a bit like a Mocom 70 and had the same quality of construction. 
The Mocom 70 and the Pulsar are probably of the same design 
generation or "familiy". 

To make you cry I'll say I can't remember how many of the Pulsars 
we trashed when Motorola Recon wouldn't even pay the freight fees 
to "Recon" (where they would crush them) upon customer trade in. 

Speaking of IMTS Radios... we also saw and serviced a number of 
Harris phones, which made very easy repeater conversions. The Harris 
UHF units had a really nice internal duplexer... call it a flat 
pack but it was more a mini cigar box size and it works great for 
Amateur Aps.  

A rush of memories flood back to those days. I can actually remember 
a few RCA, GE, Harris, Aerotron IMTS phones... oh boy, what joy. 
The phones were an easy service ticket... the #$*& taxi cabs right 
behind them were the stinky cluster of the morning.. a whole line 
of them out the door.  All the drivers with great attitudes. 

cheers, 
s. 



> "nj902" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The Pulsar mobile phone is not a 1969 product, they were produced 
> from the late 1970's through the 1980's.
> 
> These drawer units make good raw materials for building repeaters.  
> They can be had for next to nothing or even for free, so you can 
> build a complete repeater for lunch money.  Much of the circuitry 
> is of the same vintage as Micor.  The PA's are continuous duty - 
> after all, a duplex phone transmitter is active for the duration 
> of a phone call - no PTT.
> 
> Also, these are synthesized radios- but the nifty thing is that 
> there is no microprocessor - the synthesizer loop is programmed 
> with a diode matrix.  Once you master the logic - you can move 
> it to other frequencies - and without spending a dime to have 
> channel elements re-rocked.  [these units actually do have a 
> microprocessor for the supervisory logic - but we remove that 
> for amateur repeater applications]
> 
> They do have a fixed offset from TX to RX.  Since that offset is 
> 5 MHz at UHF, those can be a full duplex link or repeater in one 
> box.  For VHF, it would be easier to use two drawers since there 
> is only one VCO. Also, there is no squelch circuit so you will 
> need an audio or squelch gate board from a Micor or a squelch 
> circuit like the one from Link.
> 
> Finding a manual is necessary for a successful project.
> 
> The drawer unit will have a model number such as T1739 or T1839 
> [A,B,C,D, etc.]  This will help tell what band the unit is and what 
> book to look for.  You can also open it and look for assembly 
> numbers that begin with TLD or TLE to determine the band.
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: need some help with an Repco Repeater

[skipp025]

> Mike WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually the 900 manual is on the "Other Manufacturers" page,
> I don't think I ever saw any other manual files.

I just sent the UHF 450-470 version Manual to you ... 
s. 

>
> At 09:32 PM 03/25/07, you wrote:
> >Since I'm into some self abuse... I'll tell you I've played with
> >a number of the Repco tx and rx strips you see on ebay every so
> >often. You can see a VHF tx strip on ebay pretty constant.. the
> >seller must have a pretty large batch of them. I've also bought
> >my share from this seller.
> >
> >Repco 2Watt VHF Transmitter Board Possible Military NEW
> >Ebay Item number: 160099512977
> >
> >A fun kick around transmitter strip... only if you know exactly
> >what you have and/or what you're buying... ie getting yourself 
> >into.
> >
> >Repco made a good number of mobiles, repeaters and data units
> >you find on the used market now. I just spoke with the current
> >version of the Repco Company (in Florida) and they haven't done
> >any of these rf strips for about 6 years.
> >
> >I can help you with the manual for the tx and rx uhf strips
> >in the 450-470 band and the 900 Mhz band. I have the manual
> >scanned into pdf and it's available by simple email request
> >direct to me.  Mike has copies for the repeater builder but
> >I'm not sure if they've bothered to make a repco page yet.
>
> >I like to buy the repco manuals off ebay when/where possible.
> >I'll help with what I have, which right now is not a large
> >collection... but what I have can be useful to some people.
> >
> >cheers,
> >skipp

Re: [Repeater-Builder] English Class

[Kevin Custer]

THE moderators(s) were hoping that the (class) would just get over it.  
Everyone that responds, including you Dave, is adding to SPAM.


Move on

Kevin Custer
OWNER

DaveH wrote:
What is this English class?  It says Repeater builder!  Where is the 
mderator?