[Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur repeater ID's
A quick visit to the site revealed some workers had tripped the breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. I wonder if someone tripped the breaker or if it's just getting tired? If it trips again, it's probably time to replace it. Hope it isn't a long trip out to the site. Tom --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, TGundo 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, you are left with people who want to cause trouble by reporting something they don't feel is right in how someone else is operating. IOW, sticking their nose in the business of others. Operating should be between the licensee and the FCC and nobody else. AMEN! I for one have used such IDs as an indication that a repeater is still operating correctly. It also gives technical info (telemetry) of the site conditions which is a legal one-way transmission. Me too- The hourly ID lets me make sure all is well with the system during monitoring. Two days ago I noticed I did not hear the ID, found one of the Linked Repeaters not up. A quick visit to the site revealed some workers had tripped the breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. Had it back up and running within hours, as opposed to getting the call when I am not able to run out. Joe M. However- this is all food for thought. I might consider removing all of the top of the hour ID's. Makes you wonder about all the time put into repeater controller engineering to facilitate things like schedulers and such to make all of these illegal broadcasting possible. Thats it- I'm blaming S-Com Bob for all the trouble 73's Tom W9SRV __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Help with HP 8924C
Hi Paul the only way i found to dec. and enc. pl/ctcss is from tx and rx side. u need to go on tx and make af gen 1 to 300Hz to filter the ctcss and tx from radio don't make noise all athers to 1khz or 1.5khz from the rx side just insert pl/ctcss in af gen 1 and send signal from amplitude and send 1 khz for tone finaly go shift save and save the settings 73's John 9H5IC On 10/4/2008, Paul Holm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I've been working with my 8924C trying to learn each of the functions. I've been following the manual for an 8920B in order to focus on the analog functions vs. CDMA. I'm hoping other users out there could offer advice. I'm not picking up on how the unit deals with PL/CTCSS tones in encode or decode. The goal is to be able to see what tones are being put out by a TX and/or being sensed by a RX. The nearest thing I see in the menus is Func Gen. All others are CDCSS, Digi Page, Tone Seq, DTMF, LTR, EDACS, etc. Am I on the right track for PL by looking in Func Gen? Or should I be in a different Signal Decoder Mode? And then, when I've got this part straight, what should I be able to see displayed(tone freq? tone mod level?) when I monitor off-air signals? Thanks. 73 Paul - KC0HST
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642
Eric,
You may have lost track of the fact that this is a site to ask questions and
people knowledgeable in the subject answer. (Note the answer Bruce gave to
the question) The answer you gave makes me wonder if it isn't time for you to
step back and re-evaluate your position on this board. There are some very
talented people very willing to share their experience and knowledge. With an
answer as you gave, it appears as though you are NOT one of them. Next time I
ask a question, please don't bother to answer.
Dail
N6DGT
- Original Message
From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 7:09:53 PM
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642
Dail,
If TX-RX is no help (you DID contact them first for assistance, didn't
you?), then contact Telewave at www.telewave. com. Telewave makes it their
business to keep former WACOM customers happy.
73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Dail Terry
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:25 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642
We are working with a set of Wacom WP642 duplexer cans that is missing
the T UHF connector and the coax that goes to the first cans. Does
anyone have the dimension for the coax? The rest of the cabling is
made up with RG 213U. As Wacom is no longer in business (taken over by
RX TX) I cannot find the info.
TX
Dail
N6DGT
!--
#ygrp-mkp{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px 14px;}
#ygrp-mkp hr{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
#ygrp-mkp #hd{
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0px;}
#ygrp-mkp #ads{
margin-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad{
padding:0 0;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad a{
color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}
--
!--
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
font-family:Arial;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
--
!--
#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-reco {
margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}
#ygrp-reco #reco-head {
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;}
#reco-grpname{
font-weight:bold;margin-top:10px;}
#reco-category{
font-size:77%;}
#reco-desc{
font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-vital a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc{
background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;}
o{font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal{
margin:0 0 0 0;}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq{margin:4;}
--
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't that put things in a different light? Dan N8DJP Re: Amateur repeater ID's Posted by: kb1we6r [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ym/[EMAIL PROTECTED]YY=104 68y5beta=yesy5beta=yesorder=upsort=datepos=0 kb1we6r Date: Tue Apr 8, 2008 12:49 pm ((PDT)) As an OO, my interpretation of the rules is that it would be considered a beacon, and they are only allowed on certain frequencies. And the ones that do the hourly chimes too! (I have given verbal advisements). Remember, users are scanning MANY repeaters, if they had to listen to that for every repeater, they (or their wives) would go postal!! It also is covered in the good engineering practice rule. Keith WE6R -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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: Breaker (Was the beat to death ID Thread)
Some workers at the site were painting the chain link fence with a bright shiny silver paint, and they ran an extension from the circuit to their big commercial paint mixer. Guess there was not enough headroom left in the circuit for a giant motor! As for the drive, its a killer! 5 minutes from the office ;) Tom W9SRV tallinson2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. I wonder if someone tripped the breaker or if it's just getting tired? If it trips again, it's probably time to replace it. Hope it isn't a long trip out to the site. Tom __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD Original Message - From: Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't that put things in a different light? Dan N8DJP Re: Amateur repeater ID's Posted by: kb1we6r [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ym/[EMAIL PROTECTED]YY=104 68y5beta=yesy5beta=yesorder=upsort=datepos=0 kb1we6r Date: Tue Apr 8, 2008 12:49 pm ((PDT)) As an OO, my interpretation of the rules is that it would be considered a beacon, and they are only allowed on certain frequencies. And the ones that do the hourly chimes too! (I have given verbal advisements). Remember,
Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB4055 Duplexer
Thanks Ron, I will include these specs in the next revision of the Guide to Duplexer Specifications on the RB site. http://www.repeater-builder.com/rbtip/duplexerspecs.html I'm always keeping an eye out for data that isn't in there yet. I've added several since the current posted version so it's probably about time to send in an update. 73, Paul N1BUG Ron Wright wrote: Eric, The DB4055 is 5 cavity band reject duplexer from Decibel Products. Its notch is 75 to 80 db at 5 MHz. Min freq separation is 5 MHz making it useless for 2 meters Ham repeater. TX noise suppression at RX freq 70 db RX isolation at TX freq 70 db. Max power is 150 W continuous and insertion loss is 0.7 db. The versions ar A=150-162 and B 160-174. Would be good for something like MARS or other commercial repeater. 73, ron, n9ee/r
[Repeater-Builder] New file uploaded to Repeater-Builder
Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Repeater-Builder group. File: /DIGITAL/2008 ARRL TAPR DCC Ad.pdf Uploaded by : wb9qzb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description : ARRL / TAPR DCC (Digital Communications Conference) Chicago You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/files/DIGITAL/2008%20ARRL%20TAPR%20DCC%20Ad.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles Regards, wb9qzb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
We added an extension to this system in Greenville, Tx (about 50 miles NE of Dallas) located on the roof of the local hospital. We had an input on 426 with a beam for the Dallas feed and on 43x? to allow local crossband repeat to the 900 mHz band. We later installed a 1296 input when a radar was installed at Majors Field in Greenville. We would switch from the Dallas feed to the local feed when the weather became more local to the Greenville area. We did ID the 900 mHz output every 10 minutes, but when we had bad weather in the area, we did not allow any local repeat operations through the ATV repeater. The repeater was TT controlled through a 440 receiver, which selected the input frequency and turned the system on/off. 73 - Jim W5ZIT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
Yes, of course your right Rick, but.there are always those that just 'have to' let all of us know what they think or know, because they are the ones that are right. Jim-WA9FPT - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
Jim, I thought our groups experience would add some useful info to the interesting posts. You do not know me, so I am not sure how you can say that about me truthfully. We were involved in the system here in the North Texas area for many, many years and it was a mainstay in the storm spotting activities. We were proud of it and all that saw what we did were to, including city, county and state officials besides the numerous hams in the area. Roger W5RD . - Original Message - From: Jim McLaughlin To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's Yes, of course your right Rick, but.there are always those that just 'have to' let all of us know what they think or know, because they are the ones that are right. Jim-WA9FPT - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW
[Repeater-Builder] 700 MHz Explained in 10 Steps
http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/700mhz-explained/ enjoy, s.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642
If it were me asking that question, I would be saying thank you to Eric. Not everyone knows that some of the commercial manufacturers are very supportive of ham activities and that they have that sort of information readily available. 73 Gary K4FMX _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dail Terry Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 8:28 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 Eric, You may have lost track of the fact that this is a site to ask questions and people knowledgeable in the subject answer. (Note the answer Bruce gave to the question) The answer you gave makes me wonder if it isn't time for you to step back and re-evaluate your position on this board. There are some very talented people very willing to share their experience and knowledge. With an answer as you gave, it appears as though you are NOT one of them. Next time I ask a question, please don't bother to answer. Dail N6DGT - Original Message From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 7:09:53 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 Dail, If TX-RX is no help (you DID contact them first for assistance, didn't you?), then contact Telewave at www.telewave. com. Telewave makes it their business to keep former WACOM customers happy. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Dail Terry Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:25 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups. com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 We are working with a set of Wacom WP642 duplexer cans that is missing the T UHF connector and the coax that goes to the first cans. Does anyone have the dimension for the coax? The rest of the cabling is made up with RG 213U. As Wacom is no longer in business (taken over by RX TX) I cannot find the info. TX Dail N6DGT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ATV ID's and WX Radar - was Amateur Repeater ID's
As a moderator, I am allowing the discussion to be continued over to ATV. If I thought the new discussion was inappropriate, I would have said so. I am OK with discussions as long as they don't get out of hand. As you will notice, I changed the subject line, which *should* have been done when changing from the dead ID thread to the ATV thread. While I agree that the Last Gasp comments from Ron and others that occurred after the thread was deemed dead were un-called for, but I just hate to give people vacations from posting. Again, dead thread on repeater ID's. Please move on. Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC 474 Barnett Rd Boswell, PA 15531 - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 11:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1373 - Release Date: 4/11/2008 9:17 AM
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
The 642s were provided with either UHF or N connectors depending on the customer request. Murphy's Law says the matching feedline lead from the outside world will have the other type connector. The cable lengths were selected at the factory to meet the VHF frequency requirement and unless the TX RX spread was more than 600 KC the cable lengths were the same on both the TX and RX Side. Which is probably a ball park method... the lower frequency cable should be a bit longer... the specific length dependent on the band/frequency. Wacom Products Modified RG-214 Double shielded on it, it is an untinned double shielded cable Are the shields the same exact material makeup... or is one copper and the other something else? which will provide the necessary isolation although there is a large segment of the forum participants that feel that untinned double shielded cable is vulnerable to low level noise not the untinned part... the part with dissimilar sheild materials is the problem generator. In short vulnerable no, possible PIM generator yes. and that duplexer interconnects should used silver plated double shielded RG-214 or RG142 MilSpec cable. Double shielded coax is a nice thing but not always a must have. There have been times when I've used lower spec cable on purpose... Doesn't even have to be silver plated but the double shield materials used should be similar metals without known dissimilar metal gremlins The Type N terminated interconnects on the 642 duplexer supplied by Wacom for 145.29/144.69 were 12.5 inches including the connectors, tip to tip. I've actually seen that duplexer... :-) the receive leg would be longer if you could knats behind it on really good test equipment. I have a near duplicate duplexer on 145.470 and the rx leg is about 1/4 inch longer than the tx cable length. The optimum length for cables terminated with UHF connectors might be slightly different because the UHF connectors and chassis jacks are probably not a true 50 ohms at VHF frequencies. Depends on who spec'd and made the UHF Connectors. I know a group of Certified (looney) RF Engineers who say UHF Connectors are a train wreck and another (also looney) Engineering group who have spec'd them on serious lab test gear for operation well past 500 MHz with no real impedance bumps. Go figure... Lloyd Alcorn at Wacom, when he was preparing duplexers for customers dealt with this empirically (a fancy name for trial-and-error) by making up interconnects in quarter inch increments and selecting the length that looked best on a tracking generator. ... and it's a real snooze to deal with the first time out. But sometimes that's the way things have to work out. After a while you keep a lot of near x-length cables around to dial things in. Bruce K7IJ cheers, s.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
In a message dated 4/11/2008 12:24:20 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Wacom Products Modified RG-214 Double shielded on it, it is an untinned double shielded cable Are the shields the same exact material makeup... or is one copper and the other something else? They are both copper. which will provide the necessary isolation although there is a large segment of the forum participants that feel that untinned double shielded cable is vulnerable to low level noise not the untinned part... the part with dissimilar shield materials is the problem generator. In short vulnerable no, possible PIM generator yes. You're preaching to the choir. I think untinned double shielded copper is very adequate to duplexer connections. But there are contributors aboard who feel that silver plated shields are a better choice. The Type N terminated interconnects on the 642 duplexer supplied by Wacom for 145.29/144.69 were 12.5 inches including the connectors, tip to tip. I've actually seen that duplexer... :-) the receive leg would be longer if you could knats behind it on really good test equipment. I have a near duplicate duplexer on 145.470 and the rx leg is about 1/4 inch longer than the tx cable length. Hey you, get your cottin pickin hands outta that cabinet! I queried Lloyd Alcorn regarding this in the 80s and he indicated that he was hard pressed to improve the tracker curves using different TX and RX cables on a 600KC VHF split. The cables supplied for the sets he supplied me all had identical 12.5 inch length cables. The optimum length for cables terminated with UHF connectors might be slightly different because the UHF connectors and chassis jacks are probably not a true 50 ohms at VHF frequencies. Depends on who spec'd and made the UHF Connectors. I know a group of Certified (looney) RF Engineers who say UHF Connectors are a train wreck and another (also looney) Engineering group who have spec'd them on serious lab test gear for operation well past 500 MHz with no real impedance bumps. Go figure... That's interesting. Perhaps both loony groups are correct. You can't do much about an impedance mismatch between a connector and an associated cable because the cable has a fixed nominal impedance. But the chassis connector impedance mismatch can be accounted for by the network that feeds it. Didn't Motorola use UHF connectors on their equipment for decades and their position was that the impedance mismatch was accounted for. I remember Hank Edwards at Phelps Dodge commenting that when they designed their sticks, they accounted for UHF cable and chassis connector mismatches in the antenna design itself. K7IJ **It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp0030002850)
[Repeater-Builder] R2008D Service Monitor
Hi all, I posted this before (Apr. 01, 2007 NO JOKE) Msg# 70745. Since I never had a reply, I am hoping that we may have some new members who can help out. Copy of previous posting: Hi Gang, My Motorola R2008D service monitor went pooof the other day, blew the AC fuse and let the all important smoke out of a certain part. I have traced the problem to, what appears to be, a blown up RT (MOV?) on the A3 power supply module. Can anyone please supply me with a schematic for this module and/or a part number for the RT? I am posting a picture of the module on the list site which shows RT1 and , what I assume is, RT2 which is the one that the smoke escaped out of. Thanks for any replies es 73. Tony VE3DWI
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Breaker (Was the beat to death ID Thread)
WEL...I thought this site was a cut above the generic ham radio sites out on the internet. I can see that it is not. Time to move on. So long, all. Tom --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jim McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course your right Rick, but.there are always those that just 'have to' let all of us know what they think or know, because they are the ones that are right. Jim-WA9FPT - Original Message - From: Rick Klinge To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I thought the Moderator closed this tread? No? Rick Klinge KC5UIW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, TGundo 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some workers at the site were painting the chain link fence with a bright shiny silver paint, and they ran an extension from the circuit to their big commercial paint mixer. Guess there was not enough headroom left in the circuit for a giant motor! As for the drive, its a killer! 5 minutes from the office ;) Tom W9SRV tallinson2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: breaker on the circuit powering the repeater. I wonder if someone tripped the breaker or if it's just getting tired? If it trips again, it's probably time to replace it. Hope it isn't a long trip out to the site. Tom __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's
The FCC will also give you wide lattitude to break the rules if you can demonstrate the operation served a public need during times of emergency, was used only during such times, and didn't interfere with other providers. Sounds like you qualified. 73, Paul, AE4KR -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 7:53 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's I was in a group that operated a 426 MHz ATV repeater (transmitter) for over 10 years in Dallas (1980's), whose initial purpose was the rebroadcast of color weather radar from a local TV station for mobile storm spotters. This was well before the days of the Internet providing free and easy access to their weather radar images as they do today. Back then, it was a big deal to have the radar image in your car as you storm spotted. We got the video from the TV station, beamed it up to the top of a building on 1.2 GHz, downconverted and then fed all of this into an ATV transmitter/amplifier to a 5 dB omni gain antenna atop a 73 story building, the highest in Dallas. We controlled the system via phone line at the station. We eventually shut down the system after Internet images were becoming easy to acquire and we eventually gave up our cheap rented location. We knew the FCC was aware of the system from the first, as we approached the local FCC office in Dallas with our idea and they said Great idea. We took that as a yes and the rest is history. The system was only active during severe storm times and regularly scheduled RACES training nets. We never heard of anyone mentioning that the system was indeed in the broadcasting mode for over a decade. Roger W5RD Original Message - From: Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 9:33 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's This suddenly got me wondering, I plan to try ATV, and would it supposedly be a violation of the rules sending when you don't know if anyone will actually receive it? As far as a QST, that could be considered as a one way transmission when you really think about it. There are parts of the rules that tend to be in the grey zone rather than BW... Yet part of the idea is to be able to experiment, and that is sometimes going to be one way no matter how you slice it. I do agree that having a repeater simply sit there and ID every 9 or 10 meniutes with nobody using it is not a good idea. I had to solve a minor detail with the controller I now have. The PSE 508 series has an option for a recorded message to be played at a given time interval. If I had it set to CW ID, and had the timer for the message set for 9 minutes, it would wind up doing so every 9 minutes. Not what I really wanted. I did resolve that, and the recorded message is the voice ID, which will revert to CW if someone keys up while it is in ID mode. At least it now only ID's one time after the last activity and not again till someone keys up the repeater. It would be nice to also have another message, timer can be set for a long time. It does say voice recorded message for ID and/or announcement, so it would seem I can do both. Still learning all of the details for the controller, but it is a fast and fairly easy way to put a Mastr II station with the normal shelf online as a repeater. Anyway, it is a bit common for some repeaters to ID at times when they have not had a user. But there again, it could be annoying to some of those monitoring for activity using a scanner, who only want to hear when a user comes on the repeater... YMMV Wayne WA2YNE Imperial, Tejas 441.950 TX 446.950 RX 167.9 On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:34 -0500, Robert Pease [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your thinking, but along that line couldn't a repeater ID and time announcement be considered a QST, an announcement to all amateurs that the repeater is there with info about the repeater owner, PL and Time? Rob KS4EC From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Hancock Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 8:44 AM To: repeater builders Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Amateur Repeater ID's First let's agree on one thing, amateur repeaters are amateur stations. Second, let's admit that the rules prohibit amateur stations from one-way transmissions, except for general calling for a contact (CQ's) and announcements of interest to amateurs (QST's). Hence, having the repeater ID periodically when not in use would constitute one-way transmissions (broadcasting). Now let me play devil's advocate. What if the periodic ID used when the repeater was not in use was CQ de WR8DAR? That would not be just an ID, but rather an invitation for contact (an invitation to use the repeater). Wouldn't
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642
I agree. Eric has been very helpful to me in my problem solving. I think his help was very useful. Thank You Eric. Collin -Original Message- From: Gary Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:47 pm Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 If it were me asking that question, I would be saying “thank you” to Eric. Not everyone knows that some of the commercial manufacturers are very supportive of ham activities and that they have that sort of information readily available. 73 Gary K4FMX From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dail Terry Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 8:28 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 Eric, You may have lost track of the fact that this is a site to ask questions and people knowledgeable in the subject answer. (Note the answer Bruce gave to the question) The answer you gave makes me wonder if it isn't time for you to step back and re-evaluate your position on this board. There are some very talented people very willing to share their experience and knowledge. With an answer as you gave, it appears as though you are NOT one of them. Next time I ask a question, please don't bother to answer. Dail N6DGT - Original Message From: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 7:09:53 PM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 Dail, If TX-RX is no help (you DID contact them first for assistance, didn't you?), then contact Telewave at www.telewave. com. Telewave makes it their business to keep former WACOM customers happy. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Dail Terry Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:25 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Wacom 642 We are working with a set of Wacom WP642 duplexer cans that is missing the T UHF connector and the coax that goes to the first cans. Does anyone have the dimension for the coax? The rest of the cabling is made up with RG 213U. As Wacom is no longer in business (taken over by RX TX) I cannot find the info. TX Dail N6DGT __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
- I remember Hank Edwards at Phelps Dodge commenting that when they designed their sticks, they accounted for UHF cable and chassis connector mismatches in the antenna design itself. K7IJ Oh yes I remember Hank well, when Phelps Dodge had a warehouse in So. California. Really a great guy. Wonder what ever became of Hank with the company changes? The VHF 'sticks' had UHF connectors, the UHF 'sticks' came with type N connectors. One thing tho, the UHF connectors that PD used had the Teflon insulators and much better plating.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wacom Products Modified RG-214 Double shielded on it, it is an untinned double shielded cable Are the shields the same exact material makeup... or is one copper and the other something else? They are both copper. Nothing wrong with both shields being copper... You're preaching to the choir. I think untinned double shielded copper is very adequate to duplexer connections. But there are contributors aboard who feel that silver plated shields are a better choice. Normally the silver plated stuff is newer and is reported to have less loss. But as long as you keep moisture out of the copper jacket double shield it should continue to work very well for many decades. I have some 1970's and 1980's vintage copper double shield still considered very nice coax that doesn't generate pim. In fact the slightly higher loss over rg-214 acts as a modest value pad at some very noisy locations. So there can be a quite viable place for everything... I've actually seen that duplexer... :-) Hey you, get your cottin pickin hands outta that cabinet! Just a crank here and a screw driver there... and if you looked across the vault I was the 800 MHz community repeater in the same room (now long gone). I queried Lloyd Alcorn regarding this in the 80s and he indicated that he was hard pressed to improve the tracker curves using different TX and RX cables on a 600KC VHF split. The cables supplied for the sets he supplied me all had identical 12.5 inch length cables. But I can actually see the difference in the cable quality with mid 90's vintage hp gear... hence the reason my same duplexer tx cable is reduced in length by about 3/8 inch. Later I could review my notes and let you know the exact values but you'd have to change to mil spec rg-214 cable. :-) That's interesting. Perhaps both loony groups are correct. You can't do much about an impedance mismatch between a connector and an associated cable because the cable has a fixed nominal impedance. Depends on the connector... In some high powered rf amplifiers I actually tune the connector where required or replace it with one that doesn't require any changes. The latter being much easier... But the chassis connector impedance mismatch can be accounted for by the network that feeds it. Didn't Motorola use UHF connectors on their equipment for decades and their position was that the impedance mismatch was accounted for. not enough of an issue to get excited about or fairly easily worked around. I remember Hank Edwards at Phelps Dodge commenting that when they designed their sticks, they accounted for UHF cable and chassis connector mismatches in the antenna design itself. can be done... K7IJ See you at one of those flea markets this summer from that list I sent you... You need more stuff anyway cheers, skipp
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
Hank sent me a couple of barrel connectors made by PD that I've never seen before or since. They are UHF on one end of the barrel and Type N on the other end and Hank insisted that the connector produced no vswr bumps up to 500 Mhz. In a message dated 4/11/2008 4:24:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - I remember Hank Edwards at Phelps Dodge commenting that when they designed their sticks, they accounted for UHF cable and chassis connector mismatches in the antenna design itself. K7IJ Oh yes I remember Hank well, when Phelps Dodge had a warehouse in So. California. Really a great guy. Wonder what ever became of Hank with the company changes? The VHF 'sticks' had UHF connectors, the UHF 'sticks' came with type N connectors. One thing tho, the UHF connectors that PD used had the Teflon insulators and much better plating. **It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp0030002850)
[Repeater-Builder] FS - NHRC-10 Repeater Controller
I have for sale a NHRC-10 repeater controller. It is in the factory rack mount case that has never been rack mounted. It also has the optional 8 channel digital output board and the NHRC DAD (digital audio delay). The firmware is the most recent V1.2 and the voice chip says Marla V1.1. The controller appears to be in pristine condition and was used as a back-up and on the bench as a test set up. In trade for some work I did on a repeater I received the NHRC-10 controller. I have put it on the bench and everything test out OK. This controller looks like it just came out of the box! I have no need for another controller so it has to go. I am asking $450.00 plus shipping from 64024. I will pack it very well and will either do UPS or USPS Priority, your choice.. The software and all document can be found at http://www.nhrc.net/nhrc-10/ This setup new is $686.00... Please no offers for trade, I have plenty of stuff... Just ask my wife =-O _PLEASE REPLY TO ME DIRECTLY!_ k0bsj at hamrepeater dot com. I can supply pictures upon request... Bryon Jeffers KØBSJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
At 4/11/2008 13:43, you wrote: which will provide the necessary isolation although there is a large segment of the forum participants that feel that untinned double shielded cable is vulnerable to low level noise not the untinned part... the part with dissimilar shield materials is the problem generator. In short vulnerable no, possible PIM generator yes. You're preaching to the choir. I think untinned double shielded copper is very adequate to duplexer connections. But there are contributors aboard who feel that silver plated shields are a better choice. I don't think the duplexer interconnect cables are all that critical until you get to the antenna T interconnects. Everything behind that is partially filtered already. However, the cables on the T everything hanging on the antenna port should be either solid (hardline) or silver-plated braid shielding. I've actually had plain copper-braided RG-214 coax on the antenna port of a UHF duplexer cause desense; had to replace it with silver-plated RG-214 to eliminate it. Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
In a message dated 4/11/2008 8:13:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've actually had plain copper-braided RG-214 coax on the antenna port of a UHF duplexer cause desense; had to replace it with silver-plated RG-214 Can you clarify this? I thought that any RG-214 cable has a spec for silver plated shielding. **It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp0030002850)
[Repeater-Builder] RG-214 Cable
Genuine, MIL-C-17 RG-214/U coaxial cable has double silver-plated copper shields. Several companies manufacture an RG-214 TYPE cable that is very similar, but without the silver plating. As you would expect, it's a lot cheaper than the genuine RG-214/U stuff. Such cable may also have less braid coverage than the genuine cable. Be very cautious about buying any coaxial cable that has the word TYPE on it, even if the maker claims that is military specification cable. That one word can allow the maker to market an inferior product to unsuspecting buyers. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 8:20 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...) In a message dated 4/11/2008 8:13:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've actually had plain copper-braided RG-214 coax on the antenna port of a UHF duplexer cause desense; had to replace it with silver-plated RG-214 Can you clarify this? I thought that any RG-214 cable has a spec for silver plated shielding.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wacom 642 (duplexer war stories...)
At 4/11/2008 20:19, you wrote: In a message dated 4/11/2008 8:13:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've actually had plain copper-braided RG-214 coax on the antenna port of a UHF duplexer cause desense; had to replace it with silver-plated RG-214 Can you clarify this? I thought that any RG-214 cable has a spec for silver plated shielding. Not the modified RG-214 or cable marked RG-214 type. Search the list archives for more on this issue. I no longer put such cables anywhere in the antenna system. I've used them in the past usually have gotten away with it, but after discovering that one copper-shielded cable that caused intermittent desense for several years, I'm not counting on luck anymore. Bob NO6B
