[Repeater-Builder] Re: Free RCA Repeater
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, WI4L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kf8yk ericbartholomew@ wrote: Cleaning out the basement, found a RCA 500 UHF repeater. If anyone could use this, it's free for the asking. Pick up in Cleveland, Ohio or I'll ship it if you pay the shipping cost. The PA, PS, exciter/receiver and control shelf have all been removed from the cabinet, so if you only need a particular piece just ask. There's a set of service manuals too. 73, Eric KF8YK Is the repeater still available? Thanks 73, David, WI4L Thanks to everyone who replied, The repeater was picked up by a local RCA 500 user. I'm glad the RB list was able to save this unit from going to the landfill. - Eric KF8YK
[Repeater-Builder] Tait 800 not working
I've programmed a 27C64Q-200 EPROM with the hex below which should be Channel 0 450MHZ T855-20 but its not working i only have an EPROM in the RX module because the TX module needs the TCXO fitted but shouldn't it still receive on 450MHZ? also the carrier button was stuck on and forward was lit up on the alarm panel could that have caused damage with no antenna EPROM TCXO fitted? :180E27200101202051 :100010002020202060 :100020002020202050 :100030002020202040 :100040002020202030 :100050002020202020 :100060002020202010 :100070002020202000 :1000800020202020F0 :1000900020202020E0 :1000A00020202020D0 :1000B00020202020C0 :1000C00020202020B0 :1000D00020202020A0 :1000E0002020202090 :1000F0002020202080 :1001202020206F :10011000202020205F :10012000202020204F :10013000202020203F :10014000202020202F :10015000202020201F :10016000202020200F :1001700020202020FF :1001800020202020EF :1001900020202020DF :1001A00020202020CF :1001B00020202020BF :1001C00020202020AF :1001D000202020209F :1001E000202020208F :1001F000202020207F :1002202020206E :10021000202020205E :10022000202020204E :10023000202020203E :10024000202020202E :10025000202020201E :10026000202020200E :1002700020202020FE :1002800020202020EE :1002900020202020DE :1002A00020202020CE :1002B00020202020BE :1002C00020202020AE :1002D000202020209E :1002E000202020208E :1002F000202020207E :1003202020206D :10031000202020205D :10032000202020204D :10033000202020203D :10034000202020202D :10035000202020201D :10036000202020200D :1003700020202020FD :1003800020202020ED :1003900020202020DD :1003A00020202020CD :1003B00020202020BD :1003C00020202020AD :1003D000202020209D :1003E000202020208D :1003F000202020207D :10044500A7 :10041000DC :10042000CC :10043000BC :10044000AC :100450009C :100460008C :100470007C :100480006C :100490005C :1004A0004C :1004B0003C :1004C0002C :1004D0001C :1004EC :1004F000FC :1005EB :10051000DB :10052000CB :10053000BB :10054000AB :100550009B :100560008B :100570007B :100580006B :100590005B :1005A0004B :1005B0003B :1005C0002B :1005D0001B :1005EB :1005F000FB :100620543835352D323020002B :100610FFE9 :100620FFD9 :100630FFC9 :0001FF
[Repeater-Builder] 6 meter repeater
Looking for db of isolation need for a 1.7mhz split repeater on the 6 meter band. If using split antennas what would be the vertical seperation needed? Thanks. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Joe Burkleo wrote: Kevin Thanks for the information. I figured that if anyone had tried it you would be aware. I was just looking for more than 30 Watts out. Scott and I have been successful in building small IPA's (intermediate power amplifiers) that take the power from the exciter and make 3/4 to 1 watt with a single transistor. This stage then feeds a Wilkinson power divider and it feeds two of these brick devices. Another WPD is used to combine the power. About 75 to 80 watts is possible. We have a prototype that has one brick module (as the IPA) feeding four more, and over 150 watts is possible. We never fully developed the 150 watt high-power version because the single brick PA we build will easily deliver enough drive for any good external 220 PA, however we do have several of the 75 watt versions in service. Can these modules be considered continuous duty if they are properly mounted on a Micor station PA chassis. Absolutely - especially if running one or two modules. In addition, we actually use the MICOR power set control to retain all of its features (SWR protection, power leveling, etc.) The AMP BD that Scott builds has the pass transistor built on it and it is run from the power set control lead that originally went to the MICOR PA. Scott also builds a custom heat spreader that is used to mate the module to the MICOR heatsink. This eliminates the need to machine a flat spot on the heatsink that big enough for the surface of the module. While Scott doesn't advertise these, I feel sure he would sell them individually; they are used in /our/ custom 220 MICOR conversions. The heat spreader is not necessary in a MASTR II conversion, as there are no protruding 'bosses' for the original mounting of the RF power output transistors. The pictures in this document shows the mounting arrangement he has developed: http://www.repeater-builder.com/products/ampbddocs.pdf Good luck and let us know how you make out... Kevin Custer Repeater Builder
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wits End -- Desense
Well, I don't understand it, but yesterday afternoon the repeater seemed to revert to a bad case of desense. Today I will try to determine why this happened. Such is life! JohnT -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Transue Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 9:09 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wits End -- Desense Eric, Bob, and many other good folks, Success This being a holiday, I could not get RG400 to replace the cable from the TX to the connector on the back of the repeater, so I built a shield to completely enclose the cable. I also wrapped aluminum tape around the receive cable in the chassis. Lo! And Behold! No more desense! My sincere thanks go to all of you who have helped me through this most vexing problem. The repeater will be far more useful now. Best 73s to you all, JohnT AF4PD __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
Re: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Kevin, I've been meaning to postabout a similar project, and this prompts me to ask - have you done this to rebuild a UHF amp? I have several dead TLD-1713 UHF 75w PAs, and need a good PA or two at the moment. Rather than messing with trying to find Moto transistors, caps, and Z-matches, I was thinking of stripping the heatsink down, buying two Mx UHF 40-50w modules, and trying to combine them. I was curious as to how they would hold up under continuously linked repeater duty Can you provide some more details on the 'Wilkinson power dividers? I have experience with HF torroid combiners/splitters, but UHF is another animal altogether. Do you sell them with the boards? Is it as simple as mounting the two modules (and the supporting RB circuit boards), the combiner/splitters, and wiring it all up? I'd like to get a UHF one together asap. Thanks Eric KE2D -- Original message -- From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joe Burkleo wrote: Kevin Thanks for the information. I figured that if anyone had tried it you would be aware. I was just looking for more than 30 Watts out. Scott and I have been successful in building small IPA's (intermediate power amplifiers) that take the power from the exciter and make 3/4 to 1 watt with a single transistor. This stage then feeds a Wilkinson power divider and it feeds two of these brick devices. Another WPD is used to combine the power. About 75 to 80 watts is possible. We have a prototype that has one brick module (as the IPA) feeding four more, and over 150 watts is possible. We never fully developed the 150 watt high-power version because the single brick PA we build will easily deliver enough drive for any good external 220 PA, however we do have several of the 75 watt versions in service. Can these modules be considered continuous duty if they are properly mounted on a Micor station PA chassis. Absolutely - especially if running one or two modules. In addition, we actually use the MICOR power set control to retain all of its features (SWR protection, power leveling, etc.) The AMP BD that Scott builds has the pass transistor built on it and it is run from the power set control lead that originally went to the MICOR PA. Scott also builds a custom heat spreader that is used to mate the module to the MICOR heatsink. This eliminates the need to machine a flat spot on the heatsink that big enough for the surface of the module. While Scott doesn't advertise these, I feel sure he would sell them individually; they are used in our custom 220 MICOR conversions. The heat spreader is not necessary in a MASTR II conversion, as there are no protruding 'bosses' for the original mounting of the RF power output transistors. The pictures in this document shows the mounting arrangement he has developed: http://www.repeater-builder.com/products/ampbddocs.pdf Good luck and let us know how you make out... Kevin Custer Repeater Builder
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions)
Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Hi John, There is a case where you can actually be fighting a complex problem with unwanted contributions actually made/introduced by the cable (feed-line) Q. To be more specific some combination of the antenna, duplexer, hardware circuit(s) in addition to or along with the coaxial cable. Where I'm going with all of this is... There have been example cases where unwanted product generation has been fixed by replacing portions of the antenna system coaxial cables with a less or lower Q cable. Some transmit antenna combiner low-level generation issues have been addressed with lower-Q coax jumpers. I have replaced higher-Q feed-lines with more resistive cable, which in more than one case has solved an otherwise pesky gremlin - grunge problem. I really like RG-214 and similar (relatively) more lossy double shield coaxial cables in some cases where they provide a slightly higher measure of resistive padding and lower Q versus rigid hard-line and higher Q cable. The double shield is a big deal... but the higher Q cable could very well be a portion of the grunge problem. As well as some problematic cable lengths (and other yet unknown issues). RG-214 is cheap enough to be an easy try... keeping in mind the no free lunch rule applies in many examples. As obvious your results will probably vary. One other item... pay attention to the actual RG-214 description aka mfgrs label as there seem to be a larger number of clone cables, which is not actually the mil-spec RG-214 cable real deal. cheers, skipp John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't understand it, but yesterday afternoon the repeater seemed to revert to a bad case of desense. Today I will try to determine why this happened. Such is life! JohnT -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Transue Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 9:09 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wits End -- Desense Eric, Bob, and many other good folks, Success This being a holiday, I could not get RG400 to replace the cable from the TX to the connector on the back of the repeater, so I built a shield to completely enclose the cable. I also wrapped aluminum tape around the receive cable in the chassis. Lo! And Behold! No more desense! My sincere thanks go to all of you who have helped me through this most vexing problem. The repeater will be far more useful now. Best 73s to you all, JohnT AF4PD __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
[Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
How much transmit power Eric? And for some opinions... what type of radio/repeater gear do you plan on using? ... and why the 1.7 MHz split? cheers, s. Eric Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looking for db of isolation need for a 1.7mhz split repeater on the 6 meter band. If using split antennas what would be the vertical seperation needed? Thanks. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense
First thing is to replace the suspect cable rather than trusting the home-made shielding that was added. I also wonder if the transmitter is going spurious. Was that checked and ruled out? I don't recall. Chuck WB2EDV John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't understand it, but yesterday afternoon the repeater seemed to revert to a bad case of desense. Today I will try to determine why this happened. Such is life! JohnT
Re: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
If you want to see how many hoops we jumped through to convert a high-band VHF Micor to 220 go here: There's a PA link near the top. http://home.comcast.net/~micorrepeater/ de WD7F John in Tucson - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Kevin Custer Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:29 AM Subject: Re: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion Kevin, I've been meaning to postabout a similar project, and this prompts me to ask - have you done this to rebuild a UHF amp? I have several dead TLD-1713 UHF 75w PAs, and need a good PA or two at the moment. Rather than messing with trying to find Moto transistors, caps, and Z-matches, I was thinking of stripping the heatsink down, buying two Mx UHF 40-50w modules, and trying to combine them. I was curious as to how they would hold up under continuously linked repeater duty Can you provide some more details on the 'Wilkinson power dividers? I have experience with HF torroid combiners/splitters, but UHF is another animal altogether. Do you sell them with the boards? Is it as simple as mounting the two modules (and the supporting RB circuit boards), the combiner/splitters, and wiring it all up? I'd like to get a UHF one together asap. Thanks Eric KE2D -- Original message -- From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joe Burkleo wrote: Kevin Thanks for the information. I figured that if anyone had tried it you would be aware. I was just looking for more than 30 Watts out. Scott and I have been successful in building small IPA's (intermediate power amplifiers) that take the power from the exciter and make 3/4 to 1 watt with a single transistor. This stage then feeds a Wilkinson power divider and it feeds two of these brick devices. Another WPD is used to combine the power. About 75 to 80 watts is possible. We have a prototype that has one brick module (as the IPA) feeding four more, and over 150 watts is possible. We never fully developed the 150 watt high-power version because the single brick PA we build will easily deliver enough drive for any good external 220 PA, however we do have several of the 75 watt versions in service. Can these modules be considered continuous duty if they are properly mounted on a Micor station PA chassis. Absolutely - especially if running one or two modules. In addition, we actually use the MICOR power set control to retain all of its features (SWR protection, power leveling, etc.) The AMP BD that Scott builds has the pass transistor built on it and it is run from the power set control lead that originally went to the MICOR PA. Scott also builds a custom heat spreader that is used to mate the module to the MICOR heatsink. This eliminates the need to machine a flat spot on the heatsink that big enough for the surface of the module. While Scott doesn't advertise these, I feel sure he would sell them individually; they are used in our custom 220 MICOR conversions. The heat spreader is not necessary in a MASTR II conversion, as there are no protruding 'bosses' for the original mounting of the RF power output transistors. The pictures in this document shows the mounting arrangement he has developed: http://www.repeater-builder.com/products/ampbddocs.pdf Good luck and let us know how you make out... Kevin Custer Repeater Builder
Fw: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Forgot to addI never persued the SWR power reducing beyond the simple divider. Our converstion won't drop power all the way to zero when there's an SWR problem..yet. Once, the controller got confused and keyed the repeater over night at about 60 watts out without a problem. I think it's bullet proof in that respect. de WD7F John in Tucson - Original Message - From: WD7F - John in Tucson To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:46 AM Subject: Re: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion If you want to see how many hoops we jumped through to convert a high-band VHF Micor to 220 go here: There's a PA link near the top. http://home.comcast.net/~micorrepeater/ de WD7F John in Tucson - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Kevin Custer Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:29 AM Subject: Re: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion Kevin, I've been meaning to postabout a similar project, and this prompts me to ask - have you done this to rebuild a UHF amp? I have several dead TLD-1713 UHF 75w PAs, and need a good PA or two at the moment. Rather than messing with trying to find Moto transistors, caps, and Z-matches, I was thinking of stripping the heatsink down, buying two Mx UHF 40-50w modules, and trying to combine them. I was curious as to how they would hold up under continuously linked repeater duty Can you provide some more details on the 'Wilkinson power dividers? I have experience with HF torroid combiners/splitters, but UHF is another animal altogether. Do you sell them with the boards? Is it as simple as mounting the two modules (and the supporting RB circuit boards), the combiner/splitters, and wiring it all up? I'd like to get a UHF one together asap. Thanks Eric KE2D -- Original message -- From: Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joe Burkleo wrote: Kevin Thanks for the information. I figured that if anyone had tried it you would be aware. I was just looking for more than 30 Watts out. Scott and I have been successful in building small IPA's (intermediate power amplifiers) that take the power from the exciter and make 3/4 to 1 watt with a single transistor. This stage then feeds a Wilkinson power divider and it feeds two of these brick devices. Another WPD is used to combine the power. About 75 to 80 watts is possible. We have a prototype that has one brick module (as the IPA) feeding four more, and over 150 watts is possible. We never fully developed the 150 watt high-power version because the single brick PA we build will easily deliver enough drive for any good external 220 PA, however we do have several of the 75 watt versions in service. Can these modules be considered continuous duty if they are properly mounted on a Micor station PA chassis. Absolutely - especially if running one or two modules. In addition, we actually use the MICOR power set control to retain all of its features (SWR protection, power leveling, etc.) The AMP BD that Scott builds has the pass transistor built on it and it is run from the power set control lead that originally went to the MICOR PA. Scott also builds a custom heat spreader that is used to mate the module to the MICOR heatsink. This eliminates the need to machine a flat spot on the heatsink that big enough for the surface of the module. While Scott doesn't advertise these, I feel sure he would sell them individually; they are used in our custom 220 MICOR conversions. The heat spreader is not necessary in a MASTR II conversion, as there are no protruding 'bosses' for the original mounting of the RF power output transistors. The pictures in this document shows the mounting arrangement he has developed: http://www.repeater-builder.com/products/ampbddocs.pdf Good luck and let us know how you make out... Kevin Custer Repeater Builder
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Tait 800 not working
cisfuk wrote: I've programmed a 27C64Q-200 EPROM with the hex below which should be Channel 0 450MHZ T855-20 but its not working i only have an EPROM in the RX module because the TX module needs the TCXO fitted but shouldn't it still receive on 450MHZ? also the carrier button was stuck on and forward was lit up on the alarm panel could that have caused damage with no antenna EPROM TCXO fitted? If 450.000 is more than a few megs from where the RX was tuned before, it may be the VCO that is the problem. Refer to your service manual WRT adjusting the VCO trimmer capacitor for 10V at the top of L1. The VCO has a limited lock range (+/- 3 or 4 megs). I have found it very handy to have a set of test RX TX EPROMs programmed for every 2.5 MHz across the full frequency range. By inserting the test programs, it is easy to find where the module is currently tuned to and go from there. Ed Yoho W6YJ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Free RCA Repeater
Hi David, I have a few of these available near Nashville, TN if you're interested; see my web page below, prices are very negotiable, and I'm happy to remove the Zetron controllers if you don't want them. We could arrange to meet near South Pittsburgh, TN if you like; it's just off I-24 on the northwest side of Chattanooga. At 01:29 PM 8/31/2008, you wrote: --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kf8yk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cleaning out the basement, found a RCA 500 UHF repeater. If anyone could use this, it's free for the asking. Pick up in Cleveland, Ohio or I'll ship it if you pay the shipping cost. The PA, PS, exciter/receiver and control shelf have all been removed from the cabinet, so if you only need a particular piece just ask. There's a set of service manuals too. 73, Eric KF8YK Is the repeater still available? Thanks 73, David, WI4L Thanks, Robin Midgett K4IDC 615-322-5836 office - rolls to pager 615-835-7699 pager 615-301-1642 home [EMAIL PROTECTED] Radio Gear For Sale: http://www.people.vanderbilt.edu/~robin.midgett/index.htm
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions)
Thank Goodness you are Back Skip. missed your little Gems over the Holiday weekend. Hope you enjoyed the hAMFEST, wHEREVER THAT WAS. Wesley AB8KD - Original Message - From: skipp025 To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 11:09 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Hi John, There is a case where you can actually be fighting a complex problem with unwanted contributions actually made/introduced by the cable (feed-line) Q. To be more specific some combination of the antenna, duplexer, hardware circuit(s) in addition to or along with the coaxial cable. Where I'm going with all of this is... There have been example cases where unwanted product generation has been fixed by replacing portions of the antenna system coaxial cables with a less or lower Q cable. Some transmit antenna combiner low-level generation issues have been addressed with lower-Q coax jumpers. I have replaced higher-Q feed-lines with more resistive cable, which in more than one case has solved an otherwise pesky gremlin - grunge problem. I really like RG-214 and similar (relatively) more lossy double shield coaxial cables in some cases where they provide a slightly higher measure of resistive padding and lower Q versus rigid hard-line and higher Q cable. The double shield is a big deal... but the higher Q cable could very well be a portion of the grunge problem. As well as some problematic cable lengths (and other yet unknown issues). RG-214 is cheap enough to be an easy try... keeping in mind the no free lunch rule applies in many examples. As obvious your results will probably vary. One other item... pay attention to the actual RG-214 description aka mfgrs label as there seem to be a larger number of clone cables, which is not actually the mil-spec RG-214 cable real deal. cheers, skipp John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't understand it, but yesterday afternoon the repeater seemed to revert to a bad case of desense. Today I will try to determine why this happened. Such is life! JohnT -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Transue Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 9:09 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wits End -- Desense Eric, Bob, and many other good folks, Success This being a holiday, I could not get RG400 to replace the cable from the TX to the connector on the back of the repeater, so I built a shield to completely enclose the cable. I also wrapped aluminum tape around the receive cable in the chassis. Lo! And Behold! No more desense! My sincere thanks go to all of you who have helped me through this most vexing problem. The repeater will be far more useful now. Best 73s to you all, JohnT AF4PD __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Northern California Amateur Radio Flea Markets
Hi Wesley, A few folks get tired of reading my comments and freely Email me to tell me they don't appreciate my smarty attitude... of course most of the feedback fails to include their real reply address along with their note/message. But life goes on... For those of you close enough to make it... In Lincoln, CA (north of Sacrament by about 45-min) is a first time 4 club flea market this Saturday the 6th. Search the web for more info as I'll be working on TV that day. :-( The following day (Sunday) is the semi floundering Livermore, CA Lark Swap. I still like to go (and wish the LARK Group would get a clue on how to keep their flea market from dying)... Saturday the 13th is the South SF Bay Area De Anza College swap (often very much fun). ;-) In So-Cal is the famous TRW Swap, which I'm told is still very nice (not corrupted by computer crap) but I've not yet been able to make one. There are some reported very good Oregon and Washington Swaps worth mentioning. Others on the list might pipe-up with the better, larger (faster) swaps in their local areas. Of course Dayton has the best brauts... and it's very hard for me to stay on my 12-step Junk-Enders program. I fall off the wagon when there's so many great deals along with meeting great folks like Dave, Jeff, Bob, Ken, Kevin, Scott and the guy with the small radio tower on his hard-hat. cheers, s. Wesley Bazell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank Goodness you are Back Skipp. missed your little Gems over the Holiday weekend. Hope you enjoyed the Hamfest, wherever that was. Wesley AB8KD
Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSTR II VHF and the TS-64MSTII(Repeater Unit)
At 02:23 PM 02/09/2008, you wrote: Doug, I have had some similar experiences here in the RB skunk works. I thought I was the only one to come across this phenomenon. I first noticed it with the batch of 5 or so that I got around the first of the year. I'm not sure if they changed to a different op-amp mfg or what. My experience was the same as yours that I merely jumpered the input to the output - bypassing the TS-64 and the whole setup runs great. (no decode of course). On the ones I ran into, I merely turned down the pot in the disc. and then adjusted the input pot on the controller to compensate. I am scratching my memory, but I think I *was* able to re-produce this behavior on the test bench with a sine wave generator. Please let us all know what you find out. Scott Scott Zimmerman Amateur Radio Call N3XCC -- Hi Scott. Well I am glad I am not the only one who noticed this... I was originally looking for a wiring error. I did talk to ComSpec and the gentleman I talked to indicated he was not into the engineering of the thing. However he did kind of indicate that the last batch they made they changed the op amp. He seemed to indicate that they would be changing it on the next batch also. That leads me to think that they may be aware of some problem. He did feel that one volt hitting the input was a bit high and suggested some resistance in series with the input. Mine was bought in March of this year.. Since he did not know what the output level of the MSTRII receiver was, I rather took it that he was not involved in its development. I put a .005ufd disc ceramic capacitor across the sq/v/hi terminal and the sq low terminal and that cleared up the 'grass', but with a rx output of 500mv, I lost the squelching that I wanted. I increased the receiver output to 950mv and that seemed to fix things. The output wave form from the HP filter is looking very good. No noticeable distortion and no tendency to take off. I am presently waiting for a op amp from SCOM Bob for my mrc100 and then I will be able to listen to the repeated audio. So for now, I am going to let it sit It eventually will be connected to a 7k. The capacitor does take out some of the hf noise component thus the squelch problem. Hope this helps. I'll look at it again when I get the controller working.. 73 Doug VE5DA
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 800 not working
Thanks for that, I tried it but it just stayed at 0.17v
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 800 not working
cisfuk wrote: Thanks for that, I tried it but it just stayed at 0.17v Not sure what you tried: 1. Making a EPROM with channels from 440 to 480 (or perhaps 400 to 440 if it is a -10) in 2.5 MHz steps. 2. Adjusting the VCO trimmer. If it is #2, you will need to first move the trimmer and watch the unlocked frequency. Adjust it for about 2 megs below the desired freq. In this case that would be 403 MHz (450MHz RX - 45MHz 1st IF - 2 MHz). Once that is done, try powering down the strip for a few seconds and then reconnect the power. If you are lucky, it will lock. Then adjust the test point for 10V. One other possibility. The VCOs came with two types of trimmers. A multi-turn Johanson or a half turn trimmer capacitor. Some of the half turn trimmer caps I have come across were glued after being adjusted to the customer frequency. If they were glued and you attempt to move them, they fail internally (turns, but does not vary the capacitance). If they are the half turn style, verify the unlocked frequency is actually shifting as expected when you adjust the trimmer. If you have a T855-20 RX, the VCO should be movable from around 390 MHz to 440 MHz. Ed Yoho W6YJ
[Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. The greater the split the less isolation needed. From some technical information I found in a duplexer publication I figured about 58db of isolation was needed but not sure. Right now the repeater is running on two seperate antennas seperated by 90 feet vertical running 50 watts with no problems. Rx antenna is 120' and Tx antenna is @ 30'. It can here me about 30 miles away on 5 watts but the transmit signal comming back to me is weak. Eric N7JYS --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, skipp025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How much transmit power Eric? And for some opinions... what type of radio/repeater gear do you plan on using? ... and why the 1.7 MHz split? cheers, s. Eric Harrison n7jys@ wrote: Looking for db of isolation need for a 1.7mhz split repeater on the 6 meter band. If using split antennas what would be the vertical seperation needed? Thanks. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
That's news to me. I've run a 6-meter repeater for years and had involvement for years before that. The split in our region is 1 MHz, although you can get some pairs at 500 kHz if you really want one there. Chuck WB2EDV The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
That is still correct. I just checked. Arrl has made some suggestions. HOWEVER! THE ARRL IS _NOT_ THE FCC. THE FREQUENCIES THE FCC AUTHORIZES ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT COUNT! Chuck Kelsey wrote: That's news to me. I've run a 6-meter repeater for years and had involvement for years before that. The split in our region is 1 MHz, although you can get some pairs at 500 kHz if you really want one there. Chuck WB2EDV The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. Yahoo! Groups Links
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Kevin, Thanks for all of your information. When we get deeper into this project I am sure I will be talking to you more in-depth about the dual module PA. Milling the Micor PA deck is not a problem for me as I do a lot of metal work as well. I can see where the adapter would work very well for those who do not have knowledge or access to a milling machine. Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Burkleo wrote: Kevin Thanks for the information. I figured that if anyone had tried it you would be aware. I was just looking for more than 30 Watts out. Scott and I have been successful in building small IPA's (intermediate power amplifiers) that take the power from the exciter and make 3/4 to 1 watt with a single transistor. This stage then feeds a Wilkinson power divider and it feeds two of these brick devices. Another WPD is used to combine the power. About 75 to 80 watts is possible. We have a prototype that has one brick module (as the IPA) feeding four more, and over 150 watts is possible. We never fully developed the 150 watt high-power version because the single brick PA we build will easily deliver enough drive for any good external 220 PA, however we do have several of the 75 watt versions in service. Can these modules be considered continuous duty if they are properly mounted on a Micor station PA chassis. Absolutely - especially if running one or two modules. In addition, we actually use the MICOR power set control to retain all of its features (SWR protection, power leveling, etc.) The AMP BD that Scott builds has the pass transistor built on it and it is run from the power set control lead that originally went to the MICOR PA. Scott also builds a custom heat spreader that is used to mate the module to the MICOR heatsink. This eliminates the need to machine a flat spot on the heatsink that big enough for the surface of the module. While Scott doesn't advertise these, I feel sure he would sell them individually; they are used in /our/ custom 220 MICOR conversions. The heat spreader is not necessary in a MASTR II conversion, as there are no protruding 'bosses' for the original mounting of the RF power output transistors. The pictures in this document shows the mounting arrangement he has developed: http://www.repeater-builder.com/products/ampbddocs.pdf Good luck and let us know how you make out... Kevin Custer Repeater Builder
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Where did you hear that? It's certainly not true. 1.7 MHz is the split in some areas, but others use 0.5, 1.0, or 1.6 MHz. Joe M. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Those and the local bandplan in your area. There is no national 6M bandplan in the repeater sub-bands. In fact, there is no national bandplan in ANY of the repeater sub-bands. The last one that was national was 440, but that saw its demise with part of CA changing to 20 kHz channel spacing from 12.5/25 kHz spacing. Some areas are now also using 10.0 kHz spacing on 440. Joe M. Dave wrote: That is still correct. I just checked. Arrl has made some suggestions. HOWEVER! THE ARRL IS _NOT_ THE FCC. THE FREQUENCIES THE FCC AUTHORIZES ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT COUNT! Chuck Kelsey wrote: That's news to me. I've run a 6-meter repeater for years and had involvement for years before that. The split in our region is 1 MHz, although you can get some pairs at 500 kHz if you really want one there. Chuck WB2EDV The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. Yahoo! Groups Links
[building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Eric, I just swap the modules from a Mobile into the station PA heatsink if I have one die. They are the same modules, different heatsink. I have found that if you back down the last output stage of the exciter a little, the tripler and first stage of the PA is much happier and the PA's will last a lot longer during our hour long plus nets. Doing this I am still able to get well over 75 Watts out of the PA, but DON'T DO IT. 75 WATTS MAX. The other question I have, is have you been retuning the tripler and circulator? If not, that could be where part of your problems are coming from. Good Luck, Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin, I've been meaning to postabout a similar project, and this prompts me to ask - have you done this to rebuild a UHF amp? I have several dead TLD-1713 UHF 75w PAs, and need a good PA or two at the moment. Rather than messing with trying to find Moto transistors, caps, and Z-matches, I was thinking of stripping the heatsink down, buying two Mx UHF 40-50w modules, and trying to combine them. I was curious as to how they would hold up under continuously linked repeater duty Can you provide some more details on the 'Wilkinson power dividers? I have experience with HF torroid combiners/splitters, but UHF is another animal altogether. Do you sell them with the boards? Is it as simple as mounting the two modules (and the supporting RB circuit boards), the combiner/splitters, and wiring it all up? I'd like to get a UHF one together asap. Thanks Eric KE2D
Fw: [building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversi
John, I will take a look. Thanks a lot, Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, WD7F - John in Tucson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forgot to addI never persued the SWR power reducing beyond the simple divider. Our converstion won't drop power all the way to zero when there's an SWR problem..yet. Once, the controller got confused and keyed the repeater over night at about 60 watts out without a problem. I think it's bullet proof in that respect. de WD7F John in Tucson
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense
Chuck, Yes, I have looked at the spectrum and I don't see any spurs. JohnT -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Kelsey Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 11:43 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense First thing is to replace the suspect cable rather than trusting the home-made shielding that was added. I also wonder if the transmitter is going spurious. Was that checked and ruled out? I don't recall. Chuck WB2EDV __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions)
Skipp, Thanks for the suggestion. I have tentatively concluded that the desense problem is not classic desense caused by too much RF from the TX getting into the RX. I have used a spectrum analyzer and a sniffer probe to locate the RF. But the only RF I can find is at the TX frequency. I don't see any at the RX frequency. The dynamic range of the spectrum analyzer appears to be at least 40 or 50 dB. With the duplexer adding another 79 or so dB and the receiver having selectivity, I can't see how the RF level from the TX can be a problem. Nevertheless, when the repeater transmits, the receiver doesn't hear as well as otherwise. I'm thinking that the COR board might have a problem that is somehow feeding into the receiver. Have you ever heard of such a case? The problem seems to be independent of the external cables and feedline and antenna. I have experienced it with dummy load, with antenna, without the duplexer, with various lengths of cables, etc. I'd like to have some RG214 for test purposes, and I'd like to have some additional RG400. Getting cable is a two-hour round trip for me, so I can't do that for a few days. I hope to get to the cable store (The RF Connection) soon. Thanks for all the help, Skipp. With you an others from Repeater Builders holding my hand, this problem might actually get solved. JohnT -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of skipp025 Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 11:10 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Hi John, There is a case where you can actually be fighting a complex problem with unwanted contributions actually made/introduced by the cable (feed-line) Q. To be more specific some combination of the antenna, duplexer, hardware circuit(s) in addition to or along with the coaxial cable. Where I'm going with all of this is... There have been example cases where unwanted product generation has been fixed by replacing portions of the antenna system coaxial cables with a less or lower Q cable. Some transmit antenna combiner low-level generation issues have been addressed with lower-Q coax jumpers. I have replaced higher-Q feed-lines with more resistive cable, which in more than one case has solved an otherwise pesky gremlin - grunge problem. I really like RG-214 and similar (relatively) more lossy double shield coaxial cables in some cases where they provide a slightly higher measure of resistive padding and lower Q versus rigid hard-line and higher Q cable. The double shield is a big deal... but the higher Q cable could very well be a portion of the grunge problem. As well as some problematic cable lengths (and other yet unknown issues). RG-214 is cheap enough to be an easy try... keeping in mind the no free lunch rule applies in many examples. As obvious your results will probably vary. One other item... pay attention to the actual RG-214 description aka mfgrs label as there seem to be a larger number of clone cables, which is not actually the mil-spec RG-214 cable real deal. cheers, skipp John Transue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't understand it, but yesterday afternoon the repeater seemed to revert to a bad case of desense. Today I will try to determine why this happened. Such is life! JohnT -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 John Transue Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 9:09 PM To: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Wits End -- Desense Eric, Bob, and many other good folks, Success This being a holiday, I could not get RG400 to replace the cable from the TX to the connector on the back of the repeater, so I built a shield to completely enclose the cable. I also wrapped aluminum tape around the receive cable in the chassis. Lo! And Behold! No more desense! My sincere thanks go to all of you who have helped me through this most vexing problem. The repeater will be far more useful now. Best 73s to you all, JohnT AF4PD __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset. http://www.eset.com com __ NOD32 3192 (20080616) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
That is only true if you choose to get a coordination. It is not mandatory. Only if some kind of interference complaint surfaces does the fcc place creedance of any kind to the coordination thing. There are many repeaters on the air in the US that have not had not do they currently have a coordination. There is no law that says you must get a coordination. Joe Burkleo wrote: Actually it is your local coordination body that counts. I just recently coordinated a new 6 Meter repeater for here on the Oregon Coast. Our council, ORRC is coordinating 1.7 MHz splits here and has been since 2003 or earlier. My pair is 52.93/51.23. I would not be surprised to still find a couple repeaters left here in the state on the old 1 MHz split as well. 90 Feet of vertical separation, especially with a filter or two, should work very well. Hopefully your Micor has the factory extender option. That coupled with a low noise preamp (such as those made by Angle Linear), should be a pretty good repeater. Good Luck, Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is still correct. I just checked. Arrl has made some suggestions. HOWEVER! THE ARRL IS _NOT_ THE FCC. THE FREQUENCIES THE FCC AUTHORIZES ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT COUNT! Chuck Kelsey wrote: That's news to me. I've run a 6-meter repeater for years and had involvement for years before that. The split in our region is 1 MHz, although you can get some pairs at 500 kHz if you really want one there. Chuck WB2EDV The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Eric Harrison wrote: The repeater is a motorola micor station lo-band repeater retuned to the 6 meter band running 100 watts. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. As others have mentioned, there's nothing that makes a particular repeater split a U.S. wide thing. Here in Colorado, we have very few 6m repeaters, but we do have both 1.0 MHz and 1.7 MHz split systems on-air. I know our 1.0 split system is coordinated, and I assume the 1.7 is also. The one thing you might keep in mind is that even though 1.7 is becoming popular, many rigs will default to 1.0, meaning you've placed a *small* but annoying barrier between your users (who want to be lazy and hit the offset button on modern rigs and be done with it -- hell, half of them may not even know what an offset really is), and your repeater. In other words, standards on paper also have to be weighted against the standards built into the user radios. Just a thought. Frankly, on 6m -- your user-base is probably smarter than the average bear, and can handle it. But I mention it out of a fear that you'll have complaints and/or less users if you go with the wider split. You're correct, of course -- it's easier to duplex the wider split. It's also pretty easy to build a split-site machine for the standard split and not even have to run a duplexer... Nate WY0X
[building-repeaters] Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
I usually retune the tripler filter on my spectrun analyzer/tracking generator, and also re-tune the circulator. So the drive level into the amp is fine, and the circulator is ok. It is definitely PA issues, such as intermittent substrates, bad chip caps, Z-matches, etc... I have done the mobile-to-heatsink trick a number of times; more vhf than uhf, but 100w uhf mobiles aren't too common anyore around here. Just looking for a more modern solution. The mobile trick is probably cheaper though. Eric KE2D --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Joe Burkleo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eric, I just swap the modules from a Mobile into the station PA heatsink if I have one die. They are the same modules, different heatsink. I have found that if you back down the last output stage of the exciter a little, the tripler and first stage of the PA is much happier and the PA's will last a lot longer during our hour long plus nets. Doing this I am still able to get well over 75 Watts out of the PA, but DON'T DO IT. 75 WATTS MAX. The other question I have, is have you been retuning the tripler and circulator? If not, that could be where part of your problems are coming from. Good Luck, Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kk2ed@ wrote: Kevin, I've been meaning to postabout a similar project, and this prompts me to ask - have you done this to rebuild a UHF amp? I have several dead TLD-1713 UHF 75w PAs, and need a good PA or two at the moment. Rather than messing with trying to find Moto transistors, caps, and Z-matches, I was thinking of stripping the heatsink down, buying two Mx UHF 40-50w modules, and trying to combine them. I was curious as to how they would hold up under continuously linked repeater duty Can you provide some more details on the 'Wilkinson power dividers? I have experience with HF torroid combiners/splitters, but UHF is another animal altogether. Do you sell them with the boards? Is it as simple as mounting the two modules (and the supporting RB circuit boards), the combiner/splitters, and wiring it all up? I'd like to get a UHF one together asap. Thanks Eric KE2D
[Repeater-Builder] Ge Mobile MVP !!!!
well i have 3 GE radios here with 3 Little Sinclair Duplexer inside them,they were used as a phone patch link, they are : CT56AAS66A with their channelle elements at 152.195 mhz RX and 157.495 TX. the Duplexer are RES-LOK Model SD-220 Serial:Q3242-43 i also have 2 Zetron 36B Phone link base with OEM manual you can send me an email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 73/s Gervais,Ve2ckn.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Ge Mobile MVP !!!!
nice little units. gervais wrote: well i have 3 GE radios here with 3 Little Sinclair Duplexer inside them,they were used as a phone patch link, they are : CT56AAS66A with their channelle elements at 152.195 mhz RX and 157.495 TX. the Duplexer are RES-LOK Model SD-220 Serial:Q3242-43 i also have 2 Zetron 36B Phone link base with OEM manual you can send me an email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 73/s Gervais,Ve2ckn.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions)
Hi John, I'm not familiar with that particular radio, but would it be possible to disconnect the antenna feed at the Rx PCB and place a 50 ohm surface mount resistor in it's place? That may allow you to differentiate between shielding problems in the receive antenna cabling and other possible issues of control wires and receiver board shielding. I guess it's a bit hard then to feed in a signal on the receive frequency, but you may still be able to detect a change in unsquelched noise when the Tx operates. On another note, I presume you've probed around on the receive frequency as well as the Tx frequency, and everything in between, including I.F. frequencies? Once I had a repeater that was being upset by a 5 volt three terminal regulator chip that burst into oscillation at 50MHz when the supply dropped slightly during transmit. Another repeater had a similar problem with sidebands appearing a couple of MHz either side of the transmitter. It turned out to be a another voltage regulator oscillating at about 1MHz (a discrete component circuit this time). Surprisingly a tiny bit of this got past all the bypass capacitors and found it's way into the PA pre-driver where it mixed and produced the sidebands. Although the sidebands were more than 40dB below the fundamental, even after the diplexer they presented a significant signal on the receive frequency at the receiver input. Of course the sidebands drifted in frequency across the receive frequency, changing with temperature just to make diagnosis all that more interesting! Good Luck and 73, Mark VK3BYY Melbourne, Australia From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Transue Sent: Thursday, 4 September 2008 9:25 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Skipp, Thanks for the suggestion. I have tentatively concluded that the desense problem is not classic desense caused by too much RF from the TX getting into the RX. I have used a spectrum analyzer and a sniffer probe to locate the RF. But the only RF I can find is at the TX frequency. I don't see any at the RX frequency. The dynamic range of the spectrum analyzer appears to be at least 40 or 50 dB. With the duplexer adding another 79 or so dB and the receiver having selectivity, I can't see how the RF level from the TX can be a problem. Nevertheless, when the repeater transmits, the receiver doesn't hear as well as otherwise. I'm thinking that the COR board might have a problem that is somehow feeding into the receiver. Have you ever heard of such a case? The problem seems to be independent of the external cables and feedline and antenna. I have experienced it with dummy load, with antenna, without the duplexer, with various lengths of cables, etc. I'd like to have some RG214 for test purposes, and I'd like to have some additional RG400. Getting cable is a two-hour round trip for me, so I can't do that for a few days. I hope to get to the cable store (The RF Connection) soon. Thanks for all the help, Skipp. With you an others from Repeater Builders holding my hand, this problem might actually get solved. JohnT
[Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions
Thanks Robert, I am going out into the shack tonight, I think I am going to trace each wire and see just where they go, this should hopefully help me find a home for each one. I lloked at TB1 where some of the wires goes, says they should come from the PA, but then they don't exactly correspond to the points listed on the PA. Now just a more curious point, something I guess I just don't grasp, but all the wires going up to the PA are 18 guage or less wires, it would seem to me that with such high power output that it would have at least a few larger wires at least of the 12 guage or better. How do they accomplish this with such a small set of wires? Mathew --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, KD4PBC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mathew, It should be on the back of the chimney it has labeled input and output with so239 connectors. I'll include pictures of that also. It still looks good to get to shop today. Robert.. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n9lv Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 8:30 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions Looking at the amp I don't see the low pass filter that you are referring to. I just remembered, I have another one of these same amps in the basement that was given to me, so I at least have a spare. Can you describe what the low pass filter might look like? Mathew --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, KD4PBC 900@ wrote: No it just buffers the COR no audio delay. The amp will work at 145 it will just not be as efficient. That should not be a big problem. Just stay within the limits of the tube. There are 2 different amps for the VHF micor the 250 watt used in the PURC and Micor and the 350 Watt used in early PURCs and all Micors. The only difference is a resistor on the screen I think. It's a big wire wound mother. The PA and most importantly the tubes will last forever if you remove the rear shield and relocate the low pass filter to the right side (from front) You will see the holes there already. Then mount 2 4 muffin fans on the 2 heat sinks. It takes them from to hot to touch to cool. We did this on about 50 paging transmitters back in the day after we added the fans we never replaced another tube and I was there for 3 more years. These transmitters were on P6 (158.7000) and were keyed for an average of 18 to 20 hours a day. Robert.. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n9lv Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:52 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions If I understand Motorola right, this is would serve the same purpose as a audio delay board to remove the squelch tail heard on the unkey of the mic? Also, how clean do you think the amp might be down at 145.410 MHz and not be spurious? I am sure there will be a reduction in power, but if I get 300 watts out I would be happy. Mathew --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, KD4PBC 900@ wrote: There are 100s of ways to do it I always use the F1-PL or the DC transfer for the Chanel element ground but others just jumper it. Squelch gate card is nice for buffer from audio squelch card. Robert.. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n9lv Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:38 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions I would agree on the b/y and b/g as being a switch. As for the cards in the cards installed, there is just the Line Driver and the Station Control. I have the tone cards, repeater card, line card and squelch card, but was told they were not needed. Mathew --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, KD4PBC 900@ wrote: Mathew, Correct on the solid yellows and blues each one is an end and the one with a tracer is the CT. I think that the blue/yellow and the brown/green go to what would have been the rear door interlock. Did not make it to warehouse today (car troubles) I will take pictures and notes on a complete station I have at the shop. What cards do you have in card cage ? Robert -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n9lv Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 6:48 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions Here is a list of parts in this system, thanks to all and please bear with me as life
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Ge Mobile MVP !!!!
yes and H-Duty too. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 20:40:51 -0400Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Ge Mobile MVP nice little units. gervais wrote: well i have 3 GE radios here with 3 Little Sinclair Duplexer insidethem,they were used as a phone patch link,they are :CT56AAS66A with their channelle elements at 152.195 mhz RX and 157.495TX.the Duplexer are RES-LOK Model SD-220Serial:Q3242-43i also have 2 Zetron 36B Phone link base with OEM manual you can send me an email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 73/s Gervais,Ve2ckn. _
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Some areas have AM stations on 1000 KHz making the 1 MHz split a non-starter. The 0.5 MHz split solves that and was popular when mobile transmitters had a tough time with repeat/direct (remember those radios?). The 1.7 MHz split also solves this and usually is not a problem for newer radios (but may be for the antenna!). I've seen listings where the single site is on 1.7 MHz split with an offsite receiver on the 1 MHz split. Mike/W5JR ---[Original Message]--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sep 3, 2008 7:07:30 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater Where did you hear that? It's certainly not true. 1.7 MHz is the split in some areas, but others use 0.5, 1.0, or 1.6 MHz. Joe M. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Note that the Extender is Moto's name for a Noise Blanker, which is the term that GE used. The noise blanker (no matter who makes it) is an AM receiver (whose front end is parked on a (hopefully) quiet channel) whose IF is the same frequency as the main (FM) receiver IF. The AM IF's is inverted and injected into the FMs IF and the noise pulses cancel. At least that's the plan, and usually it works. So the noise pulses are cancelled at the IF frequency, long before they are demodulated. Some people say that the Moto Extenders don't work as well as GE's Noise Blanker circuit. Not having had a GE to play with, I can't speak to that as I don't have 1st hand experience. One person's whose opinion I respect has over 15 years of working on lowband GE and Motorola gear and he says that he'll take a Mastr II over a Micor any day as a 6m repeater receiver just from the NB design. He parks them on 51mhz and lets them run. When the NB (no matter who makes it) is working right it eliminates a LOT of the RF noise hash that is so prevalent on low band channels. It messes up when the AM front end hears noise that the FM doesn't, or when someone starts talking on the AM channel (the NB input). Moto recommends that the extender be parked a couple of MHz away from the main channel and most extender-equipped mobiles have an antenna splitter after the antenna relay so that it feeds both the FM and the AM front end. Low band repeaters come in single-receive antenna (no-noise-blanker) configurations, and some have an separate antenna input for the noise blanker. The extender sampling frequency needs to be a few mhz away from the desired frequency to guarantee that all that it picks up is wideband noise. This means that if you put a pass cavity tuned to the main receive channel in front of the splitter then the AM receiver will hear nothing (because the pass window is so narrow) and you effectively have no extender. This is the biggest argument for split site machines on 6. The same thing happens if you have a duplexer in place of the cavity in the above example. A low band duplexer has a narrow pass window so the repeaters with a single antenna port for both the main channel and for the NB have a situation where the NB never hears anything. I've seen one 6m repeater where they took a single-sited machine and split it. The old transmit antenna (on it's own feedline), and the two pass cavities were reused for the NB channel. The transmitter ended up a mile away with a 900 MHz cross-link. BTW in most cases you DON'T need a preamp on a 6m FM receiver!!! They already hear dot 25 or so and the effective sensitivity with the antenna connected will likely be in excess of 1uV at most sites just due to the atmospheric noise. Mike WA6ILQ At 03:50 PM 09/03/08, you wrote: Actually it is your local coordination body that counts. I just recently coordinated a new 6 Meter repeater for here on the Oregon Coast. Our council, ORRC is coordinating 1.7 MHz splits here and has been since 2003 or earlier. My pair is 52.93/51.23. I would not be surprised to still find a couple repeaters left here in the state on the old 1 MHz split as well. 90 Feet of vertical separation, especially with a filter or two, should work very well. Hopefully your Micor has the factory extender option. That coupled with a low noise preamp (such as those made by Angle Linear), should be a pretty good repeater. Good Luck, Joe - WA7JAW
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TPN1132A Wireup help and questions
At 05:43 PM 09/03/08, you wrote: Now just a more curious point, something I guess I just don't grasp, but all the wires going up to the PA are 18 guage or less wires, it would seem to me that with such high power output that it would have at least a few larger wires at least of the 12 guage or better. How do they accomplish this with such a small set of wires? This is the kind of comment that worries the old farts. 20ga wire can carry an amp. 18 ga can carry at least three amps. The UHF Micor amp book (the only high power book I have handy) says that the final amp runs at 1,500 volts at up to 400 mils. That's 4/10 of an amp. 1/10 can kill you if it's applied right. 1500v can ruin your survivors entire day. Do I have to say it? WATCH OUT FOR THE HIGH VOLTAGE. If you don't have experience with it DON'T WORK ALONE. There's a reason they used to tell the old techs to keep one hand in their pocket - it prevented getting a lethal level of current from hot (one hand) to ground (the other hand) and incidentally through the chest. The heart muscle does it's thing with millivolts and milliamps. Matt, I don't mean to be insulting, or demeaning your skills, but this is YOUR LIFE we are talking about. If I were in your shoes when ever I was going to have my hands inside that beast with the power on I'd have a second person in the room, even if they were sitting in a chair across the room and studying a textbook. Or watching TV. Show them what switch to flip off (or better yet what power cord to unplug) before they drag your ass out of the cabinet and begin practicing their CPR skills. Mike WA6ILQ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Not true. The FCC has upheld local bandplans. Coordinated or not - they apply to everyone. It doesn't even have to be a repeater issue. True, as long as no interference is created, they likely won't get involved, but if there is, and one user is operating according to the bandplan and the other is not, they will side with the one operating according to the bandplan. Coordination should not be an issue since any operation contrary to the bandplan should not be coordinated (unless it's grandfathered). Joe M. Dave wrote: That is only true if you choose to get a coordination. It is not mandatory. Only if some kind of interference complaint surfaces does the fcc place creedance of any kind to the coordination thing.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Most antenna specs in the band are for 800 kHz max. That's why our area has 500 kHz splits - for duplexed repeaters. We also have 1.0 MHz splits. As any 1.7 MHz bandplan would destroy the 500 kHz split band, I don't foresee that happening here anytime soon. There is also the fact that everyone around is is running either 500 kHz or 1 MHz splits. There is also the fact that there is a local TV Channel 2 station which forces usable systems to the lower part of the band. With a 1.7 MHz split, that means all your TXs will be within 1.3 MHz of the broadcast interference. Granted, that will change next February for us (and become a problem for others), but that's only one solid technical reason for not going with a 1.7 MHz split plan. Joe M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some areas have AM stations on 1000 KHz making the 1 MHz split a non-starter. The 0.5 MHz split solves that and was popular when mobile transmitters had a tough time with repeat/direct (remember those radios?). The 1.7 MHz split also solves this and usually is not a problem for newer radios (but may be for the antenna!). I've seen listings where the single site is on 1.7 MHz split with an offsite receiver on the 1 MHz split. Mike/W5JR ---[Original Message]--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sep 3, 2008 7:07:30 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater Where did you hear that? It's certainly not true. 1.7 MHz is the split in some areas, but others use 0.5, 1.0, or 1.6 MHz. Joe M. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. Yahoo! Groups Links
[Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
Local Band plans are fine except when skip opens up on 6 meters and nobody can win or utilize an interference fight. Look to see how many domestic users are left in low band vhf in relation to say 30 years ago. Unless the sunspot cycles have stopped (which according to the ARRL they may have ;-) non standard plans on low vhf frequencies are a design for trouble at least once every 11 years or so. I know, use PL/DPL...that will eliminate any interference...(let's not get that started again!) LW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. The FCC has upheld local bandplans. Coordinated or not - they apply to everyone. It doesn't even have to be a repeater issue. True, as long as no interference is created, they likely won't get involved, but if there is, and one user is operating according to the bandplan and the other is not, they will side with the one operating according to the bandplan. Coordination should not be an issue since any operation contrary to the bandplan should not be coordinated (unless it's grandfathered). Joe M. Dave wrote: That is only true if you choose to get a coordination. It is not mandatory. Only if some kind of interference complaint surfaces does the fcc place creedance of any kind to the coordination thing.
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 800 not working
L1 shows 0.17v upto 460mhz then it shows 460mhz = 2.5v, 465mhz = 9v, 470 = 14.8v, 475 = 3.8v, 480 = 9v
[Repeater-Builder] 6 meter Repeater
Well regardless if wether 1.7mhz split in the 6 meter band is or is not a national US band plan split it is an excepted split by the Kansas State Repeater Cordinator as my repeater is cordinated on 52.850/51.150 by them and has been for over 2 years. Just getting it back on the air at a new site. Wasn't trying a war here just trying to get some answers on the db isolation needed and exceptibale vertical antenna seperation needed for a 1.7mhz split on 6 meters, which is my reason for posting but have failed to see anyone give the answers I needed. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] 6 meter Repeater
On Sep 3, 2008, at 8:18 PM, Eric Harrison wrote: Well regardless if wether 1.7mhz split in the 6 meter band is or is not a national US band plan split it is an excepted split by the Kansas State Repeater Cordinator as my repeater is cordinated on 52.850/51.150 by them and has been for over 2 years. Just getting it back on the air at a new site. Wasn't trying a war here just trying to get some answers on the db isolation needed and exceptibale vertical antenna seperation needed for a 1.7mhz split on 6 meters, which is my reason for posting but have failed to see anyone give the answers I needed. Eric N7JYS No war, Eric... just discussing. Someone mentioned they needed to know what your expected transmitter power was to help with the isolation numbers. Did you post that? -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] ge uhf high power
hi i am looking for ge uhf solid state high power 88 splyt 200watts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] tx rx duplexers
hi looking to buy a set of tx rx for uhf 440 that are ham band ready 350 watt 606-215-0441
RE: [Repeater-Builder] 6 meter Repeater
Eric, Your question cannot be answered properly unless you provide the power output of your transmitter and the 12 dB SINAD sensitivity of your receiver. Therefore, I will offer some calculations based on some assumed values: 25 watt transmitter, 0.35 uV receiver, 1.7 MHz split: 237 feet vertical separation, 13,368 feet horizontal. 50 watt transmitter, 0.35 uV receiver, 1.7 MHz split: 282 feet vertical separation, 18,905 feet horizontal. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Harrison Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:18 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] 6 meter Repeater Well regardless if whether 1.7MHz split in the 6 meter band is or is not a national US band plan split, it is an accepted split by the Kansas State Repeater Cordinator as my repeater is cordinated on 52.850/51.150 by them and has been for over 2 years. Just getting it back on the air at a new site. Wasn't trying a war here just trying to get some answers on the dB isolation needed and acceptable vertical antenna separation needed for a 1.7MHz split on 6 meters, which is my reason for posting but have failed to see anyone give the answers I needed. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ge uhf high power
On Sep 3, 2008, at 8:43 PM, kb4ptj wrote: hi i am looking for ge uhf solid state high power 88 splyt 200watts There is no GE MASTR II (88-split indicates that you're looking specifically for a GE product) that does 200W at UHF. The MASTR II Station/Repeater PA (solid-state as you requested) maxes out at 100W. In the Station/Repeater form, it's rated for 100% duty-cycle (depending on altitude and ambient temperature) at that power level, which is usually *plenty* for a good repeater. Most of us run them de-rated to about 80W or so, in practice. Minus duplexer, isolator, and maybe (hopefully not) feedline losses, the power that reaches the antenna is often quite a bit less. You could run a lower power MASTR II solid-state PA into a modern 200W PA, but I doubt the few more dB from 100W to 200W is really going to produce a balanced repeater for 5W hand-held users or even 50W mobile users, unless you're planning on building multiple receiver sites and/ or REALLY work hard on *maximum* performance of your receive system. Typically the only time the use of higher power PA's is required is in that type of application. It often requires a very expensive duplexer capable of handling the higher power and also that provides enough isolation between transmitter and receiver frequencies at the higher power levels. I haven't seen the usual reminder on the list lately, and they're too modest to remind folks: Don't forget that the guys that host the Repeater-Builder list, Repeater Builder, Inc. the company do a nice job on MASTR II repeaters and they have parts in stock. Have you talked to them about your needs? See their commercial portion of the repeater-builder website at: http://www.repeater-builder.com/custombuilt/index.html -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
At 9/3/2008 16:07, you wrote: Where did you hear that? It's certainly not true. 1.7 MHz is the split in some areas, but others use 0.5, 1.0, or 1.6 MHz. Joe M. The 1.7 mhz is the new aloted band plan split for 6 meter band in the US. SoCal uses 500 kHz. Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter repeater
At 9/3/2008 16:11, you wrote: Those and the local bandplan in your area. There is no national 6M bandplan in the repeater sub-bands. In fact, there is no national bandplan in ANY of the repeater sub-bands. The last one that was national was 440, but that saw its demise with part of CA changing to 20 kHz channel spacing from 12.5/25 kHz spacing. Some areas are now also using 10.0 kHz spacing on 440. Joe M. What areas are using 10 kHz spacing? The ONLY 10 kHz spacing I know of here is 2 tiny 40 kHz segments on 2 meters where 4 D-Star pairs are spaced @ 10 kHz. Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Wits End -- Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions)
At 9/3/2008 08:09, you wrote: Desense (actual Cable-Q contributions) Hi John, There is a case where you can actually be fighting a complex problem with unwanted contributions actually made/introduced by the cable (feed-line) Q. To be more specific some combination of the antenna, duplexer, hardware circuit(s) in addition to or along with the coaxial cable. Where I'm going with all of this is... There have been example cases where unwanted product generation has been fixed by replacing portions of the antenna system coaxial cables with a less or lower Q cable. Some transmit antenna combiner low-level generation issues have been addressed with lower-Q coax jumpers. Not really a fix. Lower Q in transmissionlinespeak is lossy. Using a lossy cable to fix some interaction between, say a TX duplexer and/or antenna is IMO a band-aid solution. I have replaced higher-Q feed-lines with more resistive cable, which in more than one case has solved an otherwise pesky gremlin - grunge problem. Yes, attenuators can fix a lot of interference issues, if you don't need optimum sensitivity or most efficient TX power transfer out of your system. Particularly at low-level sites, I find I need all the performance I can get have very little margin for any additional loss in either the TX or RX path. One other item... pay attention to the actual RG-214 description aka mfgrs label as there seem to be a larger number of clone cables, which is not actually the mil-spec RG-214 cable real deal. The key phrase to watch out for is RG-214 TYPE. I've seen copper shielded coax with this designation. Bob NO6B
[Repeater-Builder] Re: 6 meter Repeater
Ok Great this helps. Any idea the db of isolation say for 50 watts and .35uv 12db sinad @ 1.7 mhz split? Eric N7JYS -- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eric, Your question cannot be answered properly unless you provide the power output of your transmitter and the 12 dB SINAD sensitivity of your receiver. Therefore, I will offer some calculations based on some assumed values: 25 watt transmitter, 0.35 uV receiver, 1.7 MHz split: 237 feet vertical separation, 13,368 feet horizontal. 50 watt transmitter, 0.35 uV receiver, 1.7 MHz split: 282 feet vertical separation, 18,905 feet horizontal. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Harrison Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:18 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] 6 meter Repeater Well regardless if whether 1.7MHz split in the 6 meter band is or is not a national US band plan split, it is an accepted split by the Kansas State Repeater Cordinator as my repeater is cordinated on 52.850/51.150 by them and has been for over 2 years. Just getting it back on the air at a new site. Wasn't trying a war here just trying to get some answers on the dB isolation needed and acceptable vertical antenna separation needed for a 1.7MHz split on 6 meters, which is my reason for posting but have failed to see anyone give the answers I needed. Eric N7JYS
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 800 not working
cisfuk wrote: L1 shows 0.17v upto 460mhz then it shows 460mhz = 2.5v, 465mhz = 9v, 470 = 14.8v, 475 = 3.8v, 480 = 9v Discounting the 475 and 480 MHz readings, it is likely currently centered / tuned for about 466 MHz. It cannot require the same VCO voltage at two largely disparate frequencies. I cannot rationalize why you got the values listed at 475 and 480 MHz. If you create a test EPROM that has 440 through 480 RX in 2.5 MHz steps, then find the center freq (closest to 10V), and then: Move down 2.5MHz and re-adjust the VCO for 10V. Repeat the line above until you get where you want to be frequency wise. Set the exact RX frequency and re-adjust the VCO for 10V one last time. Finally, adjust the helicals for best LO injection and sensitivity. Ed Yoho W6YJ
RE: [Repeater-Builder] For Sale: CAT Controller
Doug, Did you sell the RLS boards? I'm interested.. - Mike From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Fitts Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 10:02 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] For Sale: CAT Controller I have for sale two new CAT RLS-1000B controllers. Here is a link http://www.catauto.com/rls1000.html that describes what they are and how they are used in a typical repeater system. I have one additional controller board in full operation [but not for sale] attached to my 900mhz repeater system. I can select one of three remotebase radios connected through the 1000B board or, all three radios if necessary. One RLS board is mounted in the factory model RME-200L rack mounted enclosure and the other board is mounted in a Bud aluminum chassis and mounted on a 19 inch rack panel [a previous repeater project]. Asking $130 + shipping for the board in the factory enclosure and $145 + shipping for the board in the Bud chassis and rack panel package. If interested please email me direct, off the list and I will provide to you all the particulars to include photos of the each unit. 73 Doug W7FDF [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:cienegaradio%40cox.net __ NOD32 3401 (20080829) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
[Repeater-Builder] Re: ge uhf high power
You might try contacting Larry K7LJ. He posts on here occasionally and I know he had a couple of these the last time I talked to him, but that was a couple months ago. They are more like 350 Watts. Joe --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kb4ptj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi i am looking for ge uhf solid state high power 88 splyt 200watts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] Re: ge uhf high power
oops, UHF are 225-250 Watts, it is the VHF that are 350 Watts. Joe --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Joe Burkleo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might try contacting Larry K7LJ. He posts on here occasionally and I know he had a couple of these the last time I talked to him, but that was a couple months ago. They are more like 350 Watts. Joe --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kb4ptj kb4ptj@ wrote: hi i am looking for ge uhf solid state high power 88 splyt 200watts kb4ptj@
[Repeater-Builder] Re: ge uhf high power
Also as Nate said, GE did not make a high power solid state amp. The Mastr II high power stations that I referred to use a normal Mastr II solid state PA to drive a tube amplifier to acheive the 225-250 Watts on UHF or 375 Watts on VHF. If you are not familiar with high power tube transmitters and working with high voltages, stay away from these. They are not for the faint of heart, and the voltages present can be quite deadly. Joe - WA7JAW --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Joe Burkleo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might try contacting Larry K7LJ. He posts on here occasionally and I know he had a couple of these the last time I talked to him, but that was a couple months ago. They are more like 350 Watts. Joe --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, kb4ptj kb4ptj@ wrote: hi i am looking for ge uhf solid state high power 88 splyt 200watts kb4ptj@
