Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[Ken Arck]

At 09:54 PM 11/14/2009, larryjspamme...@teleport.com wrote:
>
>
>The "Red Book" was most helpful with the tuneup and crystal ordering info.
>
>
<--I still have mine :-)

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of repeater controllers and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net
"We don't just make 'em. We use 'em!"

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount

[JOHN MACKEY]

I have a T-Power crystalled up on 29.6 with factory PL and factory Extender
still working (last time I fired it up was about 10 years ago).

I simply can't part with it.

-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:34:14 PM PST
From: "skipp025" 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] re: mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount

> 
> > I have a mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount (all 
> > tube, vibrator supply) in the garage with 34/94 in 
> > it  still works, too! 
> 
> Please seek professional help... tell the shrink "there's 
> a boat-anchor in your soup". 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> s. 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[JOHN MACKEY]

No, I do not have to pay the electric bill.  

I only have to replace tubes about every 5-8 years.

-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:39:01 PM PST
From: "skipp025" 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

> > "JOHN MACKEY"  wrote:
> > I still have several Mastr Pro repeaters in operation 
> > on 6 meters, 2 meters, & UHF.
> 
> Ohhh ouch. 
> 
> Memories of burnt finger tips from trying to pull hot 
> tubes. 
> 
> Are you paying the site electric bill John?  It's gotta 
> cost ya dearly to heat those tubes 24/7. 
> 
> s. 
> 
> 
> 
> 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[skipp025]

You don't even need the Audio PA 12 Volts if you don't 
want or care for local speaker audio. 

There is such a glut of used surplus radio equipment on 
the market right now that I doubt many people will bother 
with using Master Pro-Receivers when a crystal has to be 
ordered for each frequency change. 

Of recent surprise to me is how much GE Master II stuff 
is flooding into the used radio market and how dirt cheap 
it is... 

I've even started to see Master 3 equipment coming out to 
hit the surplus market and Ebay... selling for a lot less 
than I would have suspected they/it would. 

The trouble is... fewer people want to go the surplus 
equipment route.  And for political reasons I won't throw 
out why I think that's a real shame (and part of what is 
really wrong with much, not all of the American Mindset)... 

cheers,  

s. 



> n...@... wrote:
>
> At 11/14/2009 09:39, you wrote:
> 
> 
> >Still... a Master Pro Receiver runs on 10 and 12 Volts
> 
> Any part of a Mastr Pro RX need 12 V other than the audio PA?  IIRC the 
> Mastr II RX only needs 10 V if you don't power up the audio PA.
> 
> >(it's solid state) and has one heck of a great receiver
> >so they could easily stay in operation (and often do...)
> 
> They're OK, but every one I've used had a odd, asymmetrical IF 
> response.  OK if the signal is on channel, but the squelch acts strangely 
> on off-channel signals.  If the signal is above the RX's freq. the squelch 
> blows open even if the signal is so weak it's unintelligible, while if the 
> signal into the RX is below center the squelch will act tight.  That always 
> bothered me.  The VHF Mastr Pro's IF is a bit wide for 15 kHz channel 
> spacing on 2 meters.  I still have one UHF Mastr Pro RX in service here at 
> the hub site as a backfill RX, but I don't go looking for them anymore.  I 
> prefer using Mastr II or MVP RXs now.
> 
> Bob NO6B
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[skipp025]

> Bah...
> My first repeater was built from a PRE Prog xmtr 
> and a Motorola Sensicon receiver (complete with pipes!)

Careful now... If you start down memory lane I could help 
you with a class reunion. I know your shipping address and 
I know where a fair number of Sensicons and Pre-Progs are 
sitting nearby. 

s.  

Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] re: mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount

[Marcus]

i love those old style systems,

i have an old viabrator model car radio ( HMV )
pity you didn't live in NZ , id buy that unit off of you, just for it's 
nostelgia appeal


Marcus



skipp025 wrote:
 



> I have a mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount (all
> tube, vibrator supply) in the garage with 34/94 in
> it still works, too!

Please seek professional help... tell the shrink "there's
a boat-anchor in your soup".

s.

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[skipp025]

> "JOHN MACKEY"  wrote:
> I still have several Mastr Pro repeaters in operation 
> on 6 meters, 2 meters, & UHF.

Ohhh ouch. 

Memories of burnt finger tips from trying to pull hot 
tubes. 

Are you paying the site electric bill John?  It's gotta 
cost ya dearly to heat those tubes 24/7. 

s. 

[Repeater-Builder] re: mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount

[skipp025]

> I have a mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount (all 
> tube, vibrator supply) in the garage with 34/94 in 
> it  still works, too! 

Please seek professional help... tell the shrink "there's 
a boat-anchor in your soup". 







s. 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB - FM History

[George Henry]

I have a mid-50's vintage Motorola trunk-mount (all tube, vibrator supply) 
in the garage with 34/94 in it  still works, too!

George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413


- Original Message - 
From: "lenaw12" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 9:26 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB - FM History


The history of the "right coast" FM development is pretty accurately 
described on page 59 of this document:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/11595271/The-History-of-Ham-Radio

I haven't quoted it for copyright reasons but it gives a sane take to  all 
the madness of the time. 146.94 was the defacto standard repeater channel 
that was perfect for the traveling ham because every city had a repeater on 
that pair.

BTW...I still have some Progline crystals just in case anyone wants to try a 
"new" repeater  ;-)

Len

RE: [Repeater-Builder] OT - now I know where all of the older neat radios went....

[Mark]

If I had that guy's money, I'd burn mine...  hehehe
NICE collection!

Mark - N9WYS

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Mike Morris WA6ILQ
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 6:29 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] OT - now I know where all of the older neat
radios went

Check the photos at 

Mike WA6ILQ

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

Chuck,
THANK YOU.  That clarifies that.  Now, the stupid part.  Where do I send the 
email from my email client.  I've never done that before.
TA
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Kelsey"  wrote:
>
> If you are posting your message from the Yahoo web site, you cannot send an 
> attachment. You can if you are sending it from an email client.
> 
> Chuck
> WB2EDV
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "wb6dgn" 
> To: 
> Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 10:55 PM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB
> 
> 
> > OK, I guess I'd better calm down and explain.  After I've composed the 
> > message, how do I tell the system that I want to include an attachment?  I 
> > don't see anything to click on to indicate that I want to send the 
> > attachment.
> > TA
> >
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

[hybridfan]

I have a number of those magazines also.  I used to contribute information 
about FM activities in San Diego County to FM Magazine.

I'm working on a history of early amateur FM in the San Diego area (when I get 
time).  Those old magazines help jog the old memory.

Ken Decker WA6OSB


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris WA6ILQ  wrote:
>
> As I keep posting, we have a 100gb server allocation, and
> are using less than 10% of it (9.82 gb to be precise).
> 
> If anybody wants to scan stuff, and send me PDFs, I'll create
> a new directory on repeater-builder and post them.
> 
> Mike WA6ILQ
> 
> At 02:32 PM 11/14/09 -0800, you wrote:
> 
> 
> >I have only a very few of the old RPT and FM magazines, but they 
> >were sure interesting reading when we were first getting started in 
> >FM and Repeaters. What a great resource they would be if they were 
> >scanned and available on-line somewhere!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: sjotrollet
> >Sent: Nov 14, 2009 9:36 AM
> >To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines
> >
> >
> >
> >Following items from an estate. SK was deep into VHF/UHF and had
> >2 repeaters (2m & 220). Retired PD radio tech. Total volume about
> >a "whiskey" box and can be sent by media mail. Price $25 plus
> >postage. No extra charge for packing.
> >
> >FM Magazine
> >81 copies of "FM" Magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Same format at 
> >the old "73" magazines. Some duplicates. Good condition
> >
> >FM Bulletin
> >52 copies of "FM Bulletin" magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Some 
> >duplicates. good condition.
> >
> >73
> >Walt (N4GL)
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

OK!  NUTS TO IT!  Guess you'll just have to take my word for it.  From the mid 
'50s when I first got interested in ham radio until I lost interest in about 
'67, the Tech. class licensee ONLY had access to 145 to 146.99...  I have no 
idea what happened after about '68 as I had other things on my mind.  I have 
documentation to confirm what I'm saying but I have no idea how to navigate 
this yahoo fiasco.  If anyone cares enough, send me an email and I WILL forward 
confirmation of what I am claiming.
TA

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "wb6dgn"  wrote:
>
> 
> HUH???
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer  wrote:
> >
> > Second Try...
> > 
> > Kevin Custer wrote:
> > > wb6dgn wrote:
> > >> HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS 
> > >> YAHOO CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT.  THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER 
> > >> HOST THAN THIS JOKE!
> > >
> > > Test Attachment:
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
>

Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[Marcus]

ok so i was half right, but yahoo is still c**p



Ray Brown wrote:
 
[Attachment(s) <#TopText> from Ray Brown included below]


  Just trying something...
 
 
Ray, KB0STN
 
 


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

*Sent:* Saturday, November 14, 2009 9:35 PM
*Subject:* Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

you cannot, as yahoo is C**p

i use Gmail for my emailing attachments



wb6dgn wrote:
 


HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST. AS USUAL,
THIS YAHOO CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT. THERE'S GOT TO BE A
BETTER HOST THAN THIS JOKE!
Tom A.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
, "wb6dgn"
 wrote:
>
> If I can figure out how to do it right, I have a scan from the ARRL
> Handbook form 1961 and also the License Manual from 1961. Both
list the
> frequency assignments for the various license classes. You will see
> that, for Technician Class license, the 2meter assignment was
145 to 147
> Mc. NOT 144 to 148 as some have stated. If the attachment, titled
> ARRL1961 doesn't show up, would a moderator please explain more
clearly
> than yahoo, how to send it.
> Tom DGN
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
, MCH  wrote:
> >
> > I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band"
didn't come
> > until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it
could
> have
> > been the early 80s.
> >
> > Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular -
because the
> > techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
> >
> > The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610,
146.670,
> > 146.730, Etc.), then went to 30 kHz in most areas - going to
20 kHz
> > channels in some, then the 30 kHz was again broken down into
15 kHz
> > channels. The sub-band was always 20 kHz until some areas changed
> that, too.
> >
> > Check out some of the older RDs for more info. Some of the
early 70s
> > ones even listed the Input/Output modulation, such as 5/5 or
15/5 or
> > 15/15 (meaning deviation in / deviation out).
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > wb6dgn wrote:
> > >
> > > "duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M,
they were
> only
> > > allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > > the 80's."
> > >
> > > Close, but not exactly. When repeaters first came to be
used on the
> ham bands in the late '50s/early '60s the 2m band from 144 to
148 Mc was
> only available to General class licensees and above. Novice (yes,
> Novice had some 2m voice privileges at that time) and Technician
> licensees were only allowed to operate in the 2m band from 145
to 147
> Mc. Therefore if a repeater owner wanted to make his repeater
available
> to the widest "audience" he had to keep both input and output
within the
> 145 to 147 range. Interestingly, there was a repeater in the S.
F. Bay
> area (somewhere down the Peninsula, I believe, maybe Stanford)
that did
> have it's input and output on 144 and 147+ with the clearly stated
> reason that Novices and Techs. were not welcome. Never seemed
to bother
> anyone I knew; that group carried on some pretty "stuffy"
conversations
> anyway and there were enough 145 to 147 machines to go around
including
> at least one AM repeater. However the only repeater at the time
(tha
> > t I
> > > know of) using 600Kc separation was the WB6AAE repeater in the
> foothills east of Oakland on Grizzly Peak. If they had a role in
> establishing the later standard, I have no idea
> > > Tom DGN
> > >
> > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
, wd8chl wd8chl@ wrote:
> > >> Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis wrote:
> > >>> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on
the ham
> bands? seems
> > >>> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes
through all
> the ham
> > >>> bands.
> > >>>
> > >>> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter
repeaters go to
> 2 or 3 mhz
> > >>> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode
instead
> of the same
> > >>> old 10 khz fm.
> > >>>
> > >>> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> > >>>
> > >>> one can imagine though.
> > >>>
> > >>> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of
> narrow band
> > >>> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2
meters.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[Chuck Kelsey]

If you are posting your message from the Yahoo web site, you cannot send an 
attachment. You can if you are sending it from an email client.

Chuck
WB2EDV


- Original Message - 
From: "wb6dgn" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 10:55 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB


> OK, I guess I'd better calm down and explain.  After I've composed the 
> message, how do I tell the system that I want to include an attachment?  I 
> don't see anything to click on to indicate that I want to send the 
> attachment.
> TA
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

OK, I guess I'd better calm down and explain.  After I've composed the message, 
how do I tell the system that I want to include an attachment?  I don't see 
anything to click on to indicate that I want to send the attachment.
TA

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer  wrote:
>
> wb6dgn wrote:
> > HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS YAHOO 
> > CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT.  THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER HOST THAN 
> > THIS JOKE!
> 
> Test Attachment:
> 
> Kevin
>

[Repeater-Builder] Attachments

[Kevin Custer]

Kevin Custer wrote:

Second Try...


This list was originally set up to accept and pass attachments.  
Somehow, that function was changed to strip the attachments and keep 
them on the Yahoo Site.


The mode has been changed back to the original configuration.  Please 
use it wisely.  Those not wanting to get attachments in their inbox can 
go to the Yahoo site and change the way you want to receive mail from 
this list.


Kevin Custer
List Owner

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

HUH???
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer  wrote:
>
> Second Try...
> 
> Kevin Custer wrote:
> > wb6dgn wrote:
> >> HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS 
> >> YAHOO CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT.  THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER 
> >> HOST THAN THIS JOKE!
> >
> > Test Attachment:
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > 
> >
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[Kevin Custer]

Second Try...

Kevin Custer wrote:
wb6dgn
wrote:
  
  HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO
THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS YAHOO CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT. 
THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER HOST THAN THIS JOKE!

  
  
Test Attachment:
  
  
Kevin
  
  
  
  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB [1 Attachment]

[Kevin Custer]

wb6dgn wrote:
> HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS YAHOO 
> CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT.  THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER HOST THAN THIS 
> JOKE!

Test Attachment:

Kevin

Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB [1 Attachment]

[Ray Brown]

  Just trying something...


Ray, KB0STN


  - Original Message - 
  From: Marcus 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 9:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB




  you cannot, as yahoo is C**p 

  i use Gmail for my emailing attachments



  wb6dgn wrote: 
  
HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST. AS USUAL, THIS YAHOO 
CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT. THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER HOST THAN THIS 
JOKE!
Tom A.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "wb6dgn"  wrote:
>
> If I can figure out how to do it right, I have a scan from the ARRL
> Handbook form 1961 and also the License Manual from 1961. Both list the
> frequency assignments for the various license classes. You will see
> that, for Technician Class license, the 2meter assignment was 145 to 147
> Mc. NOT 144 to 148 as some have stated. If the attachment, titled
> ARRL1961 doesn't show up, would a moderator please explain more clearly
> than yahoo, how to send it.
> Tom DGN
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH  wrote:
> >
> > I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come
> > until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could
> have
> > been the early 80s.
> >
> > Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the
> > techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
> >
> > The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670,
> > 146.730, Etc.), then went to 30 kHz in most areas - going to 20 kHz
> > channels in some, then the 30 kHz was again broken down into 15 kHz
> > channels. The sub-band was always 20 kHz until some areas changed
> that, too.
> >
> > Check out some of the older RDs for more info. Some of the early 70s
> > ones even listed the Input/Output modulation, such as 5/5 or 15/5 or
> > 15/15 (meaning deviation in / deviation out).
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > wb6dgn wrote:
> > >
> > > "duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > > allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > > the 80's."
> > >
> > > Close, but not exactly. When repeaters first came to be used on the
> ham bands in the late '50s/early '60s the 2m band from 144 to 148 Mc was
> only available to General class licensees and above. Novice (yes,
> Novice had some 2m voice privileges at that time) and Technician
> licensees were only allowed to operate in the 2m band from 145 to 147
> Mc. Therefore if a repeater owner wanted to make his repeater available
> to the widest "audience" he had to keep both input and output within the
> 145 to 147 range. Interestingly, there was a repeater in the S. F. Bay
> area (somewhere down the Peninsula, I believe, maybe Stanford) that did
> have it's input and output on 144 and 147+ with the clearly stated
> reason that Novices and Techs. were not welcome. Never seemed to bother
> anyone I knew; that group carried on some pretty "stuffy" conversations
> anyway and there were enough 145 to 147 machines to go around including
> at least one AM repeater. However the only repeater at the time (tha
> > t I
> > > know of) using 600Kc separation was the WB6AAE repeater in the
> foothills east of Oakland on Grizzly Peak. If they had a role in
> establishing the later standard, I have no idea
> > > Tom DGN
> > >
> > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, wd8chl wd8chl@ wrote:
> > >> Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis wrote:
> > >>> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on the ham
> bands? seems
> > >>> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes through all
> the ham
> > >>> bands.
> > >>>
> > >>> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to
> 2 or 3 mhz
> > >>> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead
> of the same
> > >>> old 10 khz fm.
> > >>>
> > >>> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> > >>>
> > >>> one can imagine though.
> > >>>
> > >>> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of
> narrow band
> > >>> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2 meters.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> i still can't imagine how the 600 khz split was decided for 2
> meters when
> > >>> there is room for at least a 2 mhz split.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > >> allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > >> the 80's.
> > >>
> > >> No-2M is too populated to do any changes. Not gonna happen until
> they
> > >> just flat stop making FM gear. 

Re: [SPAM] [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[Marcus]

you cannot, as yahoo is C**p

i use Gmail for my emailing attachments



wb6dgn wrote:
 

HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST. AS USUAL, THIS 
YAHOO CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT. THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER 
HOST THAN THIS JOKE!

Tom A.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
, "wb6dgn"  
wrote:

>
> If I can figure out how to do it right, I have a scan from the ARRL
> Handbook form 1961 and also the License Manual from 1961. Both list the
> frequency assignments for the various license classes. You will see
> that, for Technician Class license, the 2meter assignment was 145 to 147
> Mc. NOT 144 to 148 as some have stated. If the attachment, titled
> ARRL1961 doesn't show up, would a moderator please explain more clearly
> than yahoo, how to send it.
> Tom DGN
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
, MCH  wrote:

> >
> > I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come
> > until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could
> have
> > been the early 80s.
> >
> > Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the
> > techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
> >
> > The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670,
> > 146.730, Etc.), then went to 30 kHz in most areas - going to 20 kHz
> > channels in some, then the 30 kHz was again broken down into 15 kHz
> > channels. The sub-band was always 20 kHz until some areas changed
> that, too.
> >
> > Check out some of the older RDs for more info. Some of the early 70s
> > ones even listed the Input/Output modulation, such as 5/5 or 15/5 or
> > 15/15 (meaning deviation in / deviation out).
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > wb6dgn wrote:
> > >
> > > "duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > > allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > > the 80's."
> > >
> > > Close, but not exactly. When repeaters first came to be used on the
> ham bands in the late '50s/early '60s the 2m band from 144 to 148 Mc was
> only available to General class licensees and above. Novice (yes,
> Novice had some 2m voice privileges at that time) and Technician
> licensees were only allowed to operate in the 2m band from 145 to 147
> Mc. Therefore if a repeater owner wanted to make his repeater available
> to the widest "audience" he had to keep both input and output within the
> 145 to 147 range. Interestingly, there was a repeater in the S. F. Bay
> area (somewhere down the Peninsula, I believe, maybe Stanford) that did
> have it's input and output on 144 and 147+ with the clearly stated
> reason that Novices and Techs. were not welcome. Never seemed to bother
> anyone I knew; that group carried on some pretty "stuffy" conversations
> anyway and there were enough 145 to 147 machines to go around including
> at least one AM repeater. However the only repeater at the time (tha
> > t I
> > > know of) using 600Kc separation was the WB6AAE repeater in the
> foothills east of Oakland on Grizzly Peak. If they had a role in
> establishing the later standard, I have no idea
> > > Tom DGN
> > >
> > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
, wd8chl wd8chl@ wrote:

> > >> Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis wrote:
> > >>> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on the ham
> bands? seems
> > >>> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes through all
> the ham
> > >>> bands.
> > >>>
> > >>> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to
> 2 or 3 mhz
> > >>> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead
> of the same
> > >>> old 10 khz fm.
> > >>>
> > >>> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> > >>>
> > >>> one can imagine though.
> > >>>
> > >>> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of
> narrow band
> > >>> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2 meters.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> i still can't imagine how the 600 khz split was decided for 2
> meters when
> > >>> there is room for at least a 2 mhz split.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > >> allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > >> the 80's.
> > >>
> > >> No-2M is too populated to do any changes. Not gonna happen until
> they
> > >> just flat stop making FM gear. Not in my life time, not in your
> kids
> > >> lifetimes, probably not in your grandkids lifetimes either.
> > >>
> > >> Same with the 150-174 LMR band...WAY to much gear out there to
> try
> > >> to standardize input/output.
> > >>
> > >> Look at the bright side-at least the ham band HAS a standard. There
> is
> > >> none in the LMR segment.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> --

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

HOW THE H*** DOES ONE ADD THE ATTACHMENT TO THE POST.  AS USUAL, THIS YAHOO 
CRAP IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT.  THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER HOST THAN THIS 
JOKE!
Tom A.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "wb6dgn"  wrote:
>
> If I can figure out how to do it right, I have a scan from the ARRL
> Handbook form 1961 and also the License Manual from 1961.  Both list the
> frequency assignments for the various license classes.  You will see
> that, for Technician Class license, the 2meter assignment was 145 to 147
> Mc. NOT 144 to 148 as some have stated.  If the attachment, titled
> ARRL1961 doesn't show up, would a moderator please explain more clearly
> than yahoo, how to send it.
> Tom DGN
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH  wrote:
> >
> > I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come
> > until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could
> have
> > been the early 80s.
> >
> > Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the
> > techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
> >
> > The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670,
> > 146.730, Etc.), then went to 30 kHz in most areas - going to 20 kHz
> > channels in some, then the 30 kHz was again broken down into 15 kHz
> > channels. The sub-band was always 20 kHz until some areas changed
> that, too.
> >
> > Check out some of the older RDs for more info. Some of the early 70s
> > ones even listed the Input/Output modulation, such as 5/5 or 15/5 or
> > 15/15 (meaning deviation in / deviation out).
> >
> > Joe M.
> >
> > wb6dgn wrote:
> > >
> > > "duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > > allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > > the 80's."
> > >
> > > Close, but not exactly.  When repeaters first came to be used on the
> ham bands in the late '50s/early '60s the 2m band from 144 to 148 Mc was
> only available to General class licensees and above.  Novice (yes,
> Novice had some 2m voice privileges at that time) and Technician
> licensees were only allowed to operate in the 2m band from 145 to 147
> Mc.  Therefore if a repeater owner wanted to make his repeater available
> to the widest "audience" he had to keep both input and output within the
> 145 to 147 range.  Interestingly, there was a repeater in the S. F. Bay
> area (somewhere down the Peninsula, I believe, maybe Stanford) that did
> have it's input and output on 144 and 147+ with the clearly stated
> reason that Novices and Techs. were not welcome.  Never seemed to bother
> anyone I knew; that group carried on some pretty "stuffy" conversations
> anyway and there were enough 145 to 147 machines to go around including
> at least one AM repeater.  However the only repeater at the time (tha
> > t I
> > >   know of) using 600Kc separation was the WB6AAE repeater in the
> foothills east of Oakland on Grizzly Peak.  If they had a role in
> establishing the later standard, I have no idea
> > > Tom DGN
> > >
> > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, wd8chl wd8chl@ wrote:
> > >> Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis wrote:
> > >>> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on the ham
> bands? seems
> > >>> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes through all
> the ham
> > >>> bands.
> > >>>
> > >>> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to
> 2 or 3 mhz
> > >>> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead
> of the same
> > >>> old 10 khz fm.
> > >>>
> > >>> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> > >>>
> > >>> one can imagine though.
> > >>>
> > >>> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of
> narrow band
> > >>> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2 meters.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> i still can't imagine how the 600 khz split was decided for 2
> meters when
> > >>> there is room for at least a 2 mhz split.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
> only
> > >> allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
> until
> > >> the 80's.
> > >>
> > >> No-2M is too populated to do any changes. Not gonna happen until
> they
> > >> just flat stop making FM gear. Not in my life time, not in your
> kids
> > >> lifetimes, probably not in your grandkids lifetimes either.
> > >>
> > >> Same with the 150-174 LMR band...WAY to much gear out there to
> try
> > >> to standardize input/output.
> > >>
> > >> Look at the bright side-at least the ham band HAS a standard. There
> is
> > >> none in the LMR segment.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> > >
> > >
> > > Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > > Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[n4rqy]

Wider splits would be nice.  Usable duplexers would be more available and less 
costly.  .
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

-Original Message-
From: "wb6dgn" 
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 05:03:52 
To: 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB



"another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to 2 or 3 mhz
splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead of the same
old 10 khz fm."

Actually, it's happening now.  There's a very dedicated (and, apparently, very 
wealthy) group of hams using the Public Safety P25 digital protocol on both VHF 
HB and UHF ham bands with some discussion of trying it on 900 as well.  Even on 
the ham market, that equipment isn't cheap and well out of my area of interest. 
 As for the wider splits, performance is such that I see no reason to change 
now.  In the '60s, that may have been a good idea.
Tom DGN

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis" 
 wrote:
>
> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on the ham bands? seems 
> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes through all the ham 
> bands.
> 
> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to 2 or 3 mhz 
> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead of the same 
> old 10 khz fm.
> 
> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> 
> one can imagine though.
> 
> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of narrow band 
> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2 meters.
> 
> 
> i still can't imagine how the 600 khz split was decided for 2 meters when 
> there is room for at least a 2 mhz split.
> 
> i like the idea of injecting the 100 hz tone into a ssb carrier and using it 
> to lock the rit.
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "n0fpe" 
> To: 
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:34 AM
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] ACSSB
> 
> 
> > One thing to remember. Amatuers are NOT authorized to use ACSSB above 
> > 30mhz. Please check part 97 for the exact "modes" we are able to use.
> > heck if we were there would be tons of ACSSB repeaters already modified 
> > into the ham band.
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

[Repeater-Builder] GM300 to 1.25meter 220 band

[harleyrider2265]

Had anyone done this modification, or know of any information available on it.  
I have been told that Australia has a version of the gm300 that does the 220 
band, but they are impossible to find stateside as they are not fcc type 
approved.

[Repeater-Builder] GM300 to 1.25meter 220 band

[harleyrider2265]

Had anyone done this modification, or know of any information available on it.  
I have been told that Australia has a version of the gm300 that does the 220 
band, but they are impossible to find stateside as they are not fcc type 
approved.

[Repeater-Builder] F ree to Good Home

[Randy]

Motorola 
Base Station Power Supply...TPN 1154A
input: 120/220/240VAC50/60Hz
output: 14.1 VDC

You pay shipping from: 54151
(figure about 75#)

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB

[wb6dgn]

If I can figure out how to do it right, I have a scan from the ARRL
Handbook form 1961 and also the License Manual from 1961.  Both list the
frequency assignments for the various license classes.  You will see
that, for Technician Class license, the 2meter assignment was 145 to 147
Mc. NOT 144 to 148 as some have stated.  If the attachment, titled
ARRL1961 doesn't show up, would a moderator please explain more clearly
than yahoo, how to send it.
Tom DGN
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH  wrote:
>
> I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come
> until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could
have
> been the early 80s.
>
> Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the
> techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
>
> The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670,
> 146.730, Etc.), then went to 30 kHz in most areas - going to 20 kHz
> channels in some, then the 30 kHz was again broken down into 15 kHz
> channels. The sub-band was always 20 kHz until some areas changed
that, too.
>
> Check out some of the older RDs for more info. Some of the early 70s
> ones even listed the Input/Output modulation, such as 5/5 or 15/5 or
> 15/15 (meaning deviation in / deviation out).
>
> Joe M.
>
> wb6dgn wrote:
> >
> > "duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
only
> > allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
until
> > the 80's."
> >
> > Close, but not exactly.  When repeaters first came to be used on the
ham bands in the late '50s/early '60s the 2m band from 144 to 148 Mc was
only available to General class licensees and above.  Novice (yes,
Novice had some 2m voice privileges at that time) and Technician
licensees were only allowed to operate in the 2m band from 145 to 147
Mc.  Therefore if a repeater owner wanted to make his repeater available
to the widest "audience" he had to keep both input and output within the
145 to 147 range.  Interestingly, there was a repeater in the S. F. Bay
area (somewhere down the Peninsula, I believe, maybe Stanford) that did
have it's input and output on 144 and 147+ with the clearly stated
reason that Novices and Techs. were not welcome.  Never seemed to bother
anyone I knew; that group carried on some pretty "stuffy" conversations
anyway and there were enough 145 to 147 machines to go around including
at least one AM repeater.  However the only repeater at the time (tha
> t I
> >   know of) using 600Kc separation was the WB6AAE repeater in the
foothills east of Oakland on Grizzly Peak.  If they had a role in
establishing the later standard, I have no idea
> > Tom DGN
> >
> > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, wd8chl wd8chl@ wrote:
> >> Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis wrote:
> >>> wonder why the fcc does not allow acssb above 30 mhz on the ham
bands? seems
> >>> to me they would want to promote more efficient modes through all
the ham
> >>> bands.
> >>>
> >>> another interesting thing would be to see 2 meter repeaters go to
2 or 3 mhz
> >>> splits and employ some form of efficient modulation mode instead
of the same
> >>> old 10 khz fm.
> >>>
> >>> and i am sure we will be all dead before this happens :)
> >>>
> >>> one can imagine though.
> >>>
> >>> better tx/rx isolation, cleaner signals, employ some form of
narrow band
> >>> modulation scheme and we could even ease congestion on 2 meters.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> i still can't imagine how the 600 khz split was decided for 2
meters when
> >>> there is room for at least a 2 mhz split.
> >>>
> >>
> >> duh-because when repeaters were first authorized for 2M, they were
only
> >> allowed from 146 to 148. 144.5-145.5 didn't come into existence
until
> >> the 80's.
> >>
> >> No-2M is too populated to do any changes. Not gonna happen until
they
> >> just flat stop making FM gear. Not in my life time, not in your
kids
> >> lifetimes, probably not in your grandkids lifetimes either.
> >>
> >> Same with the 150-174 LMR band...WAY to much gear out there to
try
> >> to standardize input/output.
> >>
> >> Look at the bright side-at least the ham band HAS a standard. There
is
> >> none in the LMR segment.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date:
07/31/09 05:58:00
> >
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[no6b]

At 11/14/2009 09:39, you wrote:


>Still... a Master Pro Receiver runs on 10 and 12 Volts

Any part of a Mastr Pro RX need 12 V other than the audio PA?  IIRC the 
Mastr II RX only needs 10 V if you don't power up the audio PA.

>(it's solid state) and has one heck of a great receiver
>so they could easily stay in operation (and often do...)

They're OK, but every one I've used had a odd, asymmetrical IF 
response.  OK if the signal is on channel, but the squelch acts strangely 
on off-channel signals.  If the signal is above the RX's freq. the squelch 
blows open even if the signal is so weak it's unintelligible, while if the 
signal into the RX is below center the squelch will act tight.  That always 
bothered me.  The VHF Mastr Pro's IF is a bit wide for 15 kHz channel 
spacing on 2 meters.  I still have one UHF Mastr Pro RX in service here at 
the hub site as a backfill RX, but I don't go looking for them anymore.  I 
prefer using Mastr II or MVP RXs now.

Bob NO6B

[Repeater-Builder] OT - now I know where all of the older neat radios went....

[Tim Ahrens]

Gee, that's OK for a museum.. but an individual?

Think I'll  enlarge some of the pix, just for nostalga!!

Tim

RE: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

[Andrew Seybold]

Mike-when I get the ones I just bought I will scan them and get them to you, 
will take me a while-I know that there are even some articles I wrote, and ones 
about the Northeast FM assn, which tied a lot of the east coast together in the 
late 1960's-and PARA, the Philadelphia Amateur Repeater Assn. -first split site 
repeater went into operation in the 1960's as well, so I will do what I can and 
get you the files.

 

Andy W6AMS (K3ZTP in the old days)

 

From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Morris WA6ILQ
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 4:13 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

 

  

As I keep posting, we have a 100gb server allocation, and 
are using less than 10% of it (9.82 gb to be precise).

If anybody wants to scan stuff, and send me PDFs, I'll create 
a new directory on repeater-builder and post them.

Mike WA6ILQ

At 02:32 PM 11/14/09 -0800, you wrote:



I have only a very few of the old RPT and FM magazines, but they were 
sure interesting reading when we were first getting started in FM and 
Repeaters. What a great resource they would be if they were scanned and 
available on-line somewhere!



 

-Original Message- 

From: sjotrollet 

Sent: Nov 14, 2009 9:36 AM 

To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 

Subject: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines 

  

Following items from an estate. SK was deep into VHF/UHF and had

2 repeaters (2m & 220). Retired PD radio tech. Total volume about

a "whiskey" box and can be sent by media mail. Price $25 plus

postage. No extra charge for packing.

FM Magazine

81 copies of "FM" Magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Same format at the 
old "73" magazines. Some duplicates. Good condition

FM Bulletin

52 copies of "FM Bulletin" magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Some 
duplicates. good condition.

73

Walt (N4GL)

 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

[Eric Lemmon]

Eric,

To each his own.  I have about 60 Motorola HT750 and 30 CP200 radios in my
fleet, and have never had a problem programming or flashing any of them.
The radio failures I have found are the result of user abuse, rather than an
anomaly.  I once watched a (supposedly) experienced Motorola technician at a
Government radio shop brick an Astro Saber III radio while trying to program
it by holding the programming plug against the radio with his hand- rather
than using the attachment screw.  His grip got loose, and the plug slipped
off- certainly a "familiarity breeds contempt" moment! 

I can't complain about the mini-UHF connectors- I use only first-class crimp
connectors from RF Industries, along with the proper cable-prep tools.  I
think they're a good design.

The HT750 radio that you can't flash- did it always have the dust cover or
an RSM plug protecting the side contacts?  If not, a lot of skin oil and
other gunk can contaminate those contacts and lead to an intermittent
connection during programming or flashing.  I use a Gold Guard Pen to clean
both the side contacts on the radio and the programming cable pins, if
there's any doubt about their cleanliness.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Vincent
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 4:19 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

  

Hi Eric,

 

You're right about the speed but I’ve tried 2 different and after a certain
time the software told me to continue and do not click on cancel because the
radio will be unusable…

Anyway I think the only solution is to send the radio to Motorola… And at
the same time I persist and I would like to do it by my self… I don’t
understand why is all the time a little bit more complicated with Moto
stuff, the design is well and it’s solid but for the rest I’m not impress.
Also I hate the Mini-UHF connector on mobile radio, grrr…

 

So, when it’s functional just don’t touch it!

 

73’

Eric VE2VXT /VE7

 



De : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] De la part de Eric Lemmon
Envoyé : 14 novembre 2009 09:57
À : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Objet : RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

 

  

Motorola put out a Service & Repair Notice (SRN) a while back to remind
technicians that not all computers are capable of successfully flashing
firmware upgrades when set to the highest communication speed. If you're
not sure about your system capabilities, use the default 19.6 kB/s speed.
If the program hiccups at the higher speed, a bricked radio may result.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 ] On Behalf Of Eric Lemmon
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 8:24 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Eric,

I am not aware of any means to "clean" the memory. If you send the radio to
Motorola's repair depot, it will come back with a brand-new chassis- a new
radio in an old case- with the latest firmware installed. Of course, you
must have the most recent version of CPS to program it. It is cheaper to
replace the innards in a few minutes than to troubleshoot and repair the
problem- which might take hours.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 ] On Behalf Of Eric Vincent
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 12:55 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Hello Eric,

Thank you for reply. I used the Non Four Line Display Radio firmware and all
of my programming stuff are original from Motorola, RIB, cable and Flash
interface…

I’ve start the process and the programming software stop and ask me to do
not click on cancel to return to the previous option but I think at this
moment it was to late. Right now the radio doesn’t power up, completely
dead!

I have an access to Motorola Online, is it possible to find something to
clean the memory and start again? Is it possible to have any program like TK
for HT and CDM series?

Thanks’ again to everyone who want to help me with that.

73’ Eric VE2VXT /VE7



De : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups

[Repeater-Builder] OT - now I know where all of the older neat radios went....

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

Check the photos at 

Mike WA6ILQ

RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

[Eric Vincent]

Hi Eric,

 

Your right about the speed but I’ve tried 2 different and after a certain
time the software told me to continue and do not click on cancel because the
radio will be unusable…

Anyway I think the only solution is to send the radio to Motorola… And at
the same time I persist and I would like to do it by my self… I don’t
understand why is all the time a little bit more complicated with Moto
stuff, the design is well and it’s solid but for the rest I’m not impress.
Also I hate the Mini-UHF connector on mobile radio, grrr…

 

So, when it’s functional just don’t touch it!

 

73’

Eric VE2VXT /VE7

 

  _  

De : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] De la part de Eric Lemmon
Envoyé : 14 novembre 2009 09:57
À : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Objet : RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

 

  

Motorola put out a Service & Repair Notice (SRN) a while back to remind
technicians that not all computers are capable of successfully flashing
firmware upgrades when set to the highest communication speed. If you're
not sure about your system capabilities, use the default 19.6 kB/s speed.
If the program hiccups at the higher speed, a bricked radio may result.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Lemmon
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 8:24 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Eric,

I am not aware of any means to "clean" the memory. If you send the radio to
Motorola's repair depot, it will come back with a brand-new chassis- a new
radio in an old case- with the latest firmware installed. Of course, you
must have the most recent version of CPS to program it. It is cheaper to
replace the innards in a few minutes than to troubleshoot and repair the
problem- which might take hours.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 ] On Behalf Of Eric Vincent
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 12:55 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Hello Eric,

Thank you for reply. I used the Non Four Line Display Radio firmware and all
of my programming stuff are original from Motorola, RIB, cable and Flash
interface…

I’ve start the process and the programming software stop and ask me to do
not click on cancel to return to the previous option but I think at this
moment it was to late. Right now the radio doesn’t power up, completely
dead!

I have an access to Motorola Online, is it possible to find something to
clean the memory and start again? Is it possible to have any program like TK
for HT and CDM series?

Thanks’ again to everyone who want to help me with that.

73’ Eric VE2VXT /VE7



De : Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 ] De la part de Eric Lemmon
Envoyé : 12 novembre 2009 10:26
À : Repeater-Builder@ 
yahoogroups.com
 
Objet : RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Eric,

You'd be surprised how often a radio gets bricked during a firmware upgrade.
The primary causes are impatience, where the technician disconnects the
cables prematurely because he thinks the operation is complete, and the use
of incorrect cables or flashing adapters. A radio or laptop battery that
dies at the worst possible moment can also be a problem.

Since you appear to be savvy about the long wait between the first and
second beep signals, I wonder if you might have used the wrong firmware
upgrade package. There are two:

"Professional Series Portable Firmware R05.14.03 - Four Line Display Radios"
and
"Professional Series Portable Firmware R05.14.03 - Non Four Line Display
Radios"

The "Non Four Line" firmware is for HT750 and HT1250 radios only. The "Four
Line" firmware is for HT1550 radios. Loading the four-line firmware into an
HT750 will brick it. Assuming you have the proper cables and adapters for
firmware flashing, I suggest trying to load the correct firmware to see if
the radio can be recovered. Otherwise, it's a $275 repair at the depot. Be
aware that once the radio is flashed to firmware version R05.14.03, you
should use HVN9025W 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

[Mike Morris WA6ILQ]

As I keep posting, we have a 100gb server allocation, and
are using less than 10% of it (9.82 gb to be precise).

If anybody wants to scan stuff, and send me PDFs, I'll create
a new directory on repeater-builder and post them.

Mike WA6ILQ

At 02:32 PM 11/14/09 -0800, you wrote:


I have only a very few of the old RPT and FM magazines, but they 
were sure interesting reading when we were first getting started in 
FM and Repeaters. What a great resource they would be if they were 
scanned and available on-line somewhere!





-Original Message-
From: sjotrollet
Sent: Nov 14, 2009 9:36 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines



Following items from an estate. SK was deep into VHF/UHF and had
2 repeaters (2m & 220). Retired PD radio tech. Total volume about
a "whiskey" box and can be sent by media mail. Price $25 plus
postage. No extra charge for packing.

FM Magazine
81 copies of "FM" Magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Same format at 
the old "73" magazines. Some duplicates. Good condition


FM Bulletin
52 copies of "FM Bulletin" magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Some 
duplicates. good condition.


73
Walt (N4GL)

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Micor repeater audio

[Kevin Custer]

mzfb2001 wrote:
> I was looking in the files section and may have missed it, but I am looking 
> to improve the transmit audio quality on my UHF transmiter. I've noticed that 
> the audio is lacking in lows its not tinny but its not what I would call 
> normal audio from a Micor. The audio levels and on frequency adjustments have 
> made and to seem to be on the money. This is an unmodified repeater station 
> using stock cards and no controller. The receiver is stock and the frequency 
> has been changed to the 440mhz band. The audio coming out of the receiver has 
> fine audio quality.
> Just looking for your thoughts or ideas.
> Thanks for your input
> Mike

I'd make sure the channel element is not limiting the quality of your 
audio.  Consider doing a sweep of the frequency response at several 
deviation levels and see what you have.  I've seen re-crystaled elements 
that were less than good. 

Kevin

Re: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

[Captainlance]

I'll take them.
lance/N2HBA
  - Original Message - 
  From: sjotrollet 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 12:36 PM
  Subject: [Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines



  Following items from an estate. SK was deep into VHF/UHF and had
  2 repeaters (2m & 220). Retired PD radio tech. Total volume about
  a "whiskey" box and can be sent by media mail. Price $25 plus
  postage. No extra charge for packing.

  FM Magazine
  81 copies of "FM" Magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Same format at the old 
"73" magazines. Some duplicates. Good condition

  FM Bulletin
  52 copies of "FM Bulletin" magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Some 
duplicates. good condition.

  73
  Walt (N4GL)



  


--



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
  Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.65/2502 - Release Date: 11/14/09 
07:43:00

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB - FM History

[Rev. Robert P. Chrysafis]

that would be another nice improvement to the ham bands. in addition to the 
national simplex frequencies on 10m/6m/2m/222mhz/70m/900mhz/and 1.2 ghz 
maybe the FCC and or ARRL could designate a national repeater pair on each 
of these bands.

they could utilize a special tone in addition to the regular pl/dpl for 
access similar to the UK.

i beleive the UK uses 1250hz or something like that.

the national simplex frequencies don't seem to be monitored these days as 
people prefer to be on their favorite repeater.

in area's of low activity this proposed national pair could be tied to a 
local active repeater.

i guess of course the national simplex frequencies could also be tied into a 
active repeater as a remote base.

and that would just be a matter of clubs taking the initiative.



- Original Message - 
From: "lenaw12" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 10:26 AM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB - FM History


> The history of the "right coast" FM development is pretty accurately 
> described on page 59 of this document:
>
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/11595271/The-History-of-Ham-Radio
>
> I haven't quoted it for copyright reasons but it gives a sane take to  all 
> the madness of the time. 146.94 was the defacto standard repeater channel 
> that was perfect for the traveling ham because every city had a repeater 
> on that pair.
>
> BTW...I still have some Progline crystals just in case anyone wants to try 
> a "new" repeater  ;-)
>
> Len
>
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH  wrote:
>>
>> I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come
>> until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could have
>> been the early 80s.
>>
>> Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the
>> techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
>>
>> The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670,
>> 146.730, Etc.)
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] is there a guide for programming msf5000 to typeII

[Mark]

I'm not sure, George, but I think you'd need a trunking controller (separate
system) and **several** (i.e., two or more) MSF5000 stations in order to
have a trunked system. 

The 900 MHz MSF5000 I bought from the East Coast was part of a trunked
system, but each station itself was set for only *ONE* of the system's
frequencies.  That company had a 6- (or maybe it was 8- ?) channel trunked
system, and they changed-out *137* stations...

Mark - N9WYS

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com  On Behalf Of George

hi, i would like to reprogram my msf5000 to work with my spectras at typeII
trunked repeater, is there a guide online to read for basics and program
accordingly?

[Repeater-Builder] is there a guide for programming msf5000 to typeII

[George]

hi, i would like to reprogram my msf5000 to work with my spectras at typeII 
trunked repeater, is there a guide online to read for basics and program 
accordingly?

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[Ken Arck]

Bah...

My first repeater was built from a PRE Prog xmtr and a Motorola 
Sensicon receiver (complete with pipes!)

Ken
--
President and CTO - Arcom Communications
Makers of repeater controllers and accessories.
http://www.arcomcontrollers.com/
Authorized Dealers for Kenwood and Telewave and
we offer complete repeater packages!
AH6LE/R - IRLP Node 3000
http://www.irlp.net
"We don't just make 'em. We use 'em!"

RE: [Repeater-Builder] Micor repeater audio

[Kevin King]

First if it is all stock. I would go through the cards and replace the
electrolytic caps in the audio path. Or just shot gun all the caps. As old
as they are it would be good.

I do this when I rebuild any micor or mastr repeater. I have a couple of
stock micors up and have them sounding fine.

Others may have some suggestions to add.

-Kevin

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mzfb2001
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 12:51 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Micor repeater audio

I was looking in the files section and may have missed it, but I am looking
to improve the transmit audio quality on my UHF transmiter. I've noticed
that the audio is lacking in lows its not tinny but its not what I would
call normal audio from a Micor. The audio levels and on frequency
adjustments have made and to seem to be on the money. This is an unmodified
repeater station using stock cards and no controller. The receiver is stock
and the frequency has been changed to the 440mhz band. The audio coming out
of the receiver has fine audio quality.
Just looking for your thoughts or ideas.
Thanks for your input
Mike







Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [Repeater-Builder] DB-212 detailed info wanted

[JOHN MACKEY]

I converted one about 15 years ago for use on 6 meters.  It measured 52.5
inches from center to outer edge.

-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:41:05 AM PST
From: "cruizzer77" 
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] DB-212 detailed info wanted

> Does anyone have detailed info about the DB-212 antenna (converted to 6m)
that make it possible to build one from scratch?
> 
> All the measures and info about the mount and feed point are interesting in
the first place.
> 
> 73 de Martin HB9TZW
> 
> 
> 
> 

[Repeater-Builder] DB-212 detailed info wanted

[cruizzer77]

Does anyone have detailed info about the DB-212 antenna (converted to 6m) that 
make it possible to build one from scratch?

All the measures and info about the mount and feed point are interesting in the 
first place.

73 de Martin HB9TZW

Re: [Repeater-Builder] re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[JOHN MACKEY]

I still have several Mastr Pro repeaters in operation on 6 meters, 2 meters, &
UHF.

-- Original Message --
Received: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:43:14 AM PST
From: "skipp025" 
> 
> I can't tell you how many GE Master Pro Repeaters I'd 
> have in operation if I wasn't the one paying the power 
> bill. 
> 
> Still... a Master Pro Receiver runs on 10 and 12 Volts 
> (it's solid state) and has one heck of a great receiver 
> so they could easily stay in operation (and often do...) 
> 
> I believe the Prog Receivers are also tube..?  The only 
> tubes I really want to light up are in guitar and vintage 
> audio amplifiers with the other exception of high power 
> RF Amplifiers for the HF War Zone(s) operation. Kind of 
> the de-facto standard on some of the lower bands. 
> 
> s. 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

[Eric Lemmon]

Motorola put out a Service & Repair Notice (SRN) a while back to remind
technicians that not all computers are capable of successfully flashing
firmware upgrades when set to the highest communication speed.  If you're
not sure about your system capabilities, use the default 19.6 kB/s speed.
If the program hiccups at the higher speed, a bricked radio may result.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Lemmon
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 8:24 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

  

Eric,

I am not aware of any means to "clean" the memory. If you send the radio to
Motorola's repair depot, it will come back with a brand-new chassis- a new
radio in an old case- with the latest firmware installed. Of course, you
must have the most recent version of CPS to program it. It is cheaper to
replace the innards in a few minutes than to troubleshoot and repair the
problem- which might take hours.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 ] On Behalf Of Eric Vincent
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 12:55 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Hello Eric,

Thank you for reply. I used the Non Four Line Display Radio firmware and all
of my programming stuff are original from Motorola, RIB, cable and Flash
interface…

I’ve start the process and the programming software stop and ask me to do
not click on cancel to return to the previous option but I think at this
moment it was to late. Right now the radio doesn’t power up, completely
dead!

I have an access to Motorola Online, is it possible to find something to
clean the memory and start again? Is it possible to have any program like TK
for HT and CDM series?

Thanks’ again to everyone who want to help me with that.

73’ Eric VE2VXT /VE7



De : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 ] De la part de Eric Lemmon
Envoyé : 12 novembre 2009 10:26
À : Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
Objet : RE: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Eric,

You'd be surprised how often a radio gets bricked during a firmware upgrade.
The primary causes are impatience, where the technician disconnects the
cables prematurely because he thinks the operation is complete, and the use
of incorrect cables or flashing adapters. A radio or laptop battery that
dies at the worst possible moment can also be a problem.

Since you appear to be savvy about the long wait between the first and
second beep signals, I wonder if you might have used the wrong firmware
upgrade package. There are two:

"Professional Series Portable Firmware R05.14.03 - Four Line Display Radios"
and
"Professional Series Portable Firmware R05.14.03 - Non Four Line Display
Radios"

The "Non Four Line" firmware is for HT750 and HT1250 radios only. The "Four
Line" firmware is for HT1550 radios. Loading the four-line firmware into an
HT750 will brick it. Assuming you have the proper cables and adapters for
firmware flashing, I suggest trying to load the correct firmware to see if
the radio can be recovered. Otherwise, it's a $275 repair at the depot. Be
aware that once the radio is flashed to firmware version R05.14.03, you
should use HVN9025W CPS (R06.11.05) or later to program the radio.

73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 ] On Behalf Of Eric Vincent
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:11 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
 
 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] HT750 updating firmware.

Hello,

I've try yesterday to update the firmware on my Motorola HT750 and right now
my radio is dead. 

The original version was R05.09.11 and the wrong one was R05.14.03

Maybe someone in the group have hint for me?

Thank you.

Eric VE2VXT /VE7

[Repeater-Builder] Micor repeater audio

[mzfb2001]

I was looking in the files section and may have missed it, but I am looking to 
improve the transmit audio quality on my UHF transmiter. I've noticed that the 
audio is lacking in lows its not tinny but its not what I would call normal 
audio from a Micor. The audio levels and on frequency adjustments have made and 
to seem to be on the money. This is an unmodified repeater station using stock 
cards and no controller. The receiver is stock and the frequency has been 
changed to the 440mhz band. The audio coming out of the receiver has fine audio 
quality.
Just looking for your thoughts or ideas.
Thanks for your input
Mike

[Repeater-Builder] FS: RG-6 Coax

[sjotrollet]

>From an estate

1000 ft of new RG-6 coax, on spool. This is type that is waterproof
and has fungicide under the outer coat (can be buried). Price:
$75.00 plus shipping from northern Florida. No extra charge for
packing and taking to shipper.

73
Walt (N4GL)   (352) 637-1755

[Repeater-Builder] FS: Metered Dummy Load

[sjotrollet]

Following for sale from an estate. 

Wattmeter
ME-82/U (military version of M. C. Jones Elect Co model MM-625). 50 - 600 
mhz,52-ohm, 120w (metered). Tested OK, unmodified, good condition.
>From an estate. Price: $60.00 plus shipping from northern Florida.
No extra charge for packing and taking to shipper (UPS?USPO).Pictures available.
N4GL (352) 637-1755

[Repeater-Builder] re: Early FM Repeaters (tubes and more)

[skipp025]

> ... 146.94 was the de-facto standard repeater channel 
> that was perfect for the traveling ham because every 
> city had a repeater on that pair.

The song remains the same but now in most Metro Areas 
every repeater pair is taken... and few are honestly 
generating any decent local (notice I didn't write IRLP 
or Echo-link) user traffic. 

> BTW...I still have some Progline crystals just in 
> case anyone wants to try a "new" repeater  ;-)

 h...  tempting but! 

I can't tell you how many GE Master Pro Repeaters I'd 
have in operation if I wasn't the one paying the power 
bill. 

Still... a Master Pro Receiver runs on 10 and 12 Volts 
(it's solid state) and has one heck of a great receiver 
so they could easily stay in operation (and often do...) 

I believe the Prog Receivers are also tube..?  The only 
tubes I really want to light up are in guitar and vintage 
audio amplifiers with the other exception of high power 
RF Amplifiers for the HF War Zone(s) operation. Kind of 
the de-facto standard on some of the lower bands. 

s. 

[Repeater-Builder] FS: 1960's Vintage FM magazines

[sjotrollet]

Following items from an estate. SK was deep into VHF/UHF and had
2 repeaters (2m & 220). Retired PD radio tech. Total volume about
a "whiskey" box and can be sent by media mail. Price $25 plus
postage. No extra charge for packing.

FM  Magazine
81 copies of "FM" Magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Same format at the old 
"73" magazines. Some duplicates. Good condition

FM  Bulletin
52 copies of "FM Bulletin" magazine. From mid to late 1960's. Some duplicates. 
good condition.

73
Walt (N4GL)

[Repeater-Builder] Re: ACSSB - FM History

[lenaw12]

The history of the "right coast" FM development is pretty accurately described 
on page 59 of this document:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/11595271/The-History-of-Ham-Radio

I haven't quoted it for copyright reasons but it gives a sane take to  all the 
madness of the time. 146.94 was the defacto standard repeater channel that was 
perfect for the traveling ham because every city had a repeater on that pair.

BTW...I still have some Progline crystals just in case anyone wants to try a 
"new" repeater  ;-)

Len

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, MCH  wrote:
>
> I believe the OP is essentially correct. The "2M sub-band" didn't come 
> until much later - I was thinking it was the late 70s, but it could have 
> been the early 80s.
> 
> Your point was why the 146 MHz pairs were more popular - because the 
> techs could not use the 147 MHz pairs.
> 
> The 146 MHz segment was originally 60 kHz channels (146.610, 146.670, 
> 146.730, Etc.)

[Repeater-Builder] PD-522-509 Phelps Dodge / Celwave Duplexer Harness Cable Lengths

[cracked]

One of these was handed to me for tuning and I found a cable plugged into the 
wrong port so who knows what else is mixed up.  Anyone know the specific cable 
lengths from the "T" connector and the TX/RX ports?  It has a 22.5cm cable on 
the TX side and 21.5cm on the RX side (UHF male tip-to-tip).  The manual says 
they're "cut to specific lengths and must not be changed" but that's it.

James K7ICU