Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: no power out of duplexer SOLVED with more questions - Thanks for the answers

[Thomas Oliver]

 I agree. The users would not even notice if you cut the power in half. 
One 2 meter repeater we took over was running on the 10 watt exciter 
with the amp bypassed for I don't know how long.  The caretaker before 
we got it bypassed the amp because of desense or intermod or self 
oscillation issues, we used to have some high powered VHF paging 
transmitters close by that were exactly 600 Khz apart and no circulator, 
We are now blessed because they moved to 900.


It was only when were replacing the functioning repeater we discovered 
the amp was bypassed, He never told anyone.


tom

On 9/7/2010 11:50 PM, Glenn (Butch) Kanvick wrote:



Hi John.
Sometimes you might not want to tel the others what you do to the 
repeater, then they cannot complain about any adjustments that you make.

Butch, KE7FEL/r

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:12 PM, W3ML > wrote:


Thanks to everyone for their comments and answers about my questions.

I did turn it back so I am sure someone will say something. Once
when a ham said he could not hit it, I drove over and sat outside
his house with a 25 watt radio and brought it up with an S8 signal.
It seems when a repeater goes up anywhere, someone will complain
about something to do with it.

Thanks and 73
John, W3ML

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: no power out of duplexer SOLVED with more questions - Thanks for the answers

[Glenn (Butch) Kanvick]

Hi John.
Sometimes you might not want to tel the others what you do to the repeater,
then they cannot complain about any adjustments that you make.

Butch, KE7FEL/r

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:12 PM, W3ML  wrote:

>
>
> Thanks to everyone for their comments and answers about my questions.
>
> I did turn it back so I am sure someone will say something. Once when a ham
> said he could not hit it, I drove over and sat outside his house with a 25
> watt radio and brought it up with an S8 signal.
> It seems when a repeater goes up anywhere, someone will complain about
> something to do with it.
>
> Thanks and 73
> John, W3ML
>
> 
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: no power out of duplexer SOLVED with more questions - Thanks for the answers

[MCH]

His antenna could be in a null. It happens, as Murphy is a ham.

Joe M.

W3ML wrote:
> Thanks to everyone for their comments and answers about my questions.
> 
> I did turn it back so I am sure someone will say something. Once when a ham 
> said he could not hit it, I drove over and sat outside his house with a 25 
> watt radio and brought it up with an S8 signal.
> It seems  when a repeater goes up anywhere, someone will complain about 
> something to do with it.
> 
> 
> Thanks and 73
> John, W3ML
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] To DVP or not to DVP

[Jeff DePolo]

If you have a nearby first adjacent (especially at 20 kHz), you might be
better off with a standard receiver.  Might be worth measuring it and
comparing it against a standard receiver - I'd be curious to hear the
results as I've never done that test myself.

--- Jeff WN3A

> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Sawyer
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 5:45 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] To DVP or not to DVP
> 
>   
> 
> Hmmm... I didn't realize the DVP has a wider IF. I gather DVP 
> requires up to 6 Khz of audio. So now I'm thinking that this 
> receiver is not suitable for my busy hill (Santiago Peak). 
> What do you think?
> 
> --
> Tim
> :wq
> 
> On Sep 6, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Jeff DePolo wrote:
> 
> > The SP docs show it being a DVP station. DVP receivers have 
> wider (and
> > flatter) IF filtering than standard Micor Sensitron 
> receivers. They need a
> > flatter IF passband to decode DVP properly. I'm wondering 
> if that's why the
> > 20 dBQ reading comes out higher than normal. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Micor 123.0 Vibrasender

[spikie622]

Make that 3Z, my bad.

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "spikie622"  wrote:
>
> Found 3 (3A) 123.0 
> 1 TLN 6709B
> 1 KLN 6209A
> 1 TLN 8381A
> 
> If they are of any use to you.
> 
> 
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "terry_wx3m"  wrote:
> >
> > Anyone help me out with this part?
> > 
> > Terry
> > wx3m.terry@
> >
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Micor 123.0 Vibrasender

[spikie622]

Found 3 (3A) 123.0 
1 TLN 6709B
1 KLN 6209A
1 TLN 8381A

If they are of any use to you.


--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "terry_wx3m"  wrote:
>
> Anyone help me out with this part?
> 
> Terry
> wx3m.te...@...
>

[Repeater-Builder] Re: no power out of duplexer SOLVED with more questions - Thanks for the answers

[W3ML]

Thanks to everyone for their comments and answers about my questions.

I did turn it back so I am sure someone will say something. Once when a ham 
said he could not hit it, I drove over and sat outside his house with a 25 watt 
radio and brought it up with an S8 signal.
It seems  when a repeater goes up anywhere, someone will complain about 
something to do with it.


Thanks and 73
John, W3ML

[Repeater-Builder] To DVP or not to DVP

[Tim Sawyer]

Hmmm... I didn't realize the DVP has a wider IF. I gather DVP requires up to 6 
Khz of audio. So now I'm thinking that this receiver is not suitable for my 
busy hill (Santiago Peak). What do you think?

--
Tim
:wq

On Sep 6, 2010, at 8:17 PM, Jeff DePolo wrote:

> The SP docs show it being a DVP station.  DVP receivers have wider (and
> flatter) IF filtering than standard Micor Sensitron receivers.  They need a
> flatter IF passband to decode DVP properly.  I'm wondering if that's why the
> 20 dBQ reading comes out higher than normal. 

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Moto Micor 123.0 Vibrasender

[terry_wx3m]

It would be a KLN6210A Micor PL Encode Reed

--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris  wrote:
>
> At 09:30 AM 09/07/10, you wrote:
> >Anyone help me out with this part?
> >
> >Terry
> >wx3m.te...@...
> 
> What model number?
> 
> There are several different physical packages.
> 
> If you don't know the reed number, can you tell us what radio?
> 
> Mike WA6ILQ
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Moto Micor 123.0 Vibrasender

[Mike Morris]

At 09:30 AM 09/07/10, you wrote:
>Anyone help me out with this part?
>
>Terry
>wx3m.te...@gmail.com

What model number?

There are several different physical packages.

If you don't know the reed number, can you tell us what radio?

Mike WA6ILQ

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor UHF Sensivity

[skipp025]

> Sinad is done with a 1000 Hz tone at 3KHz deviation 
> and requires a meter that can notch out the 1K tone 
> and measure the remaining noise.
> 20dBQ is done with no modulation  2 Vac of sq noise 
> w/ no carrier then generate unmodulated carrier till 
> the ACVM indicates 0.2 Vac

Both the above are different from a signal with voice 
energy (speech). I have measured different receiver performance 
values with various test audio frequencies with varied deviation 
and what might be the best for real world operation could 
and does sometimes vary from the results you obtain using the 
above listed methods. 
 
> Proponets of the Sinad method claimed that their way of 
> doing the alignment would actually improve the overall 
> sensitivity since the radio was being tested while 
> receiving audio.  

Which is why I only use Sinad as one tool in the final 
alignment procedure. A 1KHz tone is quite different than 
real voice band audio. 

cheers, 
s. 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Micor UHF Sensivity

[Tim Sawyer]

Yes, meter 4 shows the channel element is on frequency.

If by IF alignment you mean injecting 11.7 Mhz and setting meter 4 to zero, yes 
I checked that. It was not far off. 

--
Tim
:wq

On Sep 7, 2010, at 9:11 AM, Milt wrote:

>  Is the meter 4 circuit showing that the channel element is on frequency, and 
> have you checked the alignment of the IF? 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Micor UHF Sensivity

[Milt]

Sinad is done with a 1000 Hz tone at 3KHz deviation and requires a meter that 
can notch out the 1K tone and measure the remaining noise.
20dBQ is done with no modulation  2 Vac of sq noise w/ no carrier then generate 
unmodulated carrier till the ACVM indicates 0.2 Vac

A major difference in the two usually meant an alignment issue or some sort of 
problem in the back end of the receiver.  Is the meter 4 circuit showing that 
the channel element is on frequency, and have you checked the alignment of the 
IF?  

Proponets of the Sinad method claimed that their way of doing the alignment 
would actually improve the overall sensitivity since the radio was being tested 
while receiving audio.  

Milt
N3LTQ


  - Original Message - 
  From: Tim Sawyer 
  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 3:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Micor UHF Sensivity




  I'm getting about 0.35 for 12 db SINAD. But that looks about 10 db quieting 
to me. What I typically do is open the squelch with no signal and set the 
volume to 2 Vac then crank up the signal to 0.2 vac. Isn't that 20 db, or am I 
missing something?


  --
  Tim
  :wq


  On Sep 6, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Eric Lemmon wrote:


 spec is 0.5
uV without a preamp and 0.25 uV with a preamp, when using the 20 dB quieting
method, and 0.35 and 0.175 respectively when using the 1 2 dB SINAD method





  

[Repeater-Builder] Manual for Data Signal, Inc ID/SM-700 CW IDer/Site Monitor

[k8cop]

I have searched the internet an cannot find a manual for this ider.

Any one have a pdf copy of how to program/interface it to a repeater?

Thanks,

Jim, K8COP
k8...@arrl.net