Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola-Yaesu
* n7zef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Nov 05 18:30 -0600]: > This is from a friend who has worked for the motorola people from years > agowhen there was company shops. He works in communications for the RR > locally... > > > Probably be known as Mo-junk! > > Kenwood is kicking everyone's ass on the commercial front. While I shy away from Kenwood's ham radio offerings, our company has been buying their commercial stuff for a few years now and it's rugged and reliable. I'll be installing Kenwood for my own commercial system as the narrowband deadline draws near. > It'll be > interesting to see who still stands once the narrow band stuff comes > around > on the commercial side in 2012. Motorola bought one of the best > digital > microwave radio companies when the bought out Orthogon. Motorola's > philosophy has always been if you can't compete against it, buy it. There was another aquisition I wasn't thrilled to hear about. The company I work for has a large installed base of Orthogon radios that we've installed over the past three years. Now they're Motos. Time will tell. That said, I'm a huge fan of the MSR2000, they just keep on ticking. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Bidding to Acquire Control of Vertex Standard (Yaesu)
* Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Nov 05 16:55 -0600]: > DCFluX wrote: > > Motorola buying Yaseu would be great for the land mobile market but > > don't forget that Motorola specifically goes out of its way to not > > make amateur products. > > Thinking some more about it, another thing makes sense... > > Agencies and others buying them, can say goodbye to the cheap P25 radios > Yaesu was starting to build. > > Back to $2000 an HT, right where Moto likes it. :-( Yup. That's kind of where my thinking was going. At best someone serious about keeping the ham radio product line alive will buy it and at worst, K7BV's positive attitude notwithstanding, Yaesu amateur radio gear will be a memory in five years. But, I doubt any current manufacturer would be sad to see Yaesu disappear. OTOH, maybe MFJ will buy the division. OMG, I can see the ads now... I think I'll have nightmares for a while. Shudder. Whenever a large company aquires a smaller company they are usually after one of two things, aquiring a presence in an established market, or squashing competition. At least right now I have all the Yaesu gear I need, I just hope it keeps working. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] VSWR Chart for Bird
This isn't the genuine Bird version, but I keep it with mine that also lacked a manual and nomograph when I got it some 16 years ago: http://www.procom-dk.com/techinfo/e0202-swr-nomographs 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
* kf0m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Sep 27 21:44 -0500]: > Nate: you left out the other fun part of Kansas ham plates. All Kansas > plates have a sticker that identifies the county where it was issued except > for ham plates. We have a saying in ks, that there are only two types of > hams with call letter plates in KS. Those that have already been pulled > over for not having a county sticker and those that will be pulled over for > not having a county sticker. Hi John! I have heard of hams getting pulled over for a lack of county sticker. Of course it has never happened to me. If memory serves that was happening in McPherson county or thereabouts. I guess that officer would have had fun at Salina last month! 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
* Bernie Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Sep 27 11:05 -0500]: > > > Last spring in Dayton, my buddy and I did an informal review of all the > different state's HAM plates. Some were great looking advertisements for ham > radio and some just looked like normal license plates. I wondered if those > states just gave out vanity plates with the call sign rather than a custom ham > plate. Okay, I'm helping this thread further astray. :-) In Kansas our ham plates are the same design as the regular plates. Vanity plates are an entirely different design and color and are issued in pairs (otherwise only one plate). However, one cannot get a slashed 0 on a vanity plate but just about any letter/number combination up to 7 characters is accepted. I know a ham locally that put his call on a vanity plate and the 0 is not slashed. Interestingly, we can have our callsign on one each of a car and pickup, but not two cars, or two pickups, etc. Motorcycles are limited to 5 characters so no ham plates on bikes, although vanity plates are allowed. If you want to have fun at at the DMV, just try to transfer your ham plate from one pickup to another while still owning both! Normally, plates aren't transfered except on a transfer of ownership. I did get it done. :-) 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
[Repeater-Builder] Antenex FG1443
I am looking to replace the local 2m repeater antenna. I found the Antenex FG1443 at an attractive price on the Web and am looking for any experiences/opinions on it. I have been thinking about a Hustler G6-144B but I am willing to trade a bit of gain for a more rugged antenna that will remain noise-free for a long time. One problem I face is that we have a limited mounting option on the grain elevator leg we are on so a lighter/smaller antenna is much preferable to a DB-224 style in our location. I can also get the FG1443 for about $150 which is quite attractive. http://www.antenex.com/c_search.asp?txtFunction=browse2&selFamily=FIO&txtSubFamily=VHF+3+dB+GAIN+MODELS Thoughts? 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Lightning Damage, new UHF antenna needed
* n0qzv_jhorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Sep 21 00:08 -0500]: > The DB 404 and 408 are great antennas, however I just purchased an > Antenex YDA-4404 which is a regular 4 bay dipole. It is not as heavy > duty as the DB antennas but is still better than most fiberglass > antennas. It is tuneable and it tends to be about half of the price > of the DB as well. I think I paid around $180 for it on the web. > http://www.antenex.com/index051206.htm I finally found it with the P/N YDA4404, their search engine barfs on the hyphen. BTW, I'm unable to retrieve the Specs PDF from their site. All I get is an IIS page telling me the document can't be found. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
* Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Sep 20 09:46 -0500]: > Look at http://www.dstarusers.org and see who is talking now. Interesting page. Thanks. > Maybe this digital stuff is just a fad, and when it dies out, channels > used for digital should be returned to re-coordination, but to kill an > innovation at the onset by not allowing a place to operate when there is > unused / underused space available just isn't right. It's not a fad as I believe it is here to stay. Most likely it won't remain in its present form for very long as new CODECs and other techniques will supplant the current. I just don't see amateur radio becoming an all digital service in the foreseeable future. The present analog modes still have plenty of usefulness and amateur radio will remain a playground where the past, present, and future come together. > As far as constant chatter - I would not want that either, but there are > some repeaters that are just plain dead. It also seems the assumption > here is that Joe would not be agreeable to the new folks proposal, > maybe he would be. If they buy him a complimentary radio and respect his prior efforts, Old Joe may well not just approve, but offer more help than they ask for. It's all in the approach. Too many times we prepare for an adversarial position when none exists. Flies to honey and all that. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room - testing DSTAR
* n9wys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Sep 20 15:02 -0500]: > Now in regard to the testing/repairing these D-Star systems... I didn't > become a ham until later in life, although I've always had an interest in > radio. But since I have, I continue to strive to be more than just an > "appliance operator"... I need to be able to understand how it works, and > if within my means, troubleshoot and/or repair it. Based on the earlier > statement that the only way to test/repair these stations is to "box and > ship" it back to the manufacturer, I feel we as Amateurs are taking a huge > step backward, both for ourselves and for our hobby. Actually, not so much a step backward as outward, as we hams have so far avoided being held hostage by the manufacturers in that way. Sure, most any modern radio is likely to be factory repaired, but many independent shops also perform the work. If a future digital implementation were to use a codec under a license prevents divulging of its operational parameters, then ham radio is "had". > I also feel we are doing the Amateur Radio Service itself a huge disservice, > since one of the basic tenets of the Service itself is to "Expan(d) the > existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, > technicians, and electronics experts." [Part 97.1(d)] I most assuredly agree with your conclusion. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Connecting Multiple TNCs
* Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Aug 03 08:48 -0500]: > Nate, > > I looked in my KPC-3+ manual and they do call out a DCD line on both the > RS232 DB25 connector, pin 8, and also on the 9 pin radio connector. However, > I cannot find any reference to it in the manual. Probably there, but cannot > find. Wonder why they could put in a simple chart saying "pin 1, does this, > lo or high to turn on/off". > > In the RS232 spec the pin 8, known as CD, is Receive Line Signal Detector. > It does take the unit on/off line. > > So I am assuming if the CD (DCD here) is in off state then the TNC will not > do anything including receive or transmit??? Perhaps this was dropped in the newer KPC-3 command set, but my old KPC-2 version 5.0 has this to say about the CD command: CD INTERNAL | EXTERNAL | SOFTWARE v3.0 ... When set to EXTERNAL, the carrier detect is supplied by an external device, connected to the XCD pin on the radio port. HTH, 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need An IFR Service Center
* Paul Metzger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Aug 01 18:51 -0500]: > Hello all, > > I'm looking for an IFR service center within the United States. They are now known as Aeroflex: http://www.aeroflex.com/ They just did our ancient shop 1200 this spring, now the 500 has a problem. Oh well... 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Using SPLAT or RM to "reverse plot" a repeater?
* Kris Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 31 04:41 -0500]: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Bill Powell wrote: > > Looking for experience and advice in using SPLAT or RM to "reverse > > plot" a repeater. > > > > What I'd like to do is identify holes in the current coverage and run > > a plot with SPLAT or RM with the holes as the center point to identify > > potential repeater sites. Do I use mobile parameters (antenna height) > > at the hole or do I use an estimated height of 100' assuming that I'll > > have a 100' tower at the new site? Restated - how do I insure that > > reciprocal results are reliable? > > You're gonna need a lot of computing power. > > A LOT of computing power. As compared to? I routinely run SPLAT! coverage plots on my trusty 1.333 GHz Pentium III based T23 laptop. Yes, it may take a couple of minutes to chew through some of the more demanding plots. For SPLAT! purposes, enough computing power is available on the used market for even the most frugal ham. Even in the case of SPLAT!, memory is more important than CPU speed. I have 768 MiB in the laptop and a full GiB wouldn't hurt, but it really isn't worth tossing a 256 MiB chip for a 512 MiB one. Opening the PPM files generated by GNU Plot in the Gimp is no problem for my T23 either. I do this work on a Slackware partition which is quite a bit leaner than my Debian partition which I have set up for as a rich desktop. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Using SPLAT or RM to "reverse plot" a repeater?
* Bill Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 30 20:34 -0500]: > Looking for experience and advice in using SPLAT or RM to "reverse > plot" a repeater. > > What I'd like to do is identify holes in the current coverage and run > a plot with SPLAT or RM with the holes as the center point to identify > potential repeater sites. > Do I use mobile parameters (antenna height) at the hole or do I use an > estimated height of 100' assuming that I'll have a 100' tower at the > new site? I would start with mobile parameters and the hole as the center point and do a coverage plat to an antenna at 100' AGL. With most versions of SPLAT! this will show theoretical line of sight. You should clearly see the results of earth elevation changes. You can also tell later versions of SPLAT! to use a Longley-Rice model that more approximates an RF path than line of sight. > Restated - how do I insure that reciprocal results are reliable? That is tough to do as the computer programs can't account for foliage and man made structures that will cause further path loss. Up until the last release or so SPLAT! only calculated line of sight. Now it includes a longley-Rice model option I think John is working on other algorithms for the current version. Have you sent John an email about this? He is quite responsive and would know as well as any one how you might approach your problem with SPLAT!. - Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Lon and Lat Locator
* Don KA9QJG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 27 22:43 -0500]: > > Hello Hope Everyone is doing well,. Can anyone tell Me if thee is a Program > on the WWW Like Goggle Earth that will let you just put in a Known Lat and > Lon and display the Location, Goggle and others I have found will show You > that info on the Pointer Location but You already know the area You are > looking in. The reason is I have a Ham Friend in Rural Arkansas who has a > PO Box for a Address , He used a Program to sent Me a Sat photo of His > QTH , But I know for a fact I have seen better on Goggle Earth . http://www.terraserver.com will let you put in coordinates and display a watermarked image. Subscribing may allow more options than I saw playing around for a couple of minutes. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Interference from Public-Safety Station (Was: Coax Length...)
* Eric Lemmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 22:34 -0500]: > Nate, > > Was the interference present before the duplexer was retuned? Honestly, I don't know. It was "off the air" for some time most likely due to the final transistor becoming unsoldered on one lead and the controller being out to lunch. Also, I didn't monitor it to speak of the past several years. So, this is almost like a new problem. > If not, then > I suspect that the tuning is not correct. Although I applaud your ingenuity > in the duplexer tuning setup, a proper tuning of the notches on a BpBr > duplexer really needs to be done on a spectrum analyzer or a network > analyzer. The typical BpBr duplexer has a very broad peak that can be tuned > precisely only with a network analyzer or a spectrum analyzer with a > return-loss bridge. When tuned for return loss, the bandpass can be tuned > with great precision. A network analyzer also has the advantage of > presenting precise source and load impedances to the cavity being tuned, > which makes it easy to tune them individually for cascade connection. > Separate matching pads are not required with such an instrument; the match > is built-in. I suppose that stuff could be rented.The other option is the send it to the factory at the mercy of UPS... Seriously, while doing it right is the best way, most of us don't have access to that sort of equipment. We have an ancient IFR-1200 at the shop that is too old to even put a tracking generator in (we've asked). And for the price of the equipment above I could buy many other things that would be far more satisfying including a down payment on a countryside QTH, if one ever comes available. So, we use the SINAD method. Honestly, I don't know what the big deal is as the loss figures matched the specs and we did nothing to disturb the coupling (I *won't* touch that!). We can discuss impedances, but in the real world, there will always be a difference between the test equipment and the devices that are connected together on site. A lot of good information has come from this thread as well as useful ideas. Thank you! But, shelling out 5 to 6 Grand for a couple of dB improvement is not in my budget. ;-) > How many cans are in your Wacom duplexer, and what diameter are they? 4, 8" most likely. > You might find it useful to employ the interference calculation procedures > found in GE Datafile Bulletin 10002-2: > > > > Also download the interference analysis worksheet here: > > > > The above documents were only recently added to the GE Master Index, and > have great potential value in this instance. As for your original question, > I believe that cable length between the additional bandpass cavity and the > duplexer output should not be critical if proper tuning procedures are > followed to ensure 50-ohm source and load impedances. Thanks for the info Eric (and to everyone else as well). Honestly, I expected a reply or two, but it's been fun to see everyone run with this thing. :-) 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
* Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 13:05 -0500]: > You could always try and scrap the front end from a thrashed M2 mobile - > kinda lossy but can be used as a preselector - Also even a 3 dB. > attenuator might help against overload at the cost of 3dB. in RX sen. > > Out of curiosity, what kind of repeater are you using? Probably said in > an earlier post - don't remember. It is a TKR-720. Probably not the best choice for this site. ;-) Again, it's not my system and there are some politics with getting involved to much that I'd rather avoid. So, at this point we're helping as we can. Thanks for all the ideas. Many I've seen or even tried in the pastand perhaps forgot. :-D 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
* Ken Arck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 09:44 -0500]: > Hi Nate > > Firstly, in the case of your additional bandpass cavity - if cavities are > properly tuned to 50 ohms, the length of 50 ohm coax between them doesn't make > one bit of difference. The problem most people have with proper > cavity/duplexer > tuning is that they don't maintain a 50 ohm load on ALL ports when they tune > 'em. So when they're placed into service, the port impedances are different > and > the tuning of the cavity/duplexer changes. Which is why you should NEVER EVER > tune either without at least a 3 dB 50 ohm pad on each of the ports. From your > description, I'm willing to bet you didn't use pads :-) No, we didn't. The IFR does have a pad built into its generator output and the Motorola Spectra mobile is probably fairly close to 50 ohms. We did check the Celwave cavity this morning using pads and noted no change in its tuing. Admittedly, the Celwave is a much different device than the Wacom BpBr. > My other comment (and in my humble opinion) is that if you're using a properly > tuned BpBr duplexer on a low power repeater (the 720 is 25 watts, yes?) and > you > need additional cavities in the receive side, you've got bigger issue than > simply needing an additional cavity. You didn't specify what the inteference > is > but have you done an intermod study of the site? The interference is that the repeater is receiving the public safety transmitter very clearly which has led me to think intermod. This TKR-720 is running about 40 Watts. > IMHO, the additional cavity is a waste of time and effort until you identify > the source of the interference (and made sure your duplexer is first properly > tuned) Right now it's the easiest approach to try and be installed by the ham over there on his schedule. See one of my other posts for the details of the site. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 12:14 -0500]: Thanks for all of your input. I'm learning more as I go along. I did not get a chance to performance check the RX on site. It just happened that we were able to stop by the site a week ago and see what we were up against. > Having said that, I think Skipp's point is well taken - if the junk is on > channel, an additional pass cavity > isn't going to eliminate it. BTW, are you using an isolator on the TX? Right now, no. There isn't one handy and since there are only a couple of active hams in the county, I don't know whether they're willing to plop down a few hundred bucks to try. But, you never know! There is also some amount of politics involved here as the repeater is actually owned by the county, as I understand it now. Fortunately, the interference is not constant nor really consistent. Hopefully, we can arrange a meet out there again and I can gather more information and do some tests. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
* skipp025 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 11:49 -0500]: > Depending on how often the problem comes back I would first check > for possible mixing, receiver blocking, receiver & preamp 3rd order > problems. You've said the mix numbers were already figured with > some type of computer program... but that's not a 100% tell all. We found the TX frequencies of the site and everything with a few miles (this is a rural site with no other towers nearby) Using the FCC database and ran those numbers into a program found online. I won't vouch for the program. We've only been involved for about two weeks so we're still in the information gathering stage for the most part. > Taking a first shot in the dark with cavities... I'd probably try > to insert a notch or suck out cavity on the other repeater/base > station tx frequency... in your/my repeater/receiver antenna line/ > path. I agree. But, we don't have one handy. > Relative to the grand scheme of things... tis probably better to > suck than to bandpass (in this case). You'd probably get more bang > for your buck... (result for your effort). This is simply an idea to try and will help us work toward the next step which will surely involve some $$$. One aspect of this is the poor construction of the site. The site is owned by the county and located on county land. The local (to that county) 2-way shop maintains the site. To be fair, I'm not sure if the county doesn't wish to spend any money or if the 2-way shop is simply incompetent as I've not seen any of their other sites. In short the site is a disaster with not even the basics of proper grounding or installation adhered to. The feedlines from the tower hang through the wall and dangle to the floor, if they reach that far, or just hang by their own weight (the weight of one was being held by the RG-8 jumper between it and the radio). No lighting protection or ground kits. One ground rod on the opposite side of the hut from the AC service entrance and the two grounds aren't tied together. There does appear to be a ground rod for the tower, but the ground wire spirals up the leg, wrapped around it, no less, to its attachment point. As I mentioned in my first post, I tightened several coax connectors that weren't even finger tight, which gives an idea of the sloppy work at the site. The reputation I'm hearing of the 2-way shop is that a service call to fix one problem usually leads to more problems and additional billable follow up service calls. Sadly, they contract for our county as well as they are the only shop within an hour of here. It is in this poor environment that their repeater lives. Accessability is an issue as the site is not accessable after 4:30 PM and I've noticed the interference most during the evening hours. For the record, I work for a transportation company and our land mobile radio system is part of my job. Our sites are independent and we have no other services co-located with or even near us. So, I've not had to address a case of interference like this yet (call me lucky!). Lost in all of this, though, is whether the coax length between the receiver port of the duplexer and the Celwave cavity I will loan them is critical. I don't think it is. BTW, we checked the Celwave cavity with 50 ohm pads inline and there was no change in the tuning. I don't have access to the duplexer at the moment. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
[Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
I'm helping a club in the next county get their repeater working better. A couple of weeks ago they brought the RF unit (TKR-720) over and we (KC0MLS, K0BYK, and myself) checked it out. The PA transistor required soldering and after that everything checked out well. Next we checked out the duplexer, a Wacom BpBr set. Lacking a tracking generator, we used our ancient IFR-1200 and a reprogrammed Spectra mobile radio and tuned the pass filters for best SINAD and the notch filters for the poorest SINAD for their respective frequencies. After they put everything back on site, it all works well except that the local public safety is getting into the receiver intermintently. My first thought was intermod, but the various programs don't turn up a match for the receiver's frequency. A week ago we were able to visit the site and tightened several loose connectors on the other hardware in the site. Since then the interference does seem to be less but is still present on occasion. Observations of the site revealed that the public safety and the club's repeater antennas (DB-224 style, unsure of exact models) both share the top of the tower and are broadside to each other and are maybe four feet apart at most. So now our thinking is that the problem may be receiver overload. We set up a spare Celwave bandpass cavity that has about 2 dB of insertion loss and offers about 45 dB of insertion loss at the public safety's transmitter frequency. My question is whether the coax length is critical between the RX port of the Wacom duplexer and the input port of the Celwave cavity? I plan to send along a length of RG-393 (double shielded teflon coax) with the cavity. As far as I know, it is a random length. Should I cut it to something closer to 1/2 wavelength? 3/4 WL? Thanks! 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeating D-Star
* mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Apr 25 15:33 -0500]: > Wrong. If it's not an open protocol, it's not legal in the ham band. Here is the relevant portion for FCC jurisdictions: - §97.309 RTTY and data emission codes. (b) Where authorized by §§ 97.305(c) and 97.307(f) of this part, a station may transmit a RTTY or data emission using an unspecified digital code, except to a station in a country with which the United States does not have an agreement permitting the code to be used. RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication. When deemed necessary by a District Director to assure compliance with the FCC Rules, a station must: (1) Cease the transmission using the unspecified digital code; (2) Restrict transmissions of any digital code to the extent instructed; (3) Maintain a record, convertible to the original information, of all digital communications transmitted. - Looks like to me that P25 is legal above 50.1 MHz noting the bandwidth restrictions of 97.307(f)(5) and 97.307(f)(6). From 33cm and shorter wavelengths, there are no bandwidth restrictions--97.307(f)(7). 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] OT- Activity Level On Ham Repeaters Way Down In My Area
* Tony L. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Feb 22 13:40 -0600]: > 1) Has there been a decline in traffic and the number of active > repeaters in your area? Not really. Activity has always been spares, even when I was first licensed as a Tech in 1985. We have a low density of hams to begin with since this is a rural area and even fewer of those are active. > 2) If so, what do you feel the primary cause is? I always blamed on the low number of hams and our work schedules. Personal lives don't mesh much at all usually. Back when packet was the going thing, it was very popular here because we could communicate in without having to match schedules. Email has replaced packet over the years as it is faster to give the group the same message. Even when I ran a BBS, most would not check it for mail even. > 3) What can be done to generate renewed interest? Everyone needs to present a friendly attitude. Be welcoming and engage people in conversation. Activity begets activity which is a bit of a catch-22, I know. As WY0X pointed out earlier, friends have a lot of conversations, and that is the key--friendship. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeater Time Out Award
* Mike Morris WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Feb 19 17:54 -0600]: > I once saw a old Motorola metal mobile mic that had been chrome plated, > mounted to a walnut plaque, with the curly cord mounted as well... with a > 1/2" piece cut out of the middle of the cord, and a pair of diagonal cutters > mounted next to the cut... all with a brass tag mounted under the mic > saying "(insert year) Blabbermouth Award". > > You could do something similar and call it the "Repeater Monopolizer" award. Or, "Golden Thumb" since most people press the PTT button with their thumb. Years back I programmed an RLC-4 to send "GT HI" when the transmitter came back on after COS drop. Yes, I earned it myself a few times. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Effects of doubling RF output on UHF repeater?
You've already gotten reasonable answers that I won't rehash. Let's consider this, assuming that bumping the power up to 100 Watts doesn't degrade your receiver, how do the users perceive things? Flea powered HTs are the bane of repeater builders (or, at least, me), but people love them. Most are designed with rather hot receivers that give reasonable receive range with their small rubber-duck antennas. Now let's assume that your current setup works such that as the repeater is getting noisy in their receiver that they are dropping out of the repeater, i.e. the repeater is still balanced (do you see where I'm going?). Now you bump the power and suddenly the HT user is hearing the repeater full-quieting. Naturally he'll assume that he's in a better coverage area but will find that he's dropping out (as before) even though he's hearing the machine so much better. Of course, the complaints begin. What has been gained? A different set of complaints (from personal experience). It sounds to me like your repeater is reasonably balanced and I wouldn't do anything to upset that. I would leave it up to those that need the needle pinned to improve their own stations. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] HF Remote Base?
* drwoolweaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Feb 03 21:15 -0600]: > Any suggestions for a modern repeater controller that will also > operate a frequency agile HF remote base? Thanks de David If I recall, the Link Communications models supported the Doug Hall interface. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] AEA Isopole data needed at repeater-builder... file cabinet checking time...
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 14 21:54 -0600]: > At 1/14/2007 17:01, you wrote: > >* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 14 > >11:33 -0600]: > > > > > I also have a 220 Isopole but no data sheet. Never needed it, > > > though. AFAIK the upper decoupling cone mounts at the top of the mast > > near > > > the feedpoint, & the 2nd cone mounts at the bottom of the 1st. Then > > again, > > > maybe I'm wrong & that's why that antenna never worked worth a darn. > > > >As I recall (been a long time) the upper cone had to be mounted below > >the feedpoint a distance about equivalent to the length of the stinger. > >The second cone did indeed mount below the first. > > Yes, I see that from the prior posting of the instructions. I guess that's > why it didn't work well for me. I thought it was supposed to be a dipole > equivalent so figured the 1st cone goes right at the feedpoint. Now I'd > like to know the theory behind the correct cone placement. My recollection of its operation (greatly simplified) is that it was a center-fed dual 5/8 wave collinear antenna. The cones simply kept the energy from continuing on down the mast and onto the coax shield. The result was a very low angle of radiation and a narrow vertical beamwidth. Trust me, an Isopole does not work well for picking up a satellite more than a few degrees above the horizon. ;-) 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] AEA Isopole data needed at repeater-builder... file c...
* Gary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 14 18:11 -0600]: > Negative. AEA has not folded nor did they sell any rights to any of their > products to this Spectral company from Argentina. What happened is that the > original owner of AEA sold the digital product designs to Timewave and the > antenna products to Tempo Corp. including the Isopole, Isoloop, and antenna > analyzers. Tempo later sold the product line to a private owner who still owns > a significant portion of the company today. Spectral came along about 5 years > ago with their stainless steel version of the Isopole and have been boldly > marketing it ever since. The current AEA company simply can not afford the > legal fees associated with sueing Spectral so they've taken no action. The > current AEA has focused on the analyzer products making significant > improvements and doing quite well in several markets. I have loads of Isopole > info stuffed away. I'll try to find it, scan it, and get it over to Mike. Looking over Spectral's site, I'm not sure what the current holder could sue over except, perhaps, trademark infringement by using the Isopole name. My limited understanding of trademark law is that a rights holder must defend the trademark or lose it. I do recall that AEA (or somebody) held a patent on the Isopole when I bought mine in 1985 which should have expired some time ago. It's unfortunate that the follow on rights holder never did produce the AEA Isopole. Had I known the future when AEA was disolved, I would have laid my hands on a couple. All that aside, has anyone tried the Spectral Isopole? I'd be curious to know how they compare to the AEA classic. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] AEA Isopole data needed at repeater-builder... file cabinet checking time...
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 14 11:33 -0600]: > I also have a 220 Isopole but no data sheet. Never needed it, > though. AFAIK the upper decoupling cone mounts at the top of the mast near > the feedpoint, & the 2nd cone mounts at the bottom of the 1st. Then again, > maybe I'm wrong & that's why that antenna never worked worth a darn. As I recall (been a long time) the upper cone had to be mounted below the feedpoint a distance about equivalent to the length of the stinger. The second cone did indeed mount below the first. Mine was an excellent performer for being an omni antenna. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] AEA Isopole data needed at repeater-builder... file cabinet checking time...
* Mike Morris WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 14 00:23 -0600]: > The 220 one is on the repeater-builder web site, but not the 220 or > 440. Was there a 6m one? After reading further, I assume you mean the 2m data sheet is available and the 220 is needed? As far as 6m, I don't recall that one was offered. I only recall 2m, 220, and 440 MHz. > With as many Isopoles that are out there I would imaging that a > repair article would be worth it. How about repairing one blown apart by lightning? I have one! In fact, I just recoverd the stinger a few weeks ago after it finally worked its way through the mast a few yeara after getting hit. The connector is still on the end of the coax hanging off the tower and the mast and cones are still up there. So far I've not gotten around to removing it. Maybe this year? I did pick up most of a new one in a box at a hamfest a couple of years ago. Has anyone bought one from the company that's offering them now? I saw an ad for them on eham.net the other day. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] VHF MSR 2000
* seoemsdirector <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 13 20:46 -0600]: > Hello, > > I have an opportunity to acquire a MSR 2000 VHF base station that is > currently channeled for 159.075 Mhz. I'd like to convert it to a 2 > meter base station on 146.895 Mhz. Can this be done? I think I read > where there was 2 different "splits" for this radio, a VHF model on > the "low end" and one on the "high" end. > > Thanks for any information you can provide. Is it the so-called intermintent duty or continuous duty? It appears the intermintent duty is favorable as it shows a bands split of 146 to 174 MHz (I am waiting on the channel elements from ICM to do one myself). The continuous duty shows a band split at 150.8 MHz. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Vhf Repeater
* frank james73 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 09 10:43 -0600]: > Ok thanks wheres a good site that tells how to do all of this? 73's http://www.repeater-builder.com/rbtip/ Google will reveal many more. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Vhf Repeater
* IF YOUR NICE I MAY TELL YOU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 09 06:55 -0600]: > Hi all you know they say there is no dumb question unless you didnt > ask it and messed things up so here goes .I am wanting to make a cheap > repeater system for 2 meter and I really need some input on how to put > one together and also once its built is there a special licence to > operate it?Thanks 73'3 If you're in the USA, no special license is required so long as you hold a Technician class or higher. The first thing you need to do before investing time and money is to contact your local frequency coordinator and get a frequency pair coordinated. Without proper coordination, the FCC will hold you fully accountable for resolving interference to a coordinated system. As for "cheap" equipment, as the equipment gets cheaper, your investment in time increases. It's almost a linear relationship. That said, I've had good results with a pair of Motorola Mitrek mobile radios. There is not enough isolation within one radio at 2 meters to get by with only one. Also, the modifications are fewer when two radios are used, plus you can make them to be a ready spare for the other function. To be really cheap, you'll have to avoid the duplexer. So, this pretty much dictates a "split site" repeater which adds the complexity of a link between the receive and transmit sites. Also, a split machine will suffer from uneven coverage between RX and TX. Duplexers aren't cheap even when bought used. Once purchased they need to be tuned onto the correct frequencies. This is easily done with a tracking generator, but can also be accomplished with a signal generator and a spectrum analyzer. Then there is feedline and antenna. Nothing less than hardline will do and avoid fiberglass antennas like the plague. Uless you like chasing noise problems... 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
[Repeater-Builder] Characteristics of old spiral 7/8" hardline
Does anyone have the loss, VF, and other electrical characteristics of the older spiral style 7/8" hardline (where the outer shield's shape resembles a screw rather than parallel ribs)? It is the type that uses the shorter connectors than the current Andrew Heliax offerings. I'm working out the load SWR and loss of a site that has this older coax installed and none of my current books make any mention of it. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Welcome to 2007...
Fortunately, the problem wasn't with the controller, but rather the DTMF capable control head of the Mitreks I am using for local speaker and microphone and to set the COR trigger level with the squelch. Seems I accidentally punched in the right (wrong?) code and activated the Call feature which opened the squelch continuously. That was one of my suspcions as well. Pressed the button to clear the Call on the control head and all was well. Now, I need to do something about the TX crystal which seems to like drift downward... Gr. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Welcome to 2007...
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 01 19:23 -0600]: > Nate, I was putting in some new speed dials for the autopatch on a > CAT-300 a few years ago and had a similar experience. The only solution > I found was to go switch the controller into the initialization mode > and start all over with the programming. We had a nearby lightning > strike that did not damage any equipment, but probably scrambled some > of the memory so that when I was trying to program it went astray. It > was working just fine till I tried to enter the new speed dials, but > after that nothing worked except the initialization. Been working fine > ever since, by the way - Thanks Jim. That's what I was afraid that I may have to try. I immediately figured it was the controller acting up as it started immediately after mis-punching the DTMF string. Later I started thinking of the other ways the repeater could have failed. I thought about posting to the CAT-Auto forum, but thought I'd check things over first. At least you confirmed my first suspicion, and that helps a lot. Thanks! 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Need Help... where can I buy a DSL-Internet repeater...?
* Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 01 05:53 -0600]: > I live in a remote area, where I can receive DSL service in my office > via phone company, but not in my home (which is about 2 miles away). Is > there something I can buy to send DSL wireless signal to my house?? > Thanks, Bill in Mexico http://www.wlanparts.com has lots of stuff. They have a point-to-point system that seems reasonably priced. You will need a clear line of sight path with no mountains, etc. in the way. 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Welcome to 2007...
* Mike Morris WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jan 01 03:07 -0600]: > Happy 2007 to all the readers of this mailing list. May the new > year be better than the old one. Yeah, I started it off right. Last night I was changing the ID on my CAT-200B and mis-punched a key. Now all I get is a loud rushing noise. I'm not sure if it's the controller or the audio chain (sounds like the squelch is wide open). Yeah, I got '07 heading in the right direction... :-/ 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Solar Powered Repeater
* Doug Fitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006 Dec 30 19:53 -0600]: > To start the new year out on a positive note anyone on this list have > any experience building a solar powered repeater system? I'd like to > get a better understanding on the use of solar panels, charging > system, type of batteries used and duty cycle. Probably the best collection of articles and advertisements that I found some years back was Home Power Magazine: http://www.homepower.com/ Much info on solar, wind, water, and other power generation sources. > I'd like to experiment with a totally new subminiature repeater [my > own design] powered by solar energy and "stashed" somewhere out here > in the desert southwest, for local Ham communications. Any ideas and > thoughts on this?? Document your work on a web page somewhere so that the rest of us can enjoy your journey! 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] 10 meter split site rpt, eqpt recommendations?
* Ed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006 Dec 29 09:37 -0600]: > Gentlemen > With the recent licensing structure changes, 10m meters is going to be > open to tech-minus ops like myself. Im kicking around ideas of a split > site 10m FM rpt, with a 2 meter repeater as link / dual band core. As I understand it, the 10m FM portion will still be limited to General, Advanced and Extra licensees. Technicians will have 28.000 to 28.500 (as Novices and Tech Plus/HF received on December 15) as a result of the pending R&O. > Any suggestions of what kind of gear would be suitable for 10m repeater > use? Any tips of do's and dont's for 10m? I helped a club resurrect a 10m repeater a decade ago. It was a pair of MASTR Pro machines with a UHF TX strip paired with the 10m receiver and a UHF receiver paired with the 10m transmitter. The site seperation was about 8 miles. The UHF link used yagis and PL and the 10m was carrier squelch as I recall with quarter wave whips. Local range wasn't good, but we worked some interesting DX that summer. To boost the fun factor we linked it into the UHF repeater (we had an RLC4 which made it easy to do). A pair of MASTR II mobiles, one low band and the other UHF, may work well (swap the 10m RX into the UHF and vice versa), but I suspect good MASTR II radios may be getting tough to find. I'd suggest UHF for the auxillary link as 2m is still plenty crowded and your link may suffer from interference. Using a 10m repeater is certainly a different and fun way to work DX. Have fun! 73, de Nate >> -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation!" http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
