[Repeater-Builder] Re: Tone Boards
Vern, I am assuming you have RC-1000 and not RC-1000V (slight differences). As to connecting to RC-1000 or to the MII I would recommend to RC-1000. This gives you the option of switching between CTCSS or carrier mode. It is probably easier...TS64 white wire (mute) to P3-pin 7 for decode. In later RC-1000s, less than 3 years old, the encode can be controlled for its on time allowing the tone to be turned on/off based on repeater input and a timer (tail timer for encode). There are many uses for this one being remoted Echolink. Another user quiting of their receivers before repeater dropping. This is done by connecting orange wire (ptt input) to AUX 1, P2-pin 5. On RC1000 the decode state is low requiring on the TS64 to bridge JP7. On RC-1000V it is high and no jumper here. As another post said I recommend using the on board filter to remove the encode tone before the controller. Comm Spec put a lot of thought in the TS64 and has some very good features. As another post stated get TS64DS. Couple dollars more, but comes with dip switch for selecting tone freq. On TS64 requires inserting jumpers. Kinda a pain, but it is smaller if space were a problem. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Ahh in the catalog but not on the website! Thanks! > > One more question before I put in my order. I have an > RC1000 controller am I better interfacing to the radio or > the controller. I think radio because I run Echolink and > have that going right from the radio audio so doing it at > the radio would tone Echolink as well. Is there any > reason that putting the tone at the controller would be > better? > > Thanks, > Vern > KI4ONW > > On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 06:41:28 -0800 > Johnny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Look at the bottom of this page where it says "Direct > >Plugin Tone Boards". > > http://www.com-spec.com/nucat2.htm > > Johnny > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I don't see anything like that. If anyone knows where > >>to > >> get one I would sure like to have that before I order > >>the > >> TS-64DS from Tessco. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Vern > >> KI4ONW > >> > >> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:27:47 -0600 > >> "George Henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>Last I knew, ComSpec had a version (TS-64MSTR) that was > >>>a direct plug-in > >>>for the M-II mobile... can't get much easier than that! > >>> > >>>George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413 > >>> > >>> > >>>- Original Message - > >>>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: > >>>Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 8:34 PM > >>>Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Tone Boards > >>> > >>> > >>> > The repeater council would like me to put a tone on my > repeater so I am in need of a board to do it. > > So the question is for the money what is the best tone > board to use on a MastrII mobile repeater. My first > thought is the ComSpecs TS64. Is this the right thought > or should I be looking somewhere else? How hard is this > going to be to install and is there anything I need to > watch out for? > > Thanks, > Vern > KI4ONW > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Yahoo! Groups Links > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Off Topic (but with on topic questions): NTIA propaganda
hi all, Feb 29, 2009 is the date. Here in Tampa Bay, FL, area we have a number of independent and of course the regular affiliates. Ch 10 NTSC has ch 24 for HDTV, but near the 2009 date they will replace the Ch 10 with a NTSC/HDTV (quick mod for going to HDTV) and turn off the Ch 24. They spent over $1,000,000 on 24 and it will be turned off and I assume for sale to someone somewhere needing a 24 HDTV tx. The FCC required them to do this to keep Ch 10 license. The converter boxes will be needed by the 14% over the air NTSC TVs viewers. The gov is giving up to two $40/house hold coupons for the purchase. You can apply at www.dtv2009.gov for the coupons. They have link to sources for the converters, but as of now there are no listings. They predict the boxes will go for $50-70, but I have not seen any for less than $170. You will need a converter for each TV unless you watch the same on all of what you have. Most of the TV stations here do not have HDTV cameras and other studio equipment. One does and brags about its remotes are HDTV equipped. For us who have cable and sat we will not be affected at least for now. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > At 1/6/2008 09:10, you wrote: > > >Broadcasters are really wanting this mess to be over. My former station, > >KVOA is spending more than twice as much on elect, cooling etc running two > >transmitters. One on 4 and one on 23. The stations all want to stop the > >bleeding of money. > > I thought that the broadcasters would actually fight this, as there will > definitely be a reduction in OTA viewership (hence ratings, hence advert. > $$$) the second the analogs are switched off. I own 5 non-DTV TVs (not > including an old Watchman), & since satellite TV is unaffected I will > probably forget the mostly useless OTA programming (I don't/won't pay for > locals via the dish) & continue to watch std. def. TV via the dishes. > > Bob NO6B >
[Repeater-Builder] MSR2000 info
hi all, Anyone know details of a MSR2000 with part number C73GSB-3145B. Understand is VHF base station, but know little more. Mainly interested in frequency segment. 73, ron, n9ee/r
[Repeater-Builder] new link
hi all, In LINKS on this board is a link to: http://www.dallas.net/~jvpoll/dup6m/dup6m.html Here are plans and permance data on a 6 meter duplexer built with 1-5/8" helix feedline. It is also as much an ad for purchasing the duplexer as the plans. Know some have used 7/8". Often the problem encounted with helix duplexers is the split used. At 1 MHz or more there have been reports of success. However, at lower splits like 0.5 MHz they do not perform. Not sure about the 1-5/8 model. Of course one can still buy duplexers for 6 meters at about $2000 new. Lots of expensive metal in these critters. Just for future reference. 73, ron, n9ee/r
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Hello...
Lou, For a repeater first get lots of money and then a thick skin, hi. Need to know a repeater is a radically different criter than a typical base/mobile station. What works with them can kill a repeater. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "lou_c1357" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello all. Just joined the group, and looking forward to getting all > the information that I can. I am looking at a long term project, and > want to put up a repeater. I want to know where do I get started?? I > am looking for the basics first, and then move along from there. > > 73 > > Lou > KC2RVD >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: preamp
Rob, The Mitrek pre-amp part number is HLD4052A. It plugs into a slot/hole in the receiver helical. Let me know. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Robert Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi I may ahve one do you have the part # Rob > - Original Message ----- > From: Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 10:47 AM > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] preamp > > > Hi all, > > I am in need of a Motorola Mitrek VHF (150 MHz) receiver pre-amp. > > Please let me know if you have one for sale. > > 73, ron, n9ee/r > Tampa Bay, FL >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: tower mounts
John, Tessco at www.tessco.com has a verity of mounts from many manufactures. Some say you need an account to do business with them, but some say it is easy to set up. One note: if you are mounting a UHF antenna get it away from the tower including bay type antennas. The X mounts usually mount close to the tower and on UHF the legs will affect the SWR of the antenna and probably the performance/radiation. Also if antenna is of any length like the station master or multi-folded dipoles provide both a top and bottom mount. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "JOHN MACKEY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I need to get mounts for side mounting an antenna to a tower. Who is > supplying stuff like that now days? >
[Repeater-Builder] preamp
Hi all, I am in need of a Motorola Mitrek VHF (150 MHz) receiver pre-amp. Please let me know if you have one for sale. 73, ron, n9ee/r Tampa Bay, FL
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Duplexer tuning - sanity check
Vern, Typically a BP/BR has a wide pass and narrow notch. On mobile duplexers the pass is usually very broad. Base type often have pretty good attenuation a few MHz away. Adding a bandpass will improve this. No cavity is going to illimate something 16 kHz awaywell and let the desired sig thru. On many duplexers a notch might be 50-100 kHz wide, but the pass is MHz wide. For 16 kHz one would have to rely on the receiver selective IF filters, but for typical FM NB repeaters this is a bit much. For SSB no problem assuming the signal is not very strong. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "w6nct" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm tuning up a cavity-type duplexer for a 70cm repeater, and in the > process, I showed my results to a fellow ham. He asked a couple > questions that cause me to think; so I decided to ask the experts... > > FIRST QUESTION TOPIC: > > For reference, my primary cavities were made by Tx-Rx Systems, and > have both bandpass and band-reject tuning controls on each cavity. > When tuning them (either singularly or as pairs in-series), I see and > can adjust the band-pass and notch for the desired Tx and Rx frequencies. > > However, in the broad-band sweep, I can also see a bunch of other > signals passing through the cavities; all of which are well away from > my Tx/Rx frequencies. I suspect that these are normal, and are a side > effect of how the can-type resonant cavities work. Am I correct in > this assumption? > > As a sanity check, I combined this set of cavities with another > (Phelps-Dodge) set I have, and tuned these supplemental cavities for > band-pass only (one cavity for my Tx frequency, and one cavity for my > Rx frequency). Sure enough when I put these in series with my primary > set, I can eliminate nearly all of the "other signals" from the > broad-band sweep. This observation seems to reinforce my initial > assumption about the Tx-Rx cavities. Do you agree? > > > SECOND QUESTION TOPIC: > > The other ham thought that I should end up with a band-pass that is > narrow enough to eliminate adjacent repeaters (at 16kHz spacing, as > per the current SCRRBA band-plan separation). I tried but I cannot > get either set of cavities to have that narrow of a band-pass; at > least not without sacraficing most of the signal in the process. I > suspect that the receiver and transmitter need to actually inforce > these much narrower bandwidth requirements within the broader > protection provided by the cavity-duplexer. I suspect that I should > focus my duplexer tuning on passing the desired frequency, notching > the alternate repeater frequency, and trying to do so with the least > amount of signal attenuation. Am I correct in these understandings? > > > > For both of these question topics, feel free to point out anything > that I might be missing or misunderstanding. I'm by no means > sensative about this stuff, and still consider myself on the learning > curve about duplexers and repeaters in general. > > Thank-you (in advance) for your time, thought, and opinions. > > <<< vern >>> >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: slightly OT: securing feedline to the side of a tower
Jay, Here on some of the towers that hold repeaters, cel phone sites, FM broadcast all with helix they use the proper clamp at 5 ft or less intervals. See some at about 5" helix, but most either 7/8 or 1-5/8. I have also seen 1ft pieces of #14 house wire cut to 1 ft lengths used with success, but have to make sure properly route arround tower leg flanges or movement, and there is suppose to be some movement, will eventually ware into feedline jacket. Prefer the clamps, but at $3 each the wire looked good and did work or now since 1998. 73, ron, n9ee/r In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jay Urish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > This weekend I will be un jury rigging a lame feed line install at my > repeater site. The tower is a 300' four sided guyed monster. > > I am planning on using uni-strut on the side facing the building and > using butterfly clamps or EMT clamps to hold my feed line. I am open to > suggestions on the vertical spacing of my unistrut brackets. At what > interval should 1/2 - 7/8 and 1-1/4 heliax be secured? > > Any suggestions? > -- > Jay Urish W5GM > ARRL Life Member Denton County ARRL VEC > N5ERS VP/Trustee > > Monitoring 444.850 PL-88.5 >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star demo
Hi all, Thanks for the many responses, but guess no one had the answer to my question. So I will try again. I am interested in the parameters of the D-Star vs analog test. It seems the testees had 2 receivers at a site, one D-Star and one conviental analog and made a transmission on each for the recording. My question was the rigs/power/antennas/etc the same on both. A test of 10 W with D-Star and analog 1 watt HT does not address the issue. I had hoped the D-Star rigs could be changed to analog making the only difference the modulation, rx and tx. Digial has invaded so much with much improved results. Easy to see with Direct-TV or digital cable or fiber, as I have now, and it is worlds improvement over the old analog. Same with HDTV over NTSC TV and not just because higher resolution. However, many 2-way radio systems complain about digital with variations in signals digital often has problems. With analog one might be noise, but can get the transmission, but as many have said with digital you are there or not, no in between. Just wanted to know if the D-Star and analog test parameters. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi all, > > In the FILES section of this board is a Weak Sig D-Star demon by > WB9WZB. Most impressive test. > > Can anyone give details of the test...was same rig with power levels > and antennas used in the test??? > > 73, ron, n9ee/r >
[Repeater-Builder] D-Star demo
hi all, In the FILES section of this board is a Weak Sig D-Star demon by WB9WZB. Most impressive test. Can anyone give details of the test...was same rig with power levels and antennas used in the test??? 73, ron, n9ee/r
[Repeater-Builder] Re: OT: Need to find a product to develop goodwill at a tower site(s)
Joe, Doing it on the repeater or base freq would allow other users to open the gate if one did not have the code. I like the garage door approach, but having longer range has it advantages and of course disadvantages. I should ask, do the users now have DTMF mikes. These are not cheap, but easy to install. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > But, if I did this, it would not be an "off the shelf" product and I would end up being the support repair for the units. There may be several of them. > > They want to use the talk around frequency to activate the gate. > > joe > -- Original message -- > From: "Dick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Joe: > > > > Probably one of the cheapoest ways to do this would be to get an el cheapo > > rptr controller and connect it to a VHF rcvr. The company can then buy DTMF > > mikes for their radios. If it were me, I'd set up a separate VHF freq or > > the same > > freq with a different PL for the gate actuator. I prefer the seprate freq > > so they > > won't broadcast the gate actuator code all over the world. > > > > 73, > > > > Dick W1NMZ > > > > - Original Message - > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: 26 May, 2007 13:03 > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] OT: Need to find a product to develop goodwill > > at a tower site(s) > > > > > > Hello to All, > > > > I am starting to develop a future ham repeater relation with a tower site(s) > > owner and recently got a request for something unusual. The company has a > > fleet of VHF radio equipped vehicles. They want to pull up to a site, enter > > a touch-tone sequence on the mike, and open a security gate at the site. I > > could kludge together something, but would rather find something > > commercially available. Anytime I have kludged something together, I have > > ended up having to repair it for longer that I expected. Something with a > > VHF receiver, TT decode and relay contact output would be great. > > > > Any ides if this is even made commercially? I know that some fire/ambulance > > departments use a similar idea to open and close the firehouse door. Some > > also have the ability to control traffic control lights on their way to a > > situation. > > > > 73, Joe, k1ike > > >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: OT: Need to find a product to develop goodwill at a tower site(s)
Joe, I can sell you something that will do this using DTMF. Might contact me off line at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't want to spray the board with ads. As someone else noted a different CTCSS tone set on a different user's radio channel could be used. Only need a CTCSS decoder, TS64DS, but would have to program the radios. If only few need access to the gate would be easy. If they all do not have DTMF mikes then CTCSS would be cheaper. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello to All, > > I am starting to develop a future ham repeater relation with a tower site(s) owner and recently got a request for something unusual. The company has a fleet of VHF radio equipped vehicles. They want to pull up to a site, enter a touch-tone sequence on the mike, and open a security gate at the site. I could kludge together something, but would rather find something commercially available. Anytime I have kludged something together, I have ended up having to repair it for longer that I expected. Something with a VHF receiver, TT decode and relay contact output would be great. > > Any ides if this is even made commercially? I know that some fire/ambulance departments use a similar idea to open and close the firehouse door. Some also have the ability to control traffic control lights on their way to a situation. > > 73, Joe, k1ike >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: MOTOROLA Rib Error
Jim, Wonder if this is with one of your radios or is consistant with others. One note is the speed of the computer. RS232 at a particlar baud rate is the same for all computers except for the data speed determind by the time between bytes. Some have commented newer high speed computers work too fast.The radio might not be able to respond quickly enough if the data is fed too fast. I use an old 486. If your situation is intermitment it might be on the edge of where it will work and not work. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Cicirello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Guys, > I am having an intermittent programming problem with my Motorola Rib > Box. This is > one of the after market rib boxes that works great 95% of the time and > the other 5% I get an error message Serial BUS FAILURE POWER FAULT. My > radio is powered up, my battery is good in the rib box and the box is > on, I have used two different cables, and still the error.What would I > look for? I have looked for solder joints on the db25's and all look > good. I have pinned out the cables, all good. Any ideas would be > greatly appreciated. Thank JIM >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Crystalls required
TA4T, I recommend using International Crystal at 800-725-1426. All you need to tell them is make of radio (Micor, GE Exec, etc), frequency for TX and RX, method of payment (most all accept credit cards) and address to send the crystal. They know all else needed; IFs, tx multi, cut, etc. You can get quick deliever, but the quicker the more it cost. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "atdengiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > My club, ANTRAK (Radio Amateur's Club of Ankara), is converting > the frequencies of the out of band VHF repeaters (5 Ea)to Ham Band > (144-146 MHz) to be able to use them for amateur service. > > 1- We are looking for the sources of the crystals needed and kindly > ask the group where to order from stock ; or, for cutting to exact > frequencies. > > 2- What are the parameters needed to order the crystals. > The freq. of the repeaters are in between ; > Rx 145.000 to 145.175 ,IF is 21.4 MHz (25 KHz step 8 of them needed) > Tx 145.600 to 145.775 , (25 KHz step 8 of them needed) > For the original crystalls ; > Rx crystalls Fc= (f-21.4)/2 > Fx crystalls Fc= f/9 > > Answers coluld be sent to my direct adress if needed. > My e-mail is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Any help is appreceated. > Thanks, > > A.Tahir DENGIZ, TA2T > Golbasi - Ankara - TURKIYE >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: License renewal
Don, Actually the FCC stopped putting + on the Tech class a while back, but kept in their data base who had passed the code so they could do Novice and 10 meter HF work. As others have said now with the deletion of the code requirement the no-code-techs got the expanded previdledges of Novice and 10 meter phone. There is not difference between what would be the Tech and Tech+ license. Now looking for no-code-extras. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Don Kupferschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi to all list members, > > I need to renew my father's amateur radio license shortly. > > Has anyone on the list used fcc.gov, been able to navigate through it, and successfully renewed their license? > > How easy / hard is it? Does anyone out there have a step by step instruction list to use as a guide? > > Or, is there a web site out there that can help me? > > I'm not looking to use a 3rd party provider if I can do this alone. > > TIA to all who reply. > > Don, KD9PT >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeating D-Star
Steve, I think your interest as with many Hams with D-Star is the use of digital voice. We use it every day in cel phones, HDTV is here for some, and with P25 rigs the interest is there. I am sure P25 is great, but experimenting with digital no matter what format is a good start. My interest with D-Star is how it works. Seen so many times with other services like HDTV and sat and cable digital the better performance. However, many mobile systems get complaints. Often what works in a fixed setting might not be good in a mobile setting. I am waiting for the day when Hams get time-division-muxing with more than one QSO on one frequency like with cel phones. I guess when we have 2 billion people in the US with 10 million hams or most of our VHF & UHF bands have been consumed by the commerical guys it will happen, hi. Imagine having to put all of VHF and above in 1 MHz. I think HF is safe. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Bosshard (NU5D)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Took a couple of antique GE Phoenix SX mobile radios. Programmed for 442.0/ > 447.0. With TOT. Carrier Squelch - Took Receiver Un Squelched lead to PTT > thru a one transistor keying transistor. > > Took VOL / SQ Hi and ran it thru a single common emitter stage - bipolar amp > and applied the collector output to the high side of the TX deviation > control and set for +/- 1 Khz TXD. Did have to bypass the emitter leg of > the single stage amp and wallah - DSTAR Repeater - sort of. Maybe P25 > repeater too? Simple - really do need to regenerate the data signal and key > on detected data with a CCD chip to give the preamble tone time to get thru. > > Until P25 radios become ham affordable I don't think they will be mainstream > ham radio. I believe there is still a pretty hefty payment to Moto for use > of the P25 standard, but I may be wrong. > > Steve NU5D > > > On 4/24/07, Jim B. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > James wrote: > > > Bryon Jeffers K0BSJ wrote: > > >> > > >> Well I will agree with Nate on this one.. The crazy D-Star will only do > > >> it's AMBE digital and will not pass analog voice... > > >> > > >> At least when using a Quantar/Quantro with P25 capability you can set > > it up > > >> with CAI (Clear Air Interface)/P25 IMBE and it will do either analog > > voice > > >> > > > PSST ... hey there ... :) Doesn't CAI stand for Common Air > > Interface. (Thats > > > the Astro IMBE that all the manufacturers support, wheras BIG M used to > > have the > > > AMBE version) > > > > Yup! But don't use the term Astro. Astro is a Motorola trademark, like > > Private Line (PL)! > > > > IMBE is the vocoder chip type, and has nothing to do with Motorola. The > > original Astro used a VSLEP vocoder chip, and is not supported by > > Motorola anymore. > > > > > Ahhh ... the wonderful world of acronyms!! > > > > > > James > > > > Boy, is THAT an understatement > > > > -- > > Jim Barbour > > WD8CHL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Ham Radio Spoken Here.NU5D > Nickel Under Five Dollars >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Cross-band Repeating.
I sell a repeater controller that can be put in a crossband mode. The controller normally has a repeater port and a remote base port. However, when put into crossband mode each port is to be connected to a transceiver and when it gets input on one it keys the other, typical crossband repeater. However, this sounds as if it is much more than what you need for it IDs, timeouts, remote control, etc. Same needed by a repeater. Really don't want to get into much here. Since you are on site and sounds like single user simple get input key other rig with audio connected between rxs and txs. Many use dual band antennas with diplexers (crossband coupler) and it works fine. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jason Cato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can someone tell me what equipment I will need to cross band repeat a > Uniden SMU4525KT UHF into an Icom 2100H VHF? I want to be able to > move around my property with my H/T, and still be able to get into > repeaters my H/T can't reach. > > Also, can I use the same multi-band antenna for both at the same time > with a diplexer? Or would the VHF transmission kill the UHF > reception, or vice versa? >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Spectrum Communications
Joel, If you are looking for just a receiver Motorola made a nice Micor receiver in a 19" rack mount box. The only problem it was made to plug into their unified chassis mainly got get it power. I've taken these and built an AC supply inside. The box will hold a VHF or UHF receiver. I've seen these at Hamfest for $10. I normally use them for control rcvrs, but still work very well for repeater. They have a 5 cavity helical front end and were made to work in harsh RF enviorment. Not sure if you are into building up something like this for it does take a little work. Knowledge is king. Just takes a little work and you really learn something and get a very good piece of equipment. Spectrum is from the 70s when a Micor cost $1,000s and the tube stuff was still being used. It was easy to go with Spectrum for less than $1000 then, but today the Micors and GE Mastrs are real cheap; less than $50 for a complete rig. I've bought Micor base stations complete in cabinet with AC supply for $50. Most hams have no idea what it is and if one learns it one can have excellent repeaters for little money...well the radio part any way, hi. Still need good money in the antenna system. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Al Wolfe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Re: Spectrum Communications > Posted by: "Joel Nadler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] nn6j > Date: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:53 am ((PDT)) > > skipp, > > thanks for the idea. Do you have any suggestions as to which compay to > order a receiver from. Our repeater is near other repeaters and we don't > want any rf interference. > > Joel > > > Joel, > The most bullet proof receivers are still the Micor and Mastr II. They > are the gold standards by which others are judged. They may be a thirty > years old design but will still out last all of us if maintained. They are > also pretty commonly found cheap at municipal auctions, most hamfests, and > of course, eBay. > > 73, > Al, K9SI >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: License renewal
Don, It is easier now than a few years ago that required I think the wisdom of an gover to get thru the site. If you thought about it you would get confused, real confused. Better now. Go to www.fcc.gov Select e-filing at the top of the page. You will need an FRN number and password for your dad to log in. You will get page with licenses in that name. On the far left select "Renew License". This will take you to the part of the site that lets you do it. Keep in mind one is eligible for renewable if within I think 60 days to expire otherwise you cannot do it. I have in the past used W5YI which does excellent job, but usually they do just before it expires keeping one worried. They use to charge $6 and usually sends one a notice for this. The FCC site is free. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Don Kupferschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi to all list members, > > I need to renew my father's amateur radio license shortly. > > Has anyone on the list used fcc.gov, been able to navigate through it, and successfully renewed their license? > > How easy / hard is it? Does anyone out there have a step by step instruction list to use as a guide? > > Or, is there a web site out there that can help me? > > I'm not looking to use a 3rd party provider if I can do this alone. > > TIA to all who reply. > > Don, KD9PT >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Tuning duplexers with sweep generator?
I've tuned duplexers with a signal gen and receiver, with a spectrum anal with tracking gen and sweep gen with detector. The spectrum anal with tracking gen was the best, but all worked. One thing a sweep gen gives you is not only the notch, but the width of the notch which a simple gen with rcvr does not unless one moves back and forth in freq. If you write an article one note to put in. Often it is required one slows down the sweep for the detector will not show the complete notch for it occurs fast. Slowing it down will show the true response. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "w6nct" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I was recently told (by another ham) that I could ONLY tune up my 70cm > duplexer cavities using something called a "tracking generator". > Unfortunately I do not have one; and judging the prices I have seem > for things with that name on the web, I doubt that I can easily budget > to purchase one. > > For some reason, I thought that my father used to tune up resonant > cavities using a sweep generator, oscilloscope, and a frequency > counter; but I don't recall the exact setup he used. > > I inherited his Wavetek (Model #1080, 1GHz) sweep generator, > oscilloscope, and frequency counter. I also have access to an > IFR-1100 service monitor, if I need it (i.e., can be borrowed from a > friend). > > Can I tune up my 70cm duplexer cavities using the equipment I have? > > If so, could someone please indicate the test setup and procedure. > > Thank-you. >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Project building a repeater from boards (design example)
s. The box is nice. One can do similar with seperation walls by using multiple boxes. I can't see paying $765 for this unit, but guess 222 MHz stuff hard to find for some, hi. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "skipp025" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There's an Ebay Auction for a Hamtronics 224MHz Repeater on > Ebay right now: > > Hamtronics REP-200T Repeater with Internal Controller > Ebay Item number: 300097601008 > > The reason I mention this auction is... if you've ever thought > about building a repeater from various surplus boards/kits/parts > and would like to see a pretty good straight-forward physical > layout... the bottom inside view pictures of this repeater would > give you good ideas about how to layout your repeater project in > one box. > > Looks like a standard 17 inch wide al box... probably 3 inches > high and say 10 or 12 inches deep. The rack mount ears are probably > on a standard 19 inch front panel... although you could omit the > extra front panel and put rack "ears" on each end of your box. > You would not even need the rack mount ears in your project. > > You won't like the current price of a new LMB brand 17x12X3 inch > al box with cover. So you can do what I and others do by using > surplus salvage internet and telco equipment boxes with the original > electronics recycled to your surplus electronic parts storage bin. > > Notice how each section of the repeater lives in its own section > of the box. Wires run through the internal walls probably all/most > go through feedthrough capacitors. You'd have to make up your > internal walls as desired... > > RF from the receiver and transmitter sections/leads are kept well > away from each other. > > So... it's just a nice example of how you might make up a repeater > from various parts. > > That's about it... > > cheers, > s. >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Statistics
Mike, I read the e-mails on the board and do not send to my personal account. This board gets a lot of them and I have found with yahoo by the 3rd reply the subject has gone away. Starts like "what is a good repeater antenna for 2 meters" reply #1 "well in Atlanta, GA we used a DB224 side mounted on 180 ft Rohn 25". reply #2 "you lived in Atanta, when??" reply #3 "do you have any Rohn 25 left for sale?" reply #4 "my wife liked the DB224...we use one for the green beans in our garden." This is not just this board, but about all yahoo boards. I do like this board very much for it does provide a most educational source for repeaters, about the best around. I recommend to all needing info on repeater building. See even I changed the subject some, hi. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Recently I did some research on the membership statistics for this group. > > Here's some interesting info: > > We have 3,393 members. > > 556 are in "Daily Digest" mode. > > 883 are in "Individual Emails" mode > > 275 are in "Special Notices" mode - i.e. they read the mail via the > YahooGroups web site, and if the owner or moderators send out a > special notice they will get it in their normal email (note that this > feature is almost never used here, in fact I can't remember the last > time it was used). > > 1,679 are on "No Email" - i.e. they read the mail via the YahooGroups > web site and they have locked themselves out of special notices. > > That last tidbit is very surprising to me. I would have thought that > maybe 1/10 that many would go to the hassle of reading the mail > through a web browser. > > 1694 are in "Fully Featured" mode, the rest are either in "Default" > or "Traditional" mode. The "Default" mode ones haven't made a choice > yet. Yahoo may make one for them at some point. > > The above is from a quick look at the Excel spreadsheet. > I'm not a guru in Excel number crunching, and I didn't have a reason > to go poking around any further. > > Mike WA6ILQ >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: station master bandwidth?
Ben, The Phelps Dodge/Cel Wave and now Cel Wave/? had 8 Mhz. One thing to keep in mind. The 150-160 version had 6 dbd gain, but due to the fiber glass enclosure being only so long one element had to be removed in the 140-150 MHz Ham version so gain was rated at 5.1 dbd. This was from long time ago and think still the same. I really think most of these antennas are made for a band, not a frequency. Like 150-160, 140-150, etc. So if you buy one you will get off the shelf version, not one cut for your freq. Many suppliers have a stock of them. If one looks at the SWR graph one sees a range and 1.5:1 seems to be the standard to mark the band limits. Some might actually cut for the actual ordered freq like with duplexers. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "w4wsm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Any idea what kind of bandwidth a full size station master would have? > VHF marked 153.XX...should it go down into the 2 meter band or are > they very narrow? > > Ben >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
Mark, Right on the Diamond package is dbd, not dbi. However, I do not believe if in dbi. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "N9WYS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I believe Diamond uses gain over **isotropic** (dBi) for their rating > specs... which might account for the extra ~2.2dB. > > (If memory serves me the difference between dBi and dBd is about 2.2 - yes?) > > This is one reason to be careful about what the respective company is using > for their comparison... gain vs Isotrpoic or gain vs Dipole. > > Mark - N9WYS > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Laryn Lohman > > Yup, Paul, you've caught on. > > Diamond must be good; very good. They've bent the laws of physics > again. Diamond's 18 ft. long antenna has more than a DB > Products, Sinclair, etc., which are actually slightly longer. 8.3db > gain over what? I'm here to tell you, in my humble opinion, that the > Diamond's actual gain over a dipole is closer to 6dbd. > > Laryn K8TVZ >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
Gary, Most of the commerical guys do have test ranges and some very detailed and well engineered. Most common below 1 GHz antennas were around long before computers like the PC were avialable and their technology, although sound and good, are old, go back into the 50s. Some of the broadcast guys are really getting serious. They have all kinds of ways of looking at antenna performance like just measuring the current distribution on the antenna elements to determine performance. A broadcast antenna must meet some FCC certification for performance/gain/pattern before it can be used because ERP is the standard for power. There has been lots of advancement in computer modeling and bet many not so good manufactures do use computer modeling as you said. 73, ron, n9ee/r > > It is also interesting to note that hardly any of the manufacturers of two > way antennas actually have an antenna test range or have ever tested the > antennas on a range. Most all the patterns that you see in the catalogs are > computer generated. > > 73 > Gary K4FMX >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna Gain Specification - dBi versus dBd
Eric, I think the reason antenna manufactures use dbi over dbd is dbi is higher...the higher the spec the more impressed is the customer. Most Hams probably do not know how to read the spec reference, dbi or dbd. They see db. When a Ringo-Ranger is advertised in Ham magazines it has 6 db gain. When advertised in commerical publications/catalogs it has 4.5 db gain...same antenna, same part number. I think those working with commerical and other professional systems know the specs and look for details. When they see db they want to know dbi or dbd and maybe how determined...prove your spec. Could never understand why a Diamond long 18 ft dual band antenna has about 8 dbd on VHF/11 dbd on UHF when a commerical antenna like the Super Station Master or DB224 has 6 db. Think the commerical people know why, not, hi. QST for a long time refused to print gain specs in the ads for they knew most was smoke. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Lemmon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The Telecommunications Industry Association, an international organization > which develops standards to which nearly all countries of the world have > subscribed, has already taken steps to correct the misleading practice of > indiscriminately using dBi where dBd is appropriate. > > According to TIA-329-C, published in 2003, base station antenna gain for > less than 1 GHz shall expressed in dBd using a dipole antenna as a > reference. Antenna gain for 1 GHz and above shall be expressed in dBi using > a theoretical isotropic radiator as a reference. There are no exceptions. > So, why are some manufacturers still using dBi for their 2m and 70cm > antennas? There are probably several answers to that question, such as: > > 1. Perhaps most antenna buyers don't know the difference between dBi and > dBd. > 2. Perhaps most antenna buyers believe whatever the ad copy says. > 3. Perhaps the company owner is an old-school believer that dBi is the only > "true" gain unit. > 4. Perhaps the antenna designer knows about TIA-329-C, but chooses to > ignore it. > > It should be obvious that microwaves, which begin around 1 GHz, behave a lot > like light and can be focused with a parabolic reflector. Short radio waves > are easy to visualize as being generated by a point source, very much like a > bulb in a parabolic flashlight reflector. Such point sources can be easily > expressed as isotropic radiators, and the leap to dBi is logical. The > wavelength of lower-frequency waves in the VHF and UHF spectra are not point > sources, and it is illogical to expend any effort "converting" from one > reference to the other. As several others have pointed out, there is about > 2.14 dB difference between the absolute gain expressed as dBi and that > expressed as dBd. > > Unfortunately, there will always be some "fringe group" that will argue > until the end of time that dBi is the Nirvana of antenna gain expression. I > doubt that the decision by the TIA to limit dBi as an antenna gain unit to 1 > GHz and above will change their beliefs. Getting the antenna manufacturers > to properly report the gain of their products is quite another thing. As > previous posters have mentioned, some popular antennas are junk that has > never been properly tested on an antenna range, resulting in ridiculously > inflated and undocumented claims of performance. If clueless buyers believe > the hype, nothing is likely to change. That's a shame- but hey, it's the > American Way! > > 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Distance between RX and TX antenna
>From a Decibel Products publication they state for 450 MHz vertical spacing of 10 ft 48 db isolation, 20 ft 58 db and 35 ft 70 db. Sorry no equation, just a chart. If you can put cavity on transmitter for this is where you need most isolation from duplexer, but sounds as if you want on receiver to aid in filtering out out-of-bane junk. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "arsimgllama" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All > On my duplexer The High port seems to be faulty. > I have an additional antenna so I was thinking to use the LOW port of > the duplexer with the existing antenna (because on the same tower a TV > station is having its TX antennas: output power 250W, Police repeaters, > Civil emergency repeaters and so) as receive and the other antenna > directly on the TX radio as TX antenna. > The tower is 25 meter high. And on the top of it are the TV antennas > installed. > Is there any formula to calculate the distance between the antennas > (vertical and Hor) for proper isolation? > The antennas are Procom UHF CXL2XXX series > Operating Freq is RX 443Mhz TX 453 MHz >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater antennas.
Dan, Sounds as if you are looking for 2m/440 dual band antenna. One question is how high. If low, less than say 150 ft then might consider Ham type antenna. The G7-144 is good performer for 2 meters, but cannot take falling ice. However, sounds as if some have had problems with Hustler although not much to be said for someone looking at a site for 12 years and ordering the antenna 3 days before install, hi. If antenna is high then get, as some have suggested, commerical grade. In some installs the high price of labor to replace out weights the higher cost of a good antenna. The longer dual band Diamond/Comet do perform well, but are cheaply made, but fit your price range. The stuff on the ground is most often easy to replace. The stuff in the air is often not especailly with good site. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am looking for opinions on what antenna is good for repeater use that > are in the $200-250 dollar range. I am looking at the Antennx and the > Hustler 270R. Opinoins? > Thanks Dan/NØFPE >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Backing down power on Micor
Chris, Normally, and I say normally for Mot made a number of unified chassis versions, the Power Control module is in the upper right next to the exceiter board. If you have the external seperate PA a small wire from the side of the chassis goes to the PA for the control voltage. If the PA is mounted in the unified chassis next to the exciter the control module is behind the PA. The power is controlled with a pot on this module. Some modules had 2 controls, one for setting the limit for SWR shut down among other reasons and one for power. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "cpitre_01" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a Micor repeater that is now up and running. The transmitter is > now running 50 watts. I need to back it down to 30 watts, how is this > done? I do not have a manual for the unified chassis model. Please > any help would be appreciated. > > Chris > VE3CTP >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Adding Remote Base to a Repeater
Dwayne, Gary is correct. To really comment with good solutions one needs to know: Repeater frequencies (as you've given) Remote base frequencies (suspect linking will be upside down from a repeater pair so will be txing near repeater input). What antenna seperation can you work with. Seems you need height to make the remote base work so does this mean the repeater and remote base antennas have to be close together??? One problem with cavities and notch filters are the seperation of frequencies for with a notch there also has to be a pass. Cavities are used a lot and do work if the frequencies allow it. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "k4fmx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "skipp025" > wrote: > > > > > "ldgelectronics" wrote: > > > Yes, the tower spacing is vertical (not horizontal), yes the > > > tx/rx on the repeater is 443.3 and 448.3 (5 MHz split) > > > > Don't get sideways over the vert/horz terms. We would be concerned > > with both the vertical and horizontal locations. Vertical distance > > is an easy "best bang for the buck" option. But horizontal > distance > > and location per side of a tower is also quite handy. > > > > > Ok, now to fill in some of the blanks I left out. This is why the > > > group is so cool things I thought were meaningless turned out to > be > > > important. The repeater power is 20 watts, the remote base is 10 > > > watts. > > > > Relative to the grand scheme of things... your power output is not > > that big of a problem to work with. > > > > > The repeater is an Exec II. The remote base is a Kenwood TK-805 > > > (just because I have a stack of them). The broadness of the > > > TK-805 is part of the problem and this could all go away by > > > switching to another Exec II for the remote base. > > > > I've seen a lot of tk-805d radios used as links... and they are > > very popular animals. It would be worth your while to include some > > band pass selection (cavities typical) in series with the radio. > > > > > For the splits, we have both (high TX and low TX) here in > Maryland. > > > The overall plan is to connect the new repeater with the remote > base > > > to an existing hub repeater on 449.225 TX and 444.225 RX. > > > > Clint Eastwood called it a "cluster $%^&" in one of his movies. > > > > Keep in mind the closest frequency spacing from any transmitter > > to any receiver is your largest gorilla in the room. > > > > > Skipp, I like the additional notch in the repeater duplexer > trick. > > > That alone may do it. > > > > I do a lot of close spaced in-band commercial radio repeating and > > the notch in the reciver antenna path "is da dope" to take out the > > unwanted visitor. If this is a fixed frequency remote used only > > for repeater linking... then you should also include a notch or > > "suck out" cavity on the remote radio, tuned to the repeater > > transmitter frequency. We would "assume" the remote radio to > > be operated half duplex? > > > > > I did the T-to-T thing with 2 and 4 band pass cans. The loss > > > was in the 5-6 db range with 2 cans on each side. Not > > > really worth it. If it were 2db per side, I would live with it. > > > > Something is wrong with your setup... you should be able to do > > better than the 5-6 dB loss value. Since your power levels are > > relatively modest (vs what they could be) you could actually > > replace the band-pass cavities dual port-hole with simple suck > > out notch cavities on the unwanted frequencies as long as > > things don't get too crazy with choices of frequencies, power > > level and a few other considerations. > > > > > Thanks again for all of the input. Sometimes just talking it > through > > > helps a bunch. > > > Dwayne Kincaid > > > WD8OYG > > > > Just think of the gas money you'll save by not having to drive to > > the repeater site to disable a locked up link/remote base system. > > > > cheers, > > skipp > > > > Dwayne, > I am not sure what the actual setup is that you are trying to co- > locate on the same tower. Maybe you could re list the frequencies? > > Here are a few facts about isolation that may help: > Vertical separation of antennas on 450 Mhz of 10 feet gives almost 50 > db of isolation. > 20 feet vertical separation gives around 60 db of isolation. The > spacing is figured from center to center of each antenna. > > Horizontal separation of 10 feet on 450 Mhz gives about 30 db of > isolation. > Horizontal separation of 100 feet on 450 Mhz gives about 50 db of > isolation. > > It is much easier to get more isolation with a notch cavity than it > is with a pass cavity. > > Combining with cavities will usually require an isolator on each > transmitter in addition to the cavities. > > A pass cavity or a low pass filter is always required after an > isolator to reduce 2nd harmonics generated by the isolator. >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: PL BOARD
Don, I have a data sheet on the TS32 and can give info on installing it, but no particulars on the 13-509. Let me know your direct e-mail and I can send. Just a few basic notes you need for install: TS32 audio input, connect to discreminator audio...do not use speaker audio for it often does not have the low freq response for the tone. Out 1 and 2 are the logic outputs for decode...out 1 low for decode, out 2 high. Must have HANGUP grounded or will stay in decode continously. For encode connect to 13-509 encode input. Often the mike input does not have low freq response for tone, not always. Most FM rigs have a special input for the tone. Of course I am thinking this type of info on the 509 is what you are looking for. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Don" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am trying to Donate to a New Blind Ham, a old Cobra 200 Which is the > same as the Midland 13-509 220 Mobile, The problem is I don't have the > Schematic and I would like to put a Communications Specialist TS-32 Pl > Board so he can get into My 220 repeater, I know it is a old radio but > I am sure someone might have the info I need to install it. Please > tell Me in Layman terms. > > Thanks Don KA9QJG >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: coordination question for the seasoned owners
Coy, Repeater coordination is important. However, the ones often doing it don't know much...they like the title, but not the work and many do not even own or operate a repeater. Here in Florida we do have a good coordinating council, but they often get into the mode of making rules that apply to all. My only real problem is they make decissions among them selves without allowing the repeater owners/trustees vote. I would respond to your council you have and state you have notified them on atleast 3 occations the repeater is on the air and that you are willing to demostrate it to them...while they are on the phone bring it up and if possible make a contact. If they continue to take action to de-coordinate I would threaten with legal action. I am sick of all the suing going on in our country, but sometimes it is required. They coordinated you so they have to live with it. If this had been an issue it should have been addressed initially. Most often a good council only wants say your CTCSS tone so another repeater on the same pair does not use it. Here in Florida the council has posted standard tones for each region and most follow it. The only real problem one region was given 100 Hz, kinda the standard for CTCSSng a repeater without closing it...of course these days if you want to close a repeater don't use CTCSS, use non- standard methode or DCS, but most rigs now come with DCS, but dought if most Hams know of it and how to program it in their rigs, hi. 73, ron, n9ee/r > > Coy Hilton wrote: > > > > HI Gang > > I have had one of my 2 meter repeaters coordinated as a closed > > repeater for at least two years. Three times last year I was sent a > > email asking if the repeater was on the air and three times I > > answered "yes" each time. I had even had a on going discussion about > > having multiple transmitters on the same pair coordinated. I was never > > asked to prove the repeater existed or even to "prove it" in any other > > way. They are trying to de-coordinate me on this pair using this > > reason. when it has been coordinated as a CLOSED machine for 2 years. > > > > My question to you is have any of you guys have ever heard of having a > > repeater coordination recinded because of this. I know that the FCC > > rules say that Closed repeaters are allowed and the coordinators will > > allow coordinating a repeater as closed. I'm looking for further > > replies or suggestions as how to handle this. > > > > The local director and vice-director are actually the ones behind this. > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: coordination question for the seasoned owners
hi all, With about all rigs manufactured in last 10 years or more CTCSS encode is standard and finding the tone of the repeater is easy. If the repeater transmits the tone some rigs find it for you. However, this is only if you know a repeater exist on a frequency. Here in Florida I have a high repeater that is NOT toned. With the influx of new Hams and ones on vacation about every week someone comes on my machine and comments it is the only one they can make. The reason is the other repeaters are toned and due to the typical Ham Radio not keeping things up to date they cannot get into the toned repeaters because the tone has been changed. Tone has definite advantages and is being required by repeater cancels more. However, the advantages do not alway apply. Hearing DX is not a problem with me for I have always thought DX was part of Ham Radio. Noise is becoming more common these days so tone would help this. Putting tone on a repeater does not bring it into the 21st century. It brings it to about 1950s technology, but can be good for many. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Coy Hilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Contrary to some beliefs, putting CTCSS on a repeater DOES NOT MAKE > IT "A CLOSED" mschine! > > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jim B." wrote: > > > > W5KGT wrote: > > > And make sure that the coordinator has the correct PL > > > tone in his data base. > > > > The only problem with that is they have a tendency to publish it. > Then > > suddenly the repeater isn't closed anymore. It's happened here. > Access > > codes/tones were published in the ARRL directory when they were > told NOT to. > > -- > > Jim Barbour > > WD8CHL > > >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: dual band antenna
Paul, I have a 2 meter 20 watts out of the duplexer repeater with DB224 sharing 1-5/8" feedline at 1175 ft above ground with UHF DB408. I have Comet duplexers (really crossband couplers) at top and bottom. Been installed for 10 years since 1996. They both work great. The UHF is in the commerical band. The only thing I worry about is the Comet duplexers. They are holding up, but wished we had gone with the commerical units that most often can handle 100 Ws per port, a real 100 Ws not like Ham specs. In the past I have had problems with continous higher power with the Comets and Diamond duplexers, but not on this system. It is a good way to get a site. Lots of UHF/800 MHz stuff up high and if you know someone with this who will let you share the feedline great way to go. Of course works well is all is Ham also. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Holm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I realize that from time-to-time this subject has come up: the want of a commercial-grade dual band antenna. The DB314 is one option that has been mentioned before, but the gain figures are not what we'd like them to be. And we'd really like to find something other than a multiple-section ham dual bander. > > Our ham club is wanting to add 440 capabilities to our current repeater site. The tower is a golfball-on-a-tee style water tower, and we are allowed only one mounting location. So we find ourselves in this same situation. We are currently using a commercial fiberglass stick on the low end of it's 2:1 curve for VHF and we are allowed to replace it with whatever we want to pay for. hi hi > > Has anyone ever tried 'interlacing' a DB224 and a DB408 or DB420(or similar) on a common mast? and use suitable diplexers at the top and bottom ends of the line? or would there be too much interaction between the bays, using that physical arrangement? or would it result in goofy patterns? > > Or is the DB314 the only workable method of doing this? and is it worth it at ~1200 bucks? > > Thanks. > > > 73 Paul >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Trade repeater stuff for UHF mobile
Jeff, Give us an idea of what you have. Repeaters use lots of stuff, nuts, bolts, connectors, duplexers, power supplys, etc, hi. You might find some will buy what you have and get plenty of money to buy not only what rigs some have, but what you want, new in the box with warranty from AES or HRO, etc. When it comes to repeater stuff Hams will pay for it no matter how old. Repeater stuff never goes out of style unlike most Ham rigs. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff DePolo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Need a basic UHF mobile rig. Must be a ham rig (VFO), not commercial. 25 > watts or more. PL encode; decode not really necessary. Will consider a > dual bander if I can't find anything else. Have tons of repeater- related > stuff in storage - let me know what you've got and what you're looking for > in trade. Thanks. > > --- Jeff >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio
Mathew, One other note on the crystals. We order from Bomar or International and we just give freq and they deliever their standard for the exec II. Never had a problem except when I ordered the wrong freq, my doing, hi. We are never ask hi or low side injection. We have had very good luck with both these manufactures, tuning wise and staying on freq and netting the freq easily. Bomar has a $50 min so if one crystal might be expensive. International is $19.95 for 3 weeks. Bomar is $10 ea 3 weeks, but still have $50 min. Get one set for $60 (w/shipping) or 3 sets at 3 weeks for $70. If I have to order for 2 repeaters (4 xtals) I order a 3rd set for what might be used in the future. But then again I have an unusual situation. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around they > would be willing to part with? I have a 56 split, having problems > getting it to goto 147.885 receive. Best I can get is about -70 dBm > at 12 dB sinad. So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job. > > Mathew >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz duplexer to 220Mhz
Mike, On the 220 cavity conversion this would be excellent posting on the board info sheets. Might consider giving it to the board moderators or posting in the FILES section. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Mullarkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi David, > > > > I just finished modifying 6 900MHz 10" cavities to use at 440MHz for a 3 > channel receive combiner. Sinclair engineers will send you a PDF of such > cavity at 220 and the loop length. At first they will be hesitant but they > will eventually send it to you. For the loops just make new loops and solder > them to the connector. For the internal rod. Unsolder the tower and leave > the finger stock alone if possible to. > > > > Mike > > > > Oregon Repeater Linking Group > > Mike Mullarkey > > 6539 E Street > > Springfield, OR 97478 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.orlg.org > > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ve7ltd > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 11:22 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Modification of Sinclair Q2220E 144Mhz duplexer > to 220Mhz > > > > I have recently aquired a functional high-split (148-174) Sinclair > Q2220E. Since it does not have enough isolation for my 100W VHF > repeater, and I already have a good working Q202 on there now, I am > planning to convert this over to a Q2221E for 220Mhz. > > I am pretty aware of how duplexers work and the coupling harness and > 1/4 wave characteristics, so my questions are very specific. I have a > Q3330C (compact UHF 6 cavity) and the Q202 that I have looked at for > comparing loops and such. I have already determined how I have to > reduce the length of the interconnecting harness with the velocity > factor and such. > > The only questions I have are: > 1) The coupling loop (with the connector and the variable capactior) > on the Q2220E is obviously sized for 148-174. How should the > dimensions be changed to work to 220? The reason I am confused is the > UHF is the same length, but not as spread open. and made from wider > copper stock. The Q202 is much more spread open and larger. What is > the electrical/RF characteristics of this loop supposed to be? > > 2) I know I have to cut down the hollow rod support and the finger > stock on the internals of the duplexer to accomodate the 1/4 wave > resonance inside for 220. No problem. But, does the depth of the > cavity matter? Do I have to shorten the casing as well? I know in the > past when I removed the bottom of the large Q202 cans, the bottom > being in place or not had little effect on the tuning. If I left the > casing alone, would I still be able to tune it to 220? > > Thanks for your insight. > > Dave Cameron > VE7LTD >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: WTB: GE EXEC II 66 Split receiver for mobile radio
Mathew, I've used lots and lots of the 66s to go down to 145/146/147 with no problem. Tunes to GE spec. I have found lots of 56s from Canada. Seems their commerical band is in the 140-150 range unlike the USA in 150-170. Both tuned with no problem. I will not say all 66s will tune down, but 98% do and meet spec. If 56 is not tuning then I would say it has a problem. 66s are easier to find, the easiest, but there are 56s out there. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone by chance have a GE EXEC II 66 split receiver lying around they > would be willing to part with? I have a 56 split, having problems > getting it to goto 147.885 receive. Best I can get is about -70 dBm > at 12 dB sinad. So hopefully a 66 split will do a better job. > > Mathew >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: DB 4072 Duplexer, Knowledge, will they tune the 440 Mhz Ham Band?
Mathew, I have a DB4072, the 6 cavity in the chassis/box, that was tuned by DB Products to 503 MHz. We retuned to 443/448 MHz with no problem or changes. As with most all duplexers the cabling is cut to length to get best performance so would be best if had correct cabling, but this might be little hard to replace with all the BNCs. We typically see about a 5 db improvement with proper cables, but will work especially at 30 watts. We do cut the internect cable from tx and rx to multiple 1/2 wave lengths. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a fellow ham who has a set of DB 4072 duplexers, wants to use > them on a 440 repeater at about 30 watts output. Has anyone any > expierience tuning these duplexers, and how well if they will, work. > They are currently set on 463 Mhz, and are designed for 450-470 Mhz. > > Thanks. > > Mathew >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: identifying origin of signal in large link systems
Chris, In the Cincinnati, OH, area is the 145.19 with many linked repeaters and remote receive sites. Last I heard over 30 linked sites. We used a CW character as a tail beep for each. Such as a C for Connersville. I built a CW tail beep unit that had 24 inputs each with its own CW character. This worked fine until we got more than 24 links. We then changed the tone from 1000 Hz to 500 Hz and used the CW character/tail beep and the tone to ID the linked unit. This worked well for there was a voter at the main tx site so was easy to set up. If you do not have this one site to do all then a few controllers allow programming a CW character for the tail beep. One can then set the tail beep to a character associated with the linked repeater. But all depends on how you are linking. If linking with transceivers from the distant repeaters one would have to put a tail beep on each link tx to ID itself. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Chris Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm involved in a large linked system (about 15 repeaters at present). > One of the goals of the system is that, regardless of the repeater, the > user should hear a different courtesy tone for each site in the system. > > I'm just curious, are there any large link systems that do this, and if > so, what method do you use to propagate the site IDs? > > We have a method today, which works, but is not really supported by any > of the controller manufacturers. So, we've come up with some kind of > buggy custom macros for the SCOM 7K, whwhich don't transfer well to > other controllers. This means we're constantly looking for used 7Ks on > ebay to add more repeaters to the system. > > We've added one RC210, and would like to add more, but it has its own > problems. > > I'll be happy to describe what we're doing, and some ideas we've had for > improvement, in a separate email, but for now, I'm curious to know what > other systems are doing. > > Thanks, > Chris, KG0BP >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Wide area coverage
Allen, One methode is to use a hub repeater and have a transceiver at the other repeaters linking to the hub. This hub can be one of the repeaters in the system (one hub with the others having tranceivers on this hub freq) or have a dedicated hub repeater on another band. The least expensive way is one of the 4 repeaters act as the hub. The disadvantage is this one repeater must be up at all times avialable to provide the link. Often one wishes to de-link when traffic becomes heavy tying up the whole system. The other repeaters can de-link on their own, but the hub must stay on. There are many controllers that have remote base or link ports. This is now a common of many controllers. I sell a controller that is probably one of the least expensive with a remote base port. It is a repeater controller with a controlable link/remote base ment to be connected to a transceiver for linking. The link radio, no matter which controller you get, does not have to be full duplex and will be seen by the hub repeater as simply another user. Linked repeater gets input keys link and when link gets input keys repeater. The repeater still acts on its own as a full duplexed repeater. Many have had great success doing this and has been done in USA for few decades now. Another method that has some success is Echolink or IRLP using the internet. In the transceiver method the link must be able to get into the hub. If distance is a problem then using the internet is another choice. It of course will require an internet connection at the repeater(s). 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "allenittiyavira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello all, > I am Allen, senior radio technician, working in Africa, new member. > > I have extensive experience in trunking systems, but not very good > with conventional. > > I would like to know the best method to link 4 repeaters (conventional) > to work as one channel. Are link radios the best method? (no cabling > is available). If so, which is the best repeater controller I can use > to connect three link radios from master site? > > Your replay is highly appriciated. > > Regards > > Allen >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Looking for GE master Exe II mobile UHF already converted
Miquel, The exec II is real easy to convert so might be easier to find one and convert yourself. Takes 2 steps to duplex it. Will still need controller and audio shaping. I think the conversion is on this board. Use to be. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "ai4sb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello!! > thanks for reading.. I am looking for a GE master exe II mobile that > its already converted to the UHF ham band and all i need to do is add > crystals tune it and presto on the air.. > > if you have one laying around and you want to get rid off, please > contact me off the list... > > 73 > > Miguel, ai4sb >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: repeater antenna suggestions
Steve, One other comment about the DB224 folded dipoles. One can arrange the 4 dipoles to squeue the pattern. My repeater is on the Gulf of Mexico and don't need to much west coverage. It can also help distortion of the pattern from side mounting. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hutzley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I know I'm asking a loaded question. > > Our club just lost our UHF antenna. The last straw was a wind storm. The make of the antenna that was up there is unknown. > > A stationmaster would be nice, but we cant afford it. > A Decibel Products DB series - I hear are maintenance nightmares. > > We are looking at A hustler HS9-43050 - > > Any comments on the hustler antennas. Or other suggestions? > > 73 > Steve > N1TEC > > > > > > - > Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: repeater antenna suggestions
Steve, I agree with most of the replies. One can tell a serious repeater builder by he/she not taking the typical Ham route and look for rugged antennas and feedline. I have a DB224 folded dipole here at 1175 ft above ground for about 10 years. Local club just replaced one over 25 years old. Was moving and thought they would just replace it. It did look little worn. The only problem we have here in Florida is with the salt air. When close to the Gulf the salt has eaten the exposed elements after about 8 years, but most do not have a problem. We often coat the joints for added protection. Ice can be a problem up north. If I have to replace the DB224 I will probably go with Station Master with top and bottom support. Stations Masters have some problems swaying in the air. I've use to use ham ventage antennas and like most into repeaters learned the hard way. Use to replace a G7-144 about every 18 months due to ICE falling off the tower (was in Ohio). In 1982 put up Station Master...it is still there. To replace my DB224 at 1175 ft the 4 man crew at $120/hr each, $480/hr and atleast 1 full day, more like 12 hours well do the math. Does depend on your situation. Today if you aint bonded for tower climming you aint going on the tower...well maybe once and then your repeater aint going on the tower. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hutzley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I know I'm asking a loaded question. > > Our club just lost our UHF antenna. The last straw was a wind storm. The make of the antenna that was up there is unknown. > > A stationmaster would be nice, but we cant afford it. > A Decibel Products DB series - I hear are maintenance nightmares. > > We are looking at A hustler HS9-43050 - > > Any comments on the hustler antennas. Or other suggestions? > > 73 > Steve > N1TEC > > > > > > - > Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: how to build a very simple repeater
As some stated how simple you look'n for. Get input key transmitter well simple COS driving a NPN transistor for PTT and it is repeatering. Common on commerical, but not enough for ham use. If using CTCSS then often the decoder output can be used for this for some have open collector low current outputs that can be used for this. If you want ID, remote control, timeout, tail timer, audio shaping, etc well might still be simple, but will require more. One good item to look for the Micor repeater "Squelch Gate" card. This will take rx discrementor audio, trip when the adjusted level of quiting is found and has ptt output. I think it has the proper de- emphasing audio circuit. Again how simple. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "shame_you_promise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi im thus anybody here who knows on how to build a very simple > repeater controller with-out any programming just a verry simple > repeater controller...and also how to connect the two radio tnx... >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: GE Exec II Conv. Max audio 1.5 KHz Dev, how can I increase it
Mathew, Not sure if your problem is with the rx or tx. 15k might be bit high and could lower for driving most controllers, but probably not a problem. On the exec IIs in the mobile version on the SAS board tx audio input is a 600 Ohm resistor to the 10 volts for biasing a microphone. This offers a 600 Ohm load to the controller driving the tx. If you remove it this will provide a much higher input impedance. Only a few hundred mV is required to drive an exec IIs tx to full 5 kHz dev. I drive them with the resistor removed, but do add a 2.2 k in series. I hope you do not have a bad tx audio IC, custom made for GE. Easier to replace the exciter. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n9lv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have taken a UHF transmitter and combined it with a VHF receiver for > a crossband split. The very maximum deviation that I can obtain from > the radio is about 1.5 KHz. This is with the pot turn all the way > up. Mic high is being fed into a 1.0 MFD cap through a 15K resistor > to the high side of the volume control. The audio is clear, just not > all that loud. > > Mathew >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor Compa station converstion
George, As some have said it will need retuning for that much move and a test set is a good thing to have for this. Makes life so much easier. I have tuned Micors with a voltmeter, analog works best, and typically if one sees in the manual to set the test set selector switch to say position 3 then pin 3 on the test connector is what is read so it can be done. The receiver is not as troublesom with high out put sig gen. One can peak the tuning coils/caps reducing the sig output as you go. The transmitter is another critter for you will have no or very little power out until the final stages of tuning and then power pops up. Some Micor PAs have some tuning and really need manual for this. I have gotten close by using HT with S meter, but the test set makes it so easy. Start with the oscillators first. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "n3gh_1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gentlemen, > Appreciate some direction. > I first connected a controller and tested this unit on it's original > frequency pair (460.625 Mhz +) successfully. Then I send the ICOM's > out for the new amateur frequency pair (443.050 +) Mhz. Upon getting > them back from Bomar in NJ I plugged them in and thought to run a > quick test. > Knowing I would have to realign the receiver and transmitter I still > thought it would work somewhat. I was Wrong!! > No transmitter output, no recieve. > First question is shouldn't the unit worked well enough to receive > some and transmit? > Second question is the manual I have describes the alignment procedure > using the Motorola test set only. Does anyone have test point > descriptions for use with general test equipment? (Scope, DMM, Counter) > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > Thanks > > N3GH > George > (W3BD repeater) >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Simplex repeater Controller
Randy, The RS, as others have suggested, did just as you want and yes they have not made them for a number of years. Every once in a while do see on ebay. I've used a version of the ISD voice R/P IC for similar applications. The RS was 20 sec, but ISD made the same in their ISD14xx series in 20 to 4 minute units. JameCo has them. Would require some small interface to make it work such as use COS to force record and then strobe and playback and generate PTT. I think Hamtronics made about the same. They did a clever, non- documented, not good design engineering of the IC on the audio output on playback would go to about 2.5 VDC, 0 when dormant. They used it to generate a ptt on playback. It did work. I have a similar device I got in a trade about 10 years ago from a company who use to sell as a talking repeater controller. They used the slogan "our controllers speak for themselves". It lasted about a year. They went on to bigger and better things such as voice signs for such as "wet floor" signs for the blind. I have one of these you can have for the $7 shipping. I will have to dig in the junk box to find, but it is new, never been used in the box (old time wise). I'll look for it and do some studing to see what it would take to adapt it for your application. 73, ron, n9ee/r ps For some reason some seem to take a good subject and talk about other things such as language. Well, when it comes to hams they talk about a lot, hi. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Randy Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Greetings to the Group > > I need a little advise. I am putting together a simplex repeater for > a non-profit group that already has a frequency but they need to > extend their range. Basically what I an looking for is a DVR type > controller to record and spit back out on the same radio. > Does anyone know of something available that is not the cost of a > full blown controller? > > Thanks > > Randy Elliott VE3JPU > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Simple PIC Repeater Controller
Dinesh, Looked at your controller. Looks pretty good. However, did not see any CW ID or audio processing, a must for a ham repeater. Adding these is a simple thing. CW ID is mostly software. With small PIC memory maybe not enough room. >From your schematic it appears there are two boards, the controller and a relay board, but the picture think shows all on one board. I am sure the relays are a big expense which would have little use in most repeaters. There are needs some times for these, but usually not in a low cost control. One suggestion. On the 7805 reg noticed 100 uf and 10 uf caps on input & output. Suggest removing the 100 uf on output for it would require respectable large surge current on power up and add 0.1 uf on both input and output. The 7805 has lots of gain and will oscillate easily. 10 uf caps would resonate at low freq providing little high freq response where the 7805 might like to oscillate. >From the relays you used seems overkill for a simple controller. However, it does allow you to use as a remote controller for turning on/off some large items. As with most CPU/software based products one can make for a number of applications with only software changes. Maybe you have already done this. Might be reason for large relays and understand this. Playing with these MPUs for embedded applications can be lots of fun. Howver, don't rely on becoming only a software puke, hi. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Dinesh Gajjar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have made a simple PIC controller with 8 relays. Operates on 12VDC & > has 4 digit PW on PIC. Please check-out details at > http://www.products.foxdelta.com/repeater.htm > > 73s/Dinesh > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: 6mtr duplexer
Steve, Since you have 500 kHz split you will need cans which as you have found expensive. Some have used 1-5/8 heliax with success, but don't think at 500 kHz. Wish I could say more. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi > can anyone recommend a cheapish 6mtr duplexer, not a home > made heliax one. Tx freq is 50.750 Rx 51.250 > I did play with a heliax one and it was a lot of trouble, going off tune, causing desense etc,etc. Big problem is Iam in the UK > and prices are very expensive, around 900 UK pounds. > > > Thanks > > Steve > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: OT-Code speed.. was Radio quality
Mike, Know what you mean with the amazment of watching a high speed CW op (35 wpm is nothing). Have local friend who was ship op for years back to WWII and he is great for Field Day. About the only one whose log can be read. I use to work a lot of CW and enjoyed it, but never broke 25 wpm. I got my call for CW, but seems many ops thought my key broke and ask me to repeat...did not save much time. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Perryman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I know a fellow who can run in the neighborhood of 80wpm... Tom was a > high-speed intercept operator copying cut numbers (coded numbers in groups > of 5 characters) sent by Russian operators during the cold war. It is > amazing to watch him work in a contest. I can't even come close to copying > his work.. > You may hear him on this weekend, his call is N4NW, he was talking about a > single-band effort on either 80m.. or 160m.. > > Good luck to all in this weekends contest! > 73 > Mike Perryman > www.k5jmp.us > > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mark A. Holman > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 9:38 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: Radio quality (was RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power) > > > wouldn't it be nice to send code that fast ? > > :-) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Doh! Fingers run at about 90 WPM, brain tends to lag behind... > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Dengler > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:08 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: Radio quality (was RE: [Repeater-Builder] UHF Power) > > > At 2/15/2006 09:46 AM, you wrote: > Ok, I'll bite-what's AIP? I have a G707, and don't > remember seeing > anything labeled like that. > Kenwood's AIP = "Advanced Intercept Point". It reduces the > sensitivity > of the receiver which has the effect of reducing receiver- induced > intermod by lowering the TOIP/compression point. > ^ > That should be "raising the TOIP/compression point". > > Bob NO6B > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.9/261 - Release > Date: 2/15/2006 > > > > > > -- > MZ > > > > > > > > > -- > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > a.. Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > -- > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: old mobile telephone systems
Yes, IMTS, and other modes on same system, is dead in USA. Verizon, old GTE, turned off theirs in 1994. I was working with a company to use the system, but they could not compete with the shirt pocket cel phones. Verizon at the time was using the system only for their execs giving free to them mobile phones. After some study they decided the shirt pocket phones were better and killed the whole sytem in one swoop...on one day/dead the next. However, there are still systems in place. They are in places like South America where users are spread out over wide areas making a cel system not cost effective. I've seen sources of the old Motorola IMTS phones still new in the box being shipped outside the USA. There is still a market and have seen other manufacures with more modern protocalls using the frequencies. The Verizon tower about 10 miles from me is a cel phone site. I could have bought it for about $100k, but did not have the vision. It has to be bringing in about $60k/yr. I have 3 or 4 sets of crystals for the Micor for the system, but little interest. I am sure Verizon and others are keeping the freqs because once someone gets a commerical freq they are very reluctent to give it up. ron -- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, JOHN MACKEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there anywhere that still has old 35/43 MHz, 150 Mhz, or 450 MHz mobile > phone systems still active? > > -- Original Message -- > SNIP > > > You'd think it should be getting BETTER with all of the VHF/UHF paging > > > activity having dropped off in many areas, IMTS being dead (or in some > > > cases, the channels re-used for other purposes), etc., but that doesn't > seem > > > to be the case. Go figure. > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: controller question
Nate, Wy0X Don't want to leave IRLP are bunch of old foggies. IRLP is excellent system. We have 3 or 4 here in Tampa area and many enjoy the operation. However, some did get turned off when certain subjects came up. We have a few Echolink stations also. IRLP and Echolink are, in my opion, great for ham radio. Some of my repeater users don't think so, but that is what make us. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator wrote: > > Chris, > > > > I think some of the responses about echolink to IRLP are correct. > > > > IRLP is much more restrictive with their web police terminating > > connections if the subject matter such as politics and religion are > > discussed. > > Maybe one or two owners might act that way, but lumping all of the nice > folks that make up IRLP into your personal problem with someone, isn't fair. > > Besides, just like a repeater owner can choose who they want on their > repeaters, reflector owners can do the same thing. > > Nate WY0X > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: power supply loads
Hi all, I've use hair dryers and heat guns to test 120 volt small generator. Works great. Even used a small heater I bought for my son about 14 years ago that provides for a 500, 1000 & 1500 W swithcable load at 120 VAC. A 1000 W hair dryer (typical) at 120 VAC RMS thats 14.4 Ohms. At 13.8 VDC (not many hair dryers operate on 13.8), where so much testing of power supplies is these days 13.8/14.4 Ohms is 0.96 A. I use up to four 3 Ohm, 100 W resistors allowing for selecting a pretty good load down to .75 Ohm if needed or 18.4 A. ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "skipp025" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Surplus Resistors often work well for power supply > test loads, but I like to use hair dry heating elements, > which are cheap if not free from a dead hair dryer. > > Nichrome wire elements work very well. > They're also very handy with large value low voltage > caps when zapping dead NiCad Batteries back to life. > Put a hair dryer heater in series with a high current > low voltage power supply to your zap cap bank to work > much faster through the dead battery bank. > > cheers, > skipp > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: controller question
Chris, I think some of the responses about echolink to IRLP are correct. IRLP is much more restrictive with their web police terminating connections if the subject matter such as politics and religion are discussed. Echolink is much more forgiving. I have echolink on my 2 meter repeater here in Tampa area and it is great system. Interconnecting them would be good in some applications, but make sure you get permission from the sysops. I would think if your application is emergency service related it would be acceptable, but have to talk to them. 73, ron, n9ee/r --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Is there a repeater controller that I could use to tie an Echolink > and IRLP together with? One that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? > > >Chris KA7CJH > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Loss through adaptors:
Dave, If you have all these adapters in line feel lucky with only 1 db loss. Good adapters are sometimes hard to find unless one wants to spend some real money. The Radio Shack and most at hamfest are junk...works good on CB I guess. I've seen barrel connectors with 3 db loss at 150 MHz. ron --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Dave VanHorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This one is a bit funny.. > > As part of the big project this weekend, I had this UHF amp with > output on a pigtail with a BNC male on the end. I needed to connect > with the UHF cans about 6 inches and 180 degrees of bend away, but > didn't have the bits to make that cable, so I used some adaptors... > > Working backwards from the can: > N male to PL female. > PL male PL Male. > PL right angle. > PL female to N male. > N female to PL male. > PL Right angle. > PL Female to BNC male. > BNC female to BNC Female. > > What seems like pointless conversions in this chain were needed to > clear the body of the cans. > > When testing at full power, this conglomeration of nightmares > actually gets warm. The total loss through them is about 1dB though, > which brings us back to the question asked last week or so about loss > in adaptors.. Looks like roughly 0.2dB > > So, a rule of thumb emerges: Better to have three feet of good cable, > than one good adaptor. > > > Now I've made up a short BNC male to N hardline jumper, and I'm ready > to go put that in place, but it will still require a BNC female- > female to make the link. I'm thinking of wrapping that BNC junction > in copper tape, because I don't think BNCs are all that "Tight". > > In the future, I may just pop the covers on the amp and bring the > hardlines right to the amp itself, eliminating any connectors. > > Thoughts on my temporary solution? > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
