Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Frequency Change do I retune duplexer?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The pad is only used during testing to isolate mismatch between the 
signal generator and spectrum analyzer and the device under test - not 
to be left in permanently.  At WACOM it was standard practice to use a 
10 dB pad between the test equipment and the device under test.  This is 
because it is not a perfect world, and even top notch equipment may not 
be exactly what you expect - cheap insurance.  73.  Steve NU5D


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 6/29/2008 22:57, you wrote:
>
>   
>> This is why it is best to put about 1-2 db 50 ohm pad between the duplexer
>> and the receiver, to help keep the receive side at 50 ohm.
>> 
>
> And degrade my system sensitivity by that same amount?  No thanks.  The 
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Frequency Change do I retune duplexer?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

No Skipp, deviation was not mentioned, but the frequency change is on 
the same magnitude as increasing transmitter deviation - a 12.5 khz 
shift in frequency.  73, Steve NU5D


skipp025 wrote:
>> "Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I beg to differ on this one, most respectfully, but we are 
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Frequency Change do I retune duplexer?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I beg to differ on this one, most respectfully, but we are talking about 
the difference between running the transmitter at 2.5 Khz deviation vs 
5.0 Khz, ie, 12.5 Khz occupied band width, vs, 25 khz occupied band 
width - does this mean a duplexer retune is needed when we switch from 
narrow FM to wide FM in modulation ?  I will concede that the depth in 
notch is much more dramatic than the change in pass band, and if the 
system is marginal to begin with, it might make a difference, but for 
the most part, moving 12.5 Khz would not be noticeable in performance.  
Of course, there is no harm in re-tuning (I hope)... 73,

Steve NU5D


skipp025 wrote:
> Hi Paul, 
>
> I go the other way where multiple Duplexer High-Q Series Cavities 
> have a deep sharp reject notch and a 12.5 KHz shift from F-center 
> results in a quite noticeable performance change. 
>
> cheers,
> s. 
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Frequency Change do I retune duplexer?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

12.5 Khz should not make any noticeable difference.  Steve


garyp609 wrote:
> I have a TX/RX Vari-Notch duplexer. Would the same thing apply to no 
> re-tuning?
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Who's fixing Service Monitors these days?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Ken did a nice rehab on my IFR500.

http://www.kgelectronics.com/about.html

Steve NU5D


ka9qjg wrote:
>
> I really had Great Service from Bob at http://www.cardinalelec.com/
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Fortunately it was   only a Couple hour drive to drop it off and pick 
> it up , This is where the Pros go for the FCC And Military Certification .
>
>  
>
> Good Luck
>
>  
>
> Don KA9QJG
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] isolator - circulator loss

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Running 19 chs X 4 sites Simulcast / Voters - Already split antennas - 9 
ch / 10 ch DB Spectra combiners - Still get around 37 watts after 
combining 100 watt station - The old DB CUBE was a little better on loss 
- would need another room for combining, though.  Steve NU5D


KF4TNP wrote:
>
> Jamey,
>
> Brent here, how you been?
>
>  
>
> 10 channel system on 800mhz
>
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Folded Diploles or Vertical antenna?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I beg to differ on the PEP vs Average in this instance.

On an amplitude varying signal, PEP and AVERAGE are not the same (SSB or 
a complex amplitude modulating waveform).  For FM, however, since FM has 
a constant amplitude signal, I believe PEP and Average will be the same. 

Once had a VHF Mastr Pro mobile showing well over 150 watts - a broken 
antenna connection and infinite (almost) SWR can make a meter read funny 
- also had a 450 IMTS mobile phone with a broken center conductor that 
had a very good SWR reading - just not much range - Your Mileage May 
Vary, and I may be wrong.

73, Steve NU5D


Wayne wrote:
>   Questions can arise here.
>   First, what kind of wattmeter, with what accuracy level is he using.
>   Is in an RMS or peak reading unit?
>   Makes a difference.
>   Where is he measuring the power.
>   






Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> 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] noise on exposed folded dipole arrays and fiberglass encased antennas - YES !

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

A couple of observations:

Same gain - same coverage.  Fiberglass encased or exposed dipole - 5.8 
dBd = 5.8 dBd - this is about the max you can expect from a 2M antenna 
before the law of diminishing returns kicks in.  More Gain for BUCKS 
- look at a DB228 - 40 some odd ft long exposed dipole array and an 
offset pattern.  Some of the numbers I have seen published for antennas 
are pure bull.  Let the buyer be ware.

My 30 years in LMR and lots of trips up the tower.  Fiberglass encased 
antennas get blown to kingdom come more often than exposed dipole arrays.

Exposed dipole arrays suffer loose hardware and noise when you run in 
duplex - learn about isolated TEEs and effective sensitivity before you 
go any further.

Ron, N9EE makes a lot of sense on this one - easy to get to and change - 
use the diamond or comet job - also hustler.

Nate hit the nail on the head about Height...Why have a 100 plus watt 
repeater in a non-voted system with 2 to 4 watt talkies trying to talk 
inDon't make much sense and won't buy you any coverage - now one way 
paging, or tall tower with split send and rec antennas and TTA - makes a 
whole new game plan.

Best option - birds nest on the ground - find a tall building WITHOUT 
radio tenants - A congested site that cannot receive is close to useless 
unless you have a separate receive site, or voting receivers.  You can 
also reach a point of diminishing returns on antenna height - remember 
96.6 plus 20 times the common log of the distance in miles plus 20 times 
the common log of the frequency in Ghz will yield path loss.  Start with 
a 4 watt talkie in the clear (deduct 20 dB for wearing the talkie on 
your belt in a car), and calculate to space loss, antenna gain, line and 
duplexer loss, and see how much over say -120 dBm actually gets to the 
receiver.  Most receivers get 12 dB sinad at around 118 to 122 dBm at 
the antenna.  Don't forget effective sensitivity - just because the 
receive can hear -119 from a generator don't mean the noise from a 
paging or fm broadcast station won't stifle the receiver.  Also cavity 
filters don't necessarily block out of band signals.  Anyhow, the point 
is that when the subscriber unit lacks enough RF to get to the receiver 
due to path loss, antenna height won't help.

50 ft - I would probably use 1/2" heliax, and first use whatever antenna 
I have laying around.  If I have to reach in my pocket and buy the 
thing, then the $200 job looks pretty good (because at 50 ft it is easy 
to change out when it craps out) - Don't forget proper grounding, 
grounding kits on the transmission line, polyphasers, etc.

Another thing - is the site in the middle of the desired coverage area 
?  If not, an offset pattern antenna may be in order (no need to pump 
signal into an area where there are no users.  If the 50 ft tower is on 
a big mountain overlooking the town, then both an offset pattern AND 
depressed pattern may be in order.

Anyhow that is how I would handle the question for my own use.  As 
always I may be wrong, your mileage may vary, etc.  Best 73,

Steve NU5D



skipp025 wrote:
>> after our test here we found also that Fiberglass seems to 
>> catch static much more then metal antenna. 
>> 
>
> Static is not exclusive to one type of antenna... I've had 
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: P25 (mis)Information?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I believe there is more that just amplitude involved Dan.  The vocoder 
coding algorithm handles sound patterns to (hopefully) improve 
intelligibility.  I remember part of the selection of the IMBE vocoder 
dealt with voice inflection and the receiving station being able to 
discern subtleties in voice - fear - panic, or so I have heard.  Of 
course I very well may be wrong.  I do remember the old Secode consoles 
having compression and alc on the TX - not sure about receive - made the 
mechanical clock sound like a teletype machine next to the mic.  Lets 
see, in 1995 were you referring to Motorola DES voice encryption as the 
digital communications system ? 

73, Steve NU5D


Dan Hancock wrote:
> I never cease to be amazed at how the simple answer to problems like 
> this get overlooked.
> Give the FD /noise cancelling microphones. /The less background the 
> mic picks up the less distortion problem there is.
> I've been on an 800 digital sytem for about 13 years now. Our earlier 
> purchased radios came with noise cancelling mics, that later ones 
> didn't. OMG what a difference. Some radios are so low in TX audio that 
> even with the console volume at full you have trouble hearing the 
> troopers. Then you get someone who's used to the noise cancelling mics 
> using the non cancellers and they blow you out of the console. I guess 
> the Motherola engineers never heard of ALC or the concept of using it 
> on the console to keep audio levels even.
>  
> Dan Hancock  N8DJP
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] P25 (mis)Information?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

On re-re-reading the post, I suspect the MA/COM salesman proposes just 
adding an analog trunked group to the system and calling  that group 
talk-around.  Just another group in the trunked system.  Any group can 
be either Provoice (EDACS only) or P25 digital or Analog FM. 

To many folks in the land mobile business talk-around refers to simplex 
operation on the output frequency of a repeater station and operation 
independent of the repeater station.  (hence my earlier post about 
collisions with trunked and simplex operations).

 From what I understand the problem with high noise environments and 
intelligibility is due to the characteristics of the DVSI IMBE vocoder 
and how this noise is treated in quantizing.  Another talk group will 
not help in building coverage issues because the trunked system treats 
all groups alike unless a group by attributes is steered to one 
particular site in a multisite system.  I am most familiar with simulcast.

I believe the problems with P25 digital are exactly that and have 
nothing to do with brand or manufacturer.

73, Steve NU5D


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Not wanting to start a flame war, but since I know there are some P25 
> gurus on here, I am posting this email exchange between an EDACS user 
> and their local representative. Its rather self explanatory, I am 
> looking for comments on the response; specifically, don't P25 radios 
> have an analog mode? All (constructive) comments welcome.
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr II white noise on transmit

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

You could also turn the deviation pots - CG and Voice to min - not as 
solid as a ground on the input, but might help divide and conquer the 
noise source - I don't recall a M2 mobile making noise / hiss during 
TX.  On a repeater station, a gate may be leaking causing some pass 
thru, but this would go away with a strong signal on the input.  Steve NU5D


Chuck Kelsey wrote:
> Tom -
>
> Let us know your results.
>
> Chuck
> WB2EDV
>
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Thomas Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 10:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr II white noise on transmit
>
>
>   
>> I don't think there is anything connected to the CG HI input right now so I
>> will give it a try.
>>
>> It is a Mastr II station.
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: mice and the trusty old GE Master Pro

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Never fazed the Station - BTW, we are using some ultra sonic noise 
sources that plug into the AC outlets to deter rodents in our 911 center 
and some rural tx sites.  Steve NU5D

skipp025 wrote:
> Re: mice and the GE Master Pro 
>
> What you didn't say was how the GE Master Pro in most 
> typical cases probably kept working as normal. 
>
> Hard as heck to kill a GE Master Pro I'd still have a number 
> of them in service except I have to pay the site power bill and 
> those tx strip tubes love to stay warm 24/7. 
>
> The Master Pro Receivers are still very much killer good for 
> current repeater projects. The front ends are very stout and 
> the design is a well known solid peformer. 
>
> I hate to see the receivers go in the dumpster... 
>
> cheers, 
> skipp 
>
>   
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] mice at repeater sights

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The Later Mastr Pro GE series base stations used a slanted heat sink for 
the 12.6 and 10 V pass regulators.  The chassis formed the back, and 
there was a cover on the front making a conduit for forced air from the 
4 inch muffin fan.  Poor field mouse got into the slanted heat sink, 
lost his grip, and went head first into the muffin fan - - did not 
decapitate but did trap him there and stall the fan - found the 
mummified remains some time later - then there are stories of a micor 
repeater loosing the 10 v return in the exciter - due to mouse urine 
destroying the trace on the PCB and various stories of stench.  Best 
Memorial Day wishes to all,  73, Steve NU5D

Re: [Repeater-Builder] IFR 1900 CSA

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

One of the few boxes that goes 1296 and beyond.  Don't know how much 
support you can get from AEROFLEX or Cardinal Electronics.  Nice box - 
is more a cell site test unit than a service monitor.  I have both an 
8921, 1900, and 120B.  The 8921 rides with me all the time.  Steve NU5D


cruizzer77 wrote:
> I've been interested in a service monitor with spectrum and tracking
> for some time. Now I'd have the possibility to get an IFR 1900 CSA for
> $1200, the problem being that power meter and am modulation fail the
> self test. The plus points I see in this unit are that it's not too
> old and it seems to be a full-feature rig with nothing left to desire. 
>
> I'd like to ask you the following:
>
> - Is there any hope to repair the non-working parts?
> - Does anyone have a service manual (maintenance manual) for it? These
> seem to be damn hard to track down.
> - Should I in general prefer this rig to a 8924C? Most other monitors
> including the 8920B (which seems to be an all-time favorite) are too
> expensive from the start. Of course this is a matter of personal
> opinion, but I'd like to hear your opinion.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Regards
> Martin
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] OT Dayton Hamvention Group OT

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hamvention/
MCH wrote:
> List NAME???
>
> Joe M.
>   






Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> 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/

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cushman CE3

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Seems like to OEM is Oven Air - I believe they are still in business.  
Steve NU5D


n9wys wrote:
> If Tom needs a 5 MHz reference oscillator, they can be had for under $50 at
> www.alltronics.com... I picked one up to use as an HSO in an MSF5000
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] IFR 1600s

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

My 1900 has similar Tracking Generator Resolution.  Low Resolution = 
Fastest Sweep - may pass over some stuff that would be displayed in HI 
RES that is a much slower sweep.  I would expect some difference in the 
trace.  Best success, Steve Bosshard NU5D


Joel wrote:
> Hello Group
>
>
>
> Hope you'all may be able to help,my IFR 16006 is due for calibration but
> still passes all self test.The problem is in the trackin generator when
> tuning duplexer's it has three settings for the tracking gen, low,
> medium and high,I thought it was only susposed to just change the scan
> rate but it will show at different positions in low, medium and
> highmaybe 

[Repeater-Builder] Angle Linear 3/31/08

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I just received a note from Chip Angle that he will continue to provide 
preamps for the ham community.  Filters and duplexers for amateur 
applications were taking a disproportionate amount of time and he is 
discontinuing that part of his business.  73, Steve NU5D

[Repeater-Builder] 24 vdc to 12 vdc smoke

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The protection diode is typically across the power leads to the radio 
being protected (in parallel) , and not in series wit the radio because 
of both the forward drop of a silicon diode (around 0.7 V depending on 
the characteristics of the diode) , and the current carrying capability 
of the diode.

The Cathode of the protection diode connects to A+.  The Anode of the 
protection diode connects to - which when you use the bottom battery in 
a string of 2, 12 volt batteries is chassis / frame Ground.  Much like a 
Zener that clamps -this clamping voltage  is what a distinguishes a 
transorb from an ordinary protection diode.

When both batteries are alive and well, the 2, 12 volt batteries in 
series form 24 volts which when applied through the solenoid, to the 
starter motor, and back to chassis form a complete circuit or loop.

When someone forgets and leaves the radio turned on, connected across 
the bottom 12 volt battery and discharges the bottom battery, the top 
battery remains charged.

The bottom or discharged battery is depleted and cannot power the radio 
or aid or oppose current through the starter motor.  It is as though the 
bottom battery were removed.

Now when the operator engages the starter motor, only the top battery 
has the potential to cause current to flow.

This current flows from the + post of the top battery, thru the 
solenoid, thru the starter motor, thru the radio (the battery that the 
radio is connected across is dead and for all practical purposes does 
not exit) and completes the circuit at the - post of the top battery.  
(I don't want to start an electron current vs conventional current 
discussion).

The starter will try and draw several hundred amps.  The radio and 
protection diode can only handle maybe 20 amps, and then only for a 
brief period of time.

If the radio is fused, the fuse should blow.  If the radio is not fused, 
the radio will blow, because the current carrying capability of the 
protection diode is no match for the current carrying capability of a 24 
volt starter motor and 500 mcm cable...

I hope this makes sense, Dave,  73, Steve NU5D


Dave Gomberg wrote:
> At 09:56 3/25/2008, Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
>   
>> Anyhow, without a fuse, the reverse protection diode or transorb in the
>> radio tries to short and shunt the reverse current from the radio.
>> 
>
> So you are saying it is in parallel (and reverse direction), not 
> series (in forward direction)?
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 24 vdc to 12 vdc

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

This assumes that the installer did not fuse the + lead to the radio.  
Normally a 25 to 35 watt radio has a 15 amp fuse but you might be 
surprised how many times the power cable has been cut and no fuse.  
Anyhow, without a fuse, the reverse protection diode or transorb in the 
radio tries to short and shunt the reverse current from the radio.  Most 
of these can handle about 20 amps for a few seconds before the smoke 
gets out.  Then the reverse protection diode is essentially gone and 
next in line us usually the audio power amp, and RF PA.  While the radio 
tries to act like a short (for a few brief moments during cranking with 
the first battery dead the starter will draw hundreds of amps (or try 
to) thru the radio and protection diode.  This doesn't continue very 
long at all.  If the radio is properly fused, then the diode may short 
and blow the fuse, but without a fuse, the radio gets blown.

Steve

Dave Gomberg wrote:
> At 05:22 3/25/2008, Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
>   
>> any protection diodes - 10 amp protection diode against 400 amp starter
>> current - no contest.
>> 
>
> Steve, this confuses the dickens out of me.   I now understand the 
> reverse polarity part, but won't the protection diode be reverse 
> direction, and therefore the only relevant stat is the reverse 
> voltage, 12v, and therefore presumably within ratings?
>
> I don't see what the current has to do with it because the diode will 
> be non-conducting.   The current rating is only for the conducting 
> direction, right?  (with one battery dead, the other battery will cause
> reverse current thru the first battery during cranking and at that time the 
> protection diode will be briefly conducting).
>
>
>
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital/>

[Repeater-Builder] 24 vdc to 12vdc

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Some of the earlier equipment with 24 volt power and tube radios did use 
a big ballast resistor.  It did put out some heat.  There was not that 
much difference in current draw between send and receive, so you might 
have 14 volts on receive and drop to 11 or so on send - with solid state 
the currents are much different - get a dc to dc  converter. 

Some fire apparatus also had a separate battery and charging system for 
a water pump.  We have connected radio equipment to the pump electrical 
system but the conductor runs were kinda long and lots of opportunities 
to pick up noise in the power system.  Steve NU5D

>>  I know I could use a 
>> droping resistor but I can see it making a lot of heat 
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 24 vdc to 12 vdc

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have installed land mobile stuff in Gov Surplus fire equipment, (right 
next to Fort Hood) and 24 volt Forestry Service and 24 V street 
sweeping  equipment over the years.  I will NOT install any equipment 
across one battery in a 24 V string. 

Take it somewhere else and let them do it.  I will not.

Without exception, from a RaVo street sweeper to a 2.25 ton truck, the 
driver will forget and leave the equipment turned on that is across the 
one battery resulting in that one battery going dead. 

Now picture this.  2 batteries in a string.  One dead, one hot and 
healthy.  Just for sake of discussion. lets say the radio / siren, stuff 
is across the bottom battery.  Neg to GND, Positive to the Radio / Siren 
stuff AND the Negative of the second battery.  Positive of the second 
battery to the starter solenoid, etc.

As long as both batteries are charged this works GREAT.  When the bottom 
battery is dead, and the top battery is OK, and the driver hits the Cole 
Hersey Switch and tries to crank the engine it is just as though the 
first battery was no longer there.  Remember that the Positive of the 
bottom battery (now dead) is connected to the Negative if the second 
battery, thru the starter motor and back to ground.

This effectively does 2 things.  1 - reverse polarity is applied to the 
dead battery and whatever equipment is hooked to it.  2 - The cranking 
current will be in excess of 400 amps.

The fuse in the Neg side of the radio most likely won't make any 
difference because the case of the radio is tied to the chassis of the 
vehicle - ground.  The fuse in the positive side (if present) may save 
the radio, but most often, the audio PA and RF PA are history as well as 
any protection diodes - 10 amp protection diode against 400 amp starter 
current - no contest.

So, spring for the Astron or NewMar or whatever  DC-DC converter - I 
like the fully isolated if possible or else I would encourage anyone to 
stay away from the one battery connection.  Forklifts are even worse.  
Remember it is just a matter of time before stuff gets smoked...

Steve NU5D
School of Hard Knocks...

Ron Wright wrote:
> Depending on the load connecting across one battery, the one connected to 
> ground or the lower of the 2 12 batteries, will work.  I would not do is load 
> is heavy because I am sure the charging system is for both batteries and 
> draining one much more than the other could upset things.
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Ritron RRX450 Manual

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have the 454 but no RRX - might try http://www.ritron.com and see if 
they will sell a manual ?  Steve NU5D

Jack Hayes wrote:
> I'm still searching for a manual (of copy) for a Ritron Patriot RRX450 
> UHF programmable repeater.  Happy to pay copying costs and postage -- 
> or whatever you like.
>
> Thanks,
>
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Tricks & Tips to get a VHF Mastr III on 2M..

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

1 - Be sure it is working properly BEFORE you change anything.
2 - Program the new send and receive frequencies and adjust the VCO's if 
necessary.
3 - Align the receiver front end.

An extender card really helps, but can be done without.  I have tuned 
the front end looking at the IF out with a spectrum display unit.

Last - go thru the factory alignment procedure at the back of the 
service manual and make sure the audio levels are set properly. 

Steve NU5D



n2mci wrote:
> Are there any Tips & Tricks to get a Mastr III rptr. on 2M? We have
> the transmitter working and the rec'er VCO, but the frontend is as 
> fas as it goes but is still not enough.. About 1-1.5 uv sens.
>
> Thanks for any help..
>
> -Pete N2MCI
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Combination of Omni and Yagi antenna

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Decibel Products called something similar a Keyhole Pattern array.  (3 
dB omni and 2, 3 ele yagis in VHF).

Steve NU5D


Camilo So wrote:
>
> Does any know is it possible to use two antenna with a matching line, 
> I mean a G7 and a 12 element Yagi, on 220 MHZ, my G7 have a very good 
> coverage in farther distance, but at a closer distance there is a dead 
> spot due to tall building blocking on the way, but if I use the yagi 
> pointed to that particular area, I have good signal, but to use a 
> voting system
>
> It s going cost me a lot, I was thinking of using two antenna 
> combination at the same time,
>
> The question now is how to calculate the exact length of the matching 
> cable to go for 222.660 MHZ. any suggestion is highly appreciated. 
> Thank You.
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> de W4CSO
>
>  
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Unknown board

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Seems like the chips are switched capacitance audio filters - similar 
used in packet tone encoder / decoder.  Don't have a clue.  Steve


jeffcarlyle wrote:
> Hi all, I posted 4 pics in the photo section of a board I got in a lot
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Astron RS-35M pass transistor Socket

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Hi Vince, cannot help you with the socket - maybe Newark or Mouser, or 
such.  I have seen folks actually solder to the leads on the pass 
transistor if all else fails.  73, Steve NU5D


Vince Staffo wrote:
> My Astron RS-35M Power Supply has developed a problem with one of the
> sockets used for the TO-3 Pass Transistors. The Astron supplied socket 
> does not look like it is very good quality. Does anyone know of a 
> better replacemnt socket that I could use? If so please provide part 
> number and where to order if possible.
>
> Thank You,
>
> Vince
> WB2FYZ
>
>
>
>   

begin:vcard
fn:Steve Bosshard
n:Bosshard;Steve
org:Bosshard Radio Service
adr:;;503 B. South 25th. Street;Temple;Texas;76504;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:254-773-1102
tel;fax:254-773-1174
tel;home:254-770-0111
tel;cell:254-624-4230
url:http://www.bosshardradio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Community Repeater War Stories

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Amen on the LTR trunk.

Worst problem was an electrical contractor and a materials hauler.  The 
haul guy had instructions to report to base when he reached the gravel 
pits.  "This is unit 10, I am at the gravel pit, where do you want me to 
go from here?"

Poor gravel hauler's loudspeaker went open.  He called in every 5 
minutes for the next hour or so, while the electricians were dispatching 
calls - took a 12 pack of Bud to calm that one down.  Steve NU5D


skipp025 wrote:
> Ahh... that magic Busy Channel Lock-out feature that never 
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Unidentified Tone Board

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

You can probably get the truth chart from a Maxon LMR or Selectone LMR 
service manual - The MXCOM chip was not uncommon for them - will take a 
peek in the morning.  Steve NU5D


Terry wrote:
> Can anyone ID this tone encoder board?
>
> IC is mx-com mx315
>
> marked with FT303
>
> 6 dip switches
>
> DCS / PL ?
>
> Truth Chart ?
>
> THX, WX3M
>
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] 1272 Mhz Preamp

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have used many of the ARR preamps.  They are great.  They do not have 
a product in the 1200 Mhz band.  Also I cannot find a cross band coupler 
other that a Diamond MX37 or possibly a Comet product.  I was hoping 
some folks here tried something beside 2M and 70 CM.  Thanks for your 
reply, James and VY 73,

Steve NU5D


James Delancy wrote:
> I am personally a big fan of Advanced Receiver Research (Burlington, 
> CT).  I just ordered 3 different pre-amps from them and had them in a 
> few days.
>
> James
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Matching a 75 ohm antenna

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I had some very nice 3/4" catv 75 ohm line some years ago.  It was foam
dielectric with a jelly filled outer jacket - nice stuff.  I took a hack
saw and split the outer shield kind of like peeling a banana, then
cleaned out the dielectric, and took a small hammer and drove a PL258
over the center pin after using a small amount of passivating compound
on both the center conductor and the outside of the PL258.  Then I took
a small stainless steel water hose clamp to secure the shield, and
skotch coated and taped the mess.

I used this line on a 150 ft water tank UHF repeater behind the M&W Cafe
/ City of Harker Heights, Texas water tank for over 10 years.  The
standing wave was not perfect, but the system - UHF Pro with a Wacom
Duplexer and ARR Preamp worked very well for many years, until the City
decided to de-commission the water tank.  Also I used water hose clamps
to attach grounding braid top and bottom - again skotch coat and tape
and noalox compound sparingly applied.

Yep, its better to match impedances, and it makes it easier to avoid
desense when you do things 'right', but in reality, I doubt you will see
much difference one way or the other - your mileage may vary - back to
bed with visions of  left over of sugar plumbs going through my head,
etc.  Steve NU5D

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 12/23/2007 23:52, you wrote:
>
>   
>> Bob, those 1/12 wave lenths are prety short, I figuerd (in my head)
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair Q202G duplexer Conversion

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

When I moved some 155 mhz duplexers to 146 I found adding a type n elbow
in places where I could not get the notch to move made just enough
difference.  This adds about an inch without having to rebuild the
harness, or else a nice way to test cable lengths.  Also if adding the
elbow makes things worse, then you might want to cut and try.  73, Steve
NU5D

Eric Lemmon wrote:
> Bill,
>
> This topic has been addressed several times in recent years.  There is no
> "formula" for the harness; Sinclair makes two harnesses, one with 12"
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] feedline advice

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Ditto on the super flex - or 1/2" heliax.  de nu5d

Jay Urish wrote:
> Just go get some 1/2 suplerflex and call it good.
>
> Willis M. Hagler wrote:
>   
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I am putting up a UHF repeater in Seattle and have a question
>> regarding feedline losses. The repeater site is on top of a
>> 

/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] RF Guys Chip Programmer problem

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Which radio and which chip - Xicor 2212 and 9346 are pretty simple.  
Others are not as common.  Steve NU5D

PS - 2212 is a parallel eeprom and 9346 is a serial eeprom.  Neither has 
links to burn.  2764s ? are different.  steve

w4wsm wrote:
> Just got a programmer to burn GE chips. I've tried it on 4 different
> computers now and all kinds of printer port settings. It will act like
> it is burning but when I verify it just shows errors. Put the chip
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Zetron model 48 controller

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

http://www.zetron.com/data/site/templates/zetrontemplate.asp?area_0=pages/menus/privateradioprod&area_1=pages/products/privateradio/m48-max

http://tinyurl.com/yva5pd




R.Wesley Bazell Jr wrote:
> Picked up this Model at fort Wayne Hamfest for my MastrII 440 Repeater.
> Have been using Software with computer for ID up till now.
> See no info on Repeater tech website on this Zetron. anyone know how to 
> program  the Eproms on this unit. Have I bought an White Elephant?
>
>
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: AM interference on long cable run

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Both ends need an isolation transformer and both send and receive
audio.  Also if there is a high Z circuit, you may try adding a 1K or so
shunt resistor to lower the impedance of the circuit.  I would
experiment with grounding only one end of the cable at first.  Of course
this is moot with the cable severed by the mower, but there is no reason
the circuit should not work.  Also the .001 line to line and line to
ground may help.  We had music on hold from an AM broadcast station into
a telephone patch years ago, and the .001 capacitors fixed that
particular problem.  Best luck,  Steve NU5D


Jim Brown wrote:
> Skip, I did have transformer coupling on the audio
> lines out at the repeater with both sides of the
> twisted pair isolated from ground, but did not try
> putting transformers in the line back at the computer.
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] TKR-820 Reciever Issues

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

If you are up to removing the eeprom from the front panel (soldered in) 
and mail it to me I will put it in my kpt20 and verify operation - I
have never run into trouble with a UHF repeater.  Some of the TKR720's
were borderline, but the TKR820's were OK.  You don't have a T band unit
or something out of the ordinary do you?

Steve NU5D


John Barrett wrote:
>
> Byte swapped version of the chip was unable to get the test point
> voltages above 150mV on either TX or RX, so I presume I have the byte
> order correct J
>
>  
>
> Data for the chip was generated with KPG21D (the programming software
> for this repeater) and validated with the formula from a 3^rd party
> document detailing the frequency to hex code calculation. The binary
> data saved by KPG21D was edited with a hex editor to extract the 128
> bytes needed for the frequency eeprom.
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ailing Wacom 220Mhz Duplexer

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

See if the screw in side connecting pin on the TEE is loose - glad you 
found it.  I have had a type N tee with a loose connection where the 
side pin screws into the other pin.  sb


Keith, KB7M wrote:
> Just an update on the status of this project.  I thought what I've 
> found might be interesting to the group.
>  
> At the suggestion of a group member, I removed the top and side ports 
> to the cavity.  It turns out that this is quite easy to do.  You just 
> remove the three screws holding the top port, and the nut holding the 
> side port.  At this point the whole assembly lifts out easily.  I 
> inspected the assembly and could see no problems.  I resoldered the

Re: [Repeater-Builder] AM interference on long cable run (was PSE-508-2 Repeater Controller for Mastr II Station)

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have had good luck with k-comm line filters.  First would try 0.001 mf 
line to line and line to ground - on the audio pairs - be sure you are 
using balanced pairs and not grounded single ended lines.  This may mean 
adding a 600 ohm 1:1 transformer at each end. Also 1/4w 100 ohm 
resistors and movs make great line protection for lightning mitigation.  
73, Steve NU5D


Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
> At 05:58 AM 11/21/07, you wrote:
>>  (big chunk cut out)
>>  
>> Al published my EchoLink interface on his web site

Re: [Repeater-Builder] A couple of questions

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Be very sure the repeater is working properly BEFORE you re-crystal and 
re-tune.  This is probably old hat for you, but I have seen many 
problems in recrystalling an unknown status station.  Steve NU5D

Ron Wright wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I order a number of crystals each month and use Bomar.  I also like 
> International, but have had delivery problems with them.  However, both make 
> an excellent crystal.
>
> Bomar has min of $50 so if get only a pair then $25 each with 1 week 
> delivery.  If order 4 or more can get for $15 each with 2 weeks, $10 for 3-4 
> weeks.
>
> International is I think $19.95 for 2 weeks, but not sure if they will make 
> it.  It's been a while.
>
> All you need is freq, model (GE mastr II), where to ship to and method of 
> payment.  Both take credit cards.
>
> On the radio for remote base cannot comment.
>
> 73, ron, n9ee/r
>
>
>
>   
>> From: Joe Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: 2007/11/19 Mon PM 04:45:20 CST
>> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] A couple of questions
>> 
>
>   
>>  
>> Hey everyone
>>
>> I want to ask a couple of questions and see if I get any replies
>>
>> I am getting ready to change a frequency in a mastr II and I got to 
>> buy some crystals Who is doing the best job at a resonable rate with 
>> them nowadays .
>>
>> Secondly I have a radio I want to use for remote base use I need a 
>> mike plug diagram of pinout diagram to make a jack for the controller
>> The radio info is as follows
>>
>> it is a maxon model 1520a mobile
>> plate on back has p/n 717810
>>
>> no serial number
>>
>> Thanks everyone have a great holiday
>>
>> Michael J. Landers
>> Assistant Emergency Radio Officer
>> Chesterfield County Virginia.
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
> Ron Wright, N9EE
> 727-376-6575
> MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS
> Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL
> No tone, all are welcome.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

[Repeater-Builder] Wide Area Coverage

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Imagine your 2M or 70CM base station were on a tall, tall, tower and you 
can key and operate any one of 140 different repeaters world wide, no 
noise, static, etc.

Thats DSTAR today.  From Hawaii to Alaska, to Vancouver to Ottawa, to 
Los Angeles, to London, to Berlin to Venice, to Darwin, AU.  Today and NOW.

I know this is probably a bit off topic, and I appreciate your indulgence.

visit www.dstarusers.org and see who's talking.

Steve NU5D, /K5CTX B  Temple, Texas US


-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] MSR2000 info

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

http://www.batlabs.com/models.html

Jim wrote:
> Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator wrote:
>   
>> hi all,
>>
>> Anyone know details of a MSR2000 with part number C73GSB-3145B.
>> 
>

-- 
/Subscribe to dstar_digital/

Powered by groups.yahoo.com 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Installation of Radio Equipment in Elevator Machine Rooms and Hoistways

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

In Texas the JCAH (Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals)
guidelines forbids installation and operation of radio transmitting
equipment in hospital elevator equipment rooms.  Both Scott and White
and Kings Daughters Hospitals had us re-locate all of their radio
equipment in the early 90s..  Coaxial cables still run through the
elevator rooms, but there is no radio equipment installed therin.  As
earlier stated graphite from the motor brushes along with noise from
relay contactors and now SCR/Triac control is not nice to say nothing of
the ambient noise in the rooms - had to wear headphones to hear a
receiver, make such installations unpleasant at best.  I believe the
reasoning was RF emissions possibly affecting elevator controls.

Steve NU5D


Nate Duehr wrote:
> On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:29 PM, Eric Lemmon wrote:
>
>   
>> to go.  If I remember correctly, the issue was resolved by erecting a
>> fireproof (cinder block) wall to separate the radio equipment from the
>> elevator machine room, in essence creating a new room with a separate
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: duplexer isolation and receiver noise bud

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Can't an isolator do both, provide a constant 50 Ohm load to the 
transmitter, and offer 30 (single junction) to 60 (dual junction) of 
isolation from signals travelling from the antenna to the transmitter 
for mixing.  If isolators were just to provide a constant load, why are 
there dual junction isolators ?

Steve NU5D

>>> The primary reason for a isolator is to prevent intermod
>>>   
>> I strongly disagree...
>> An isolators main purpose is to prevent a power amplifier from burning 
>> up due to excessive reflected power; due to antenna system issues.
>>
>> 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: duplexer isolation and reciev

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Even magnetic amplifiers and tunnel diodes..

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 10/24/2007 19:26, you wrote:
>
>   
>> I would consider anything that uses a semi-condutor material to be
>> active, Silicon and Germanium transistors included.
>> 
>
> According to Wikipedia, a passive device is a device that is not capable of 
> power gain.  If it is capable of power gain, it is an active device.
>
> If needed, I can probably dig up some definition in an IEEE reference that 
> essentially says the same thing.
>
> Bob NO6B
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: duplexer isolation and reciever n

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Wonder if any of these here diodes 'tunnel' ?

Steve NU5D

Jeff DePolo wrote:

Re: [Repeater-Builder] duplexer isolation and reciever noise budget

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

If this is going mobile on a 40 ft crank up I would sure consider
separate antennas is possible.  You can get into some real challenges,
and even with separate antennas you will still have issues to consider. 
Also you will have a much better idea when the repeater pair is
determined.  Steve NU5D


Gary Schafer wrote:
> You won't do it with band pass cavities unless you crank the insertion loss
> way up. What would work for the two simplex radios with the 660 Khz spacing
> is a pass/notch duplexer. It needs to work just like a regular repeater
> duplexer with the same kind of isolation from one radio to the other. You
> need in the neighborhood of 70 to 90 db depending on how good the radios
> are. Very hard to get with pass band cavities. Just look at the curve of a
> pass band cavity at different insertion loss settings and move off of center
> frequency 660 Khz and you will see how far down the attenuation is. Most
> cavity manufacturers have those curves on their web site. Look at different
> size cavities, 4", 6", 10" and you will see that the larger cavities are
> better (have steeper skirts) than the smaller ones. Most will show curves
> for two cascaded cavities too. You will quickly see what is needed for pass
> cavities to get the isolation needed.
>
> When you get the repeater frequencies you will probably have to start over
> again. Two antennas would be a big help if you can do that.
>
> 73
> Gary  K4FMX
>
>   
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John B
>> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 12:51 AM
>> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] duplexer isolation and reciever noise budget
>>
>> I'm attempting to design a system that will have a VHF repeater (freqs
>> not yet determined) sharing an antenna with 2 packet radios (APRS on
>> 144.39 and Winlink on 145.05, either of which may be active as a
>> digipeater at any time).
>>
>> I'm currently considering a bandpass-only "quadplexor" to isolate the
>> radios from each other.. each radio running through a bandpass filter
>> tuned to its frequency only (that includes the transmitter and
>> receiver for the repeater), on the theory that it is a lot easier to
>> pass one frequency than it is to reject 3 others.
>>
>> Assuming that none of the transmitters run more than 50w, how many DB
>> down do I need to be outside of the passband to minimize desense for
>> any of the 3 receivers ??
>>
>> Any other suggestions on how I might handle this hookup would be
>> greatly appreciated. I'm nearing completion my trailer-mounted 40ft
>> crank up tower, and I'm having some problems budgeting space for a
>> filtering system with 12 bandpass cavities without cutting into
>> general cargo space.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Duplexer and noise question

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

If it works into a dummy load without desense you either have a 
feedline/antenna problem or external noise and most likely not the 
duplexer - be sure and use an isolated TEE and sig gen with a dummy load 
to test.  Steve NU5D


jminn699 wrote:
> -I am having the same problem also with a wacom duplexer. On a dummy 
> load the tunning checks great with no desense, but with the antenna 
> attached the repeater will hang on transmitting noise as long as the 
> ttansmitter is on. 
>  I can`t take the system off the air, and I don`t have another 
> duplexer. My short term solution has been to set the repeater hang 
> time to zero. Another would be to make the tx pl different from the 
> rx; but I am hoping to avoid reprogramming all the radios on the 
> system.
>
>  My system is located in a lousy enviorment, a elevator equipment 
> room-there is a layer of carbon dust on everything. I suspect that 
> this dust may have found its way inside the cans, but I can`t take it 
> off the air to open up the cans.
>
>  I hope someone has a solution to this problem.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
>
> --  In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Dan Cation" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>   
>> Hi everyone - new to the group looking for help on a strange 
>> 
> problem.
>   
>>  I've been involved with two repeaters in Southeast Kansas 
>> 
> (Humboldt -
>   
>> 147.18 and 442.900) for over 30 years and work in Electronics,
>> although not in radio.  A couple months ago we lost both repeaters
>> when we had a flood in this area - I took the Wacom duplexer apart 
>> 
> and
>   
>> cleaned any obvious corrosion or such and assumed it would be fine -
>> it tuned up without any trouble and there was almost no corrosion.  
>> 
> I
>   
>> replaced as many of the T connectors as I could and carefully 
>> 
> cleaned
>   
>> any that remained and made new cables of the correct length.  I have
>> built a new repeater but am now having a problem with intermittent
>> buzzing sometimes when the transmitter is up - it will hold the
>> receiver open and cover any signals that aren't pretty strong.  
>> 
> Comes
>   
>> on whenever the transmitter comes up but not always - sometimes it 
>> 
> is
>   
>> fine.  I have tried 3 different transmitters - a Midland 3400, a
>> Midland 340A and even a couple Icom rigs - makes no difference.  
>> 
> Same
>   
>> for receivers - makes no difference.  Never shows up unless the
>> duplexer is hooked to an antenna - works fine on a dummy load.  
>> 
> Tried
>   
>> two different antennas as well.  The noise sounds like bad line 
>> 
> noise,
>   
>> but I can't hear it except on the repeater.  The repeater is at my
>> house right now, but I intend to haul it back to the site to see if 
>> 
> it
>   
>> shows up there as well when I can get time to do it.  Anyone else 
>> 
> ever
>   
>> ran into this kind of thing?
>>
>> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Overlapping Coverage

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The idea with simulcast is to keep the non capture area as small as
possible.  Typically the capture area is that where the dominant
transmitter has a 10 dB or greater advantage.  In capture areas
subscribers hear only one signal  A good test is to broadcast different
audible tones from each site and see which tone is heard.

Running as high power as possible keeps the capture areas as large as
possible and minimizes non-capture areas.

For simulcast to work the signal in the non-capture area needs to arrive
in the non-capture area at the same time from each contributor.  Most
systems are designed in a straight line so that the outer sites don't
overlap.

The GPS signal is used to discipline a master oscillator at each site. 
Every transmitter uses the same MO.  Depending on the number of
channels, you may want to use receiver voting along with bulk delay in a
1.544 mb/s T1 stream. 

Contact Ed O'Connor at Simulcast Solutions or visit their site for some
good information.

http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/

73

Steve NU5D

Bill Powell wrote:
> I'm considering a trunked (type TBD) system on 470 that will have
> significant on-channel overlap.
> The overlap comes about due to the need for multiple sites to fill the
> many holes that will exist with a single site regaurdless of location
> or (reasonable) tower height.
> Assuming that ALL the transmitters are GPS locked and properly set up
> for simulcast operation, what operational problems might I expect?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Powell
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Spectral Power

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I once heard of a term called Gain Bandwidth Product where the greater 
the bandwidth - lower the gain.  FM commercial broadcast uses extremely 
wide bandwidth to support 15 Khz audio and good s/n.  Business once used 
+/- 15 kHz transmitter deviation to support 300 to 3000 Hz, then +/- 5 
kHz, and now +/- 2.5 kHz.

I have had it explained that DSTAR has better s/n because of it's narrow 
bandwidth.

My own observations in 460 mHz trunked radio, repeaters and systems, is 
there is not much noticeable difference in analog FM radios whether they 
are running 2.5 or 5 kHz transmitter deviation.  Every one has told me 
that the s/n will be somewhat worse on 2.5 but I have not noticed it.

This all considers the receiving station is intended to receive the 
bandwidth being transmitted. 

As far as the antenna goes - within reason bandwidth is not an issue - 
kinda like how bright is the light bulb in terms of power applied to the 
antenna - the bandwidth should not matter unless you get out of the 
design bandwidth of the antenna.

Maybe some graduate engineering student has a thesis on this topic?

Steve NU5D (tired old bench technician)

Kris Kirby wrote:
> I've been milling a few things over in my head and one thing that has 
> struck my mind and resonated is power versus modulation -- our 900MHz 
> repeaters typically use a +/-2.5KHz average deviation, which is smaller 
> than the VHF norm of +/-4.5KHz. At almost half the deviation, it would 
> seem that one would obverse an apparent increase in signal power of a 
> little less than three decibels. 
>
> Here's where I'm getting confused: Does 50W RMS at 950MHz over +/-2.5KHz 
> deviation mean the wideband (+/-4.5KHz) rating would be 25W? Does the 
> antenna manufacturer even bother to take deviation into consideration 
> when factoring power specifications? How does this factor in terms of 
> power wasted as heat (in the unlikely case that I'll attempt to put too 
> much power into an insufficently-sized radiator)? 
>
> --
> Kris Kirby, KE4AHR  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * WAR IS PEACE *  FREEDOM IS SLAVERY *
> * IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH * KETCHUP IS *
>   * A VEGETABLE *
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] New Article: Mastr II self quieting

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Once upon a time in the early 80s I worked on an Army Mars repeater that 
self quieted.  Transmitter on 143.990 and received on 148.01.  Seems 
like the transmitter used a X12 multiplier, and the receiver had a 12 
mHz. IF.  Took lots of screen wire and feed thru capacitors to make that 
puppy work.  Steve NU5D ex AAV6NQ.

Scott Zimmerman wrote:
> Fellows,
>  
> I have finally published my article on why the UHF mastr II radio self 
> quiets when converted to a repeater using low-side receiver injection. 
> Please read over it and let me know of any problems or things that 
> just don't make sense.
>  
> http://www.repeater-builder.com/ge/mastrII/m2loproblem.html
>  
> 
>  
> Scott
>  
> Scott Zimmerman
> Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
> 612 Barnett Rd
> Boswell, PA 15531
>  

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

A transmitter may have broadband noise with considerable noise content 
at the receive frequency.  The notch in the transmit side removes 
transmitter noise that may impair your receiver's capability.  In an 
earlier post there was mention of a solid state transmitter.  
Traditionally tube transmitters have higher Q output circuits as opposed 
to wideband circuits in solid state transmitters, so a solid state 
transmitter may need more filtering.

There are also combination band pass / band reject duplexers and also 
band pass only.  Each has a characteristic suited for a particular job.  
Beware, a duplexer may pass an intended frequency PLUS unintended 
frequencies outside the normal band pass.  I found that 158.100 radio 
paging was being received by a dual band antenna, and passed right thru 
a 440 duplexer to cause overload in the receiver front end.  In this 
particular instance the best solution was to go to a monoband antenna.

Wishing you best success, Steve NU5D


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks for the great info as soon as we get the service 
> monitor back we are going to try these things.
>
> I have already seperated the 2 sides and have seen much 
> improvement so I think that this is really my problem.
>
> I do have a question about duplexers in general.  I am 
> sure that this is a dumb question but
> What is the purpose of notching out the receive frequency 
> on the transmit side?  Since I have 6 cans couldn't I move 
> one of the cans from the transmit side to the receive side 
> to give me 4 on the receive and 2 on the transmit?
>
> Thanks,
> Vern
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Decibel did make a 6 cavity notch duplexer - 4" full sized cavities - 
that would work nicely on a 110 Watt  M2 station @ 600 kHz.  Isolated
TEE test into a dummy load - how bad is the receiver desense ?  If you
don't have some test equipment - signal gen, dummy load, and a TEE
fitting with the side pin cut away (makes 60 dB lossy coupling, there
abouts) you probably will need to find someone who does locally that can
help.  73,  Steve NU5D

Eric Lemmon wrote:
> Vern,
>
> Did this problem exist before you had the duplexer tuned?  Was anything at
> all done to your repeater system just before the problem was noticed?
>
> A band reject (notch) duplexer may be incapable of performing even
> satisfactorily at 2m.  Please advise the model number of your duplexer, so
> we can understand your situation.  Are all of your cables double-shielded?
> It might be a good idea to perform a noise-floor test using an "iso-tee" and
> a service monitor.
>
> Some helpful information about investigating desense problems can be found
> here:
>
> 
>
> 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
>  
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Time for an isolated TEE test with a dummy load.  Why did you have the 
duplexers tuned ?  Was there a problem prior?

You should be able to split the duplexer without any trouble - just mark 
things so you can go back as it was.

Best luck and 73, Steve NU5D

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am having some receive problems on my repeater and I am 
> thinking that it might be desense.  I am on 2M running a 
> MASRII repeater with a Decibal Products band reject 6 can 
> duplexer.
>
> While I can key the repeater from a pretty good distance 
> the audio that makes it through the repeater drops off 
> pretty quickly.  I just had the duplexers tuned and they 
> are tuned very well.
>
> So on to my question.  If I were to take and seperate the 
> recv cans from the xmit cans and run to 2 seperate 
> antennas would that mess up the duplexer tuning?  will 20' 
> of vertical seperation plus the cans and the fact that I 
> would be running through seperate cable, make a 
> difference?
>
> Thanks,
> Vern
> KI4ONW
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: NFCC votes to recommend FCC treat all repeaters as repeaters

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

My DSTAR repeater has 3 inputs, and 3 outputs.  In 70 cm it transmits
on  442.000 and receives on 447.000.  On 23 cm it transmits on 1292.1000
and receives on 1272.1000, and the high speed simplex data port operates
on 1253..  Since like many programmable repeaters, I am not locked
into a 5 mHz offset, I can use a 3 mHz split, or a 4.5 mHz split, or
pretty much any 2 frequencies in the 70 cm band that I choose, like
wise, in 23 cm digital voice, there is an input and output.  Our Texas
VHF FM coordinator recommended a 20 Mhz split, but I could just as
easily used a 12 mHz split, or 15 mHz split, or what ever pair of
frequencies I want.  The HS DATA is simplex, but I believe I could have
a different send and receive frequency but have never explored this
facet - today I am using 1253..

I cannot imagine the 70 cm DSTAR repeater not having a transmit
frequency programmed in, thus making it just a receiver in 70 cm, or
just using the 1272.1000 receiver without also using the 1292.1000
transmitter.  I don't even know what would happen if I left the transmit
frequency blank when programming - I suspect there is a default number
that would go into the synthesizer.

When I send on 447.000 the repeater repeats on 442.000, regardless of
any other setting.  When I send on 1272.1000 the repeater repeats my
transmission on 1292.1000 and when I connect to the internet this takes
place on 1253. with a 50 ms turn around time.  I cannot send on
447. without being repeated on 442.000 unless I choose a different
transmit frequency.  I don't know what would happen if I left the
442.000 transmit field blank.  I don't know of anyone who has done this
or any reason why anyone would have a repeater without haviing their
transmitter functional.

I can not send on 447. without my transmission being repeated on
442. regardless of whether I choose to cross band to 1292.1000 also,
or choose to make a gateway call to London, I am still repeated on
442..  This is kinda like one of my first 2M repeaters that had a 10
Meter simplex drop that I could activate with touch tones, and I could
also cross to my 6Meter repeater with touch tone commands if I wanted. 
It was still a 2M repeater.

There is no reason you can't refer to these 2 repeaters and one simplex
high speed data box as multiple inputs and outputs, but they are not
independent of one another.  They are 2 repeaters and a simplex data box
(for lack of a better description). 

When I first installed the DSTAR system May the 5th, It consisted of 2
GE Phoenix radios, one transmit radio on 442.000 and one receive radion
on 447.000 with some creative interfacing to repeat the DSTAR signal. 
About 2 weeks later, the Icom 440 repeater and controller arrived and we
changed out the GEs for the Icom.  Function was the same, except it now
would ID in DSTAR properly.  Next we connected to the internet to enjoy
the gateway features, and next a few weeks ago we added a 23 cm digital
voice repeater and a 23 cm high speed data repeater *loose term repeater
because it uses one frequency, 1253.*.

Maybe there is someone out there that does not use a DSTAR repeater as a
repeater - I have never heard of this but there are many things I do not
know.

Best 73 and also KUDOs to the hard working unpaid volunteer frequency
coordinators who do their split level best to make jello stick to the
wall while they are trying to push wet spaghetti in a straight line
uphill on a slippery slope at the same time while swatting at gnats
buzzing at their sweaty faces.  (No sarcasm meant - I really do
appreciate the work these folks do)  Steve NU5D
. 


>>
>> 
>>> Bottom line guys & gals, The D-Star units have two frequencies one for
>>> Transmit and one for Receive
>>>   
>> Incorrect.  Most D-Star systems have multiple inputs & outputs & are
>> networked via radio & internet to other D-Star systems around the world.
>>
>> 
>
>
> But a 2-meter D-Star repeater has ONE input frequency and ONE output 
> frequency, and does NOT transmit point-to-point communications on that 
> output frequency!  What the rest of the SYSTEM has, or does, is irrelevant: 
> if that 2-meter transmitter is not transmitting point-to-point 
> communications, it is NOT in auxiliary operation.  You are continuing to 
> ignore the key requirement for auxiliary operation on any given frequency, 
> that point-to-point communications are actually TRANSMITTED over that 
> frequency.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Simulcast questions

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

That would be Ed O'Conner at Simulcast Solutions

http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/

Steve NU5D

Brian Gieryk wrote:
> I am looking to set up a simulcast tx with voted rx system on VHF hi 
> band (2 meters) using 3 MSF-5000 digital capable stations, with spectra 
> tac rx'ers.
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Slick Identifier

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Hutton no longer carries Comspec.  I just ordered 3 ID8s yesterday.  My 
account from 1985 was still good.  Steve NU5D

I wonder if I should have purchased one of the micro repeater 
controllers, though - get ID plus controllersb


Mike Morris wrote:
> At 09:13 AM 09/20/07, you wrote:
>> Milt
>>
>> I could not find an ID-8 to purchase.   ComSpec did not list the 
>> item.  I could have missed it.
>
> Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
> Change settings via the Web 
> 
>  
> (Yahoo! ID required)
> Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest 
>  
> | Switch to Fully Featured 
>  
>
> Visit Your Group 
> 
>  
> | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use  | 
> Unsubscribe 
> 
>
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room - testing DSTAR

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

No flames here, Mark,

Maybe we should have stuck with straight keys - those bugs might obscure 
transmissions - maybe a 10 wpm speed limit.  But no, folks added 
microphones and heising coils.  Next thing the cans went to the sideline 
and there were loudspeakers, then Central Electronics with the 
multiphase exciter, and here comes sideband and warbulators2M and 6M 
AM gave way to fm - point being this should be progress - just as 
digital has surpassed almost every analog strong hold.

Your telephone network has used PCM digital mux since the days of N 
Carrier went away - remember LD calls with cross talk in the back ground 
- gone.

Digitized voice is in its infancy in ham radio, but I do believe with 
continued development it will continue to gain acceptance.

I am not so big on critical traffic on ham radio - that is what public 
safety networks are for.  We as hams provide comms for events like 
marathons, parades, etc, and during disasters, augment failed and downed 
public systems.  Critical traffic is not intended to be hams mainstay.  
- kind of off topic for repeater builders, though.

As for serviceability I have been a bench and field tech since 1972, 
when selenium rectifiers stunk, and tuned lines were king.  We could 
actually repair radios then.  Today, unless you have hot air soldering / 
desoldering stations and a microscope, I defy the average tech to get 
into board level repair - has nothing to do with digital, or smarts, or 
education and  everything to do with automated manufacture and 
unbelievable reliability.  It was unusual to see a tube radio in a 
butane truck go 6 months without some kind of failure.  Now it's unusual 
for a modern radio not to outlast several butane trucks - things have 
changed.

Our technology has changed too - the diddle stick is replaced with 
digital pots and firmware upgrades - flash new data and go.

The really sad thing is my profession is also fast disappearing - 2 Way 
Radio Shops are turning into dinosaurs - we still change mics and volume 
controls and do minor repairs - but most major fixes go to a depot 
because who buys several thousand $$$ in custom repair and testing 
fixtures to change a 128 pin IC that cost $20 and fails in 3 out of 
every 500 radios in the first 2 years ???

So, no flames my friend - I too don't like all the change taking place 
but like a wise friend once said "a bend in the road is not the end of 
the road, unless you fail to turn."

73, Steve NU5D



 

n9wys wrote:
> Gentle people,
>
> Although I'm usually very open to newer technology, this digital (or better
> said, "digitized") voice thing has me very concerned.  As a public safety
> worker, I shudder to think that maybe some day I might need assistance and
> call for back-up, only to have my meaning misunderstood because a few
>
> As ham radio operators, one of our missions is to pass critical traffic...
>
>
> Now in regard to the testing/repairing these D-Star systems...  I didn't
> become a ham until later in life, although I've always had an interest in
> radio.  But since I have, I continue to strive to be more than just an
> "appliance operator"...  I need to be able to understand how it works, and
> if within my means, troubleshoot and/or repair it.  Based on the earlier
> statement that the only way to test/repair these stations is to "box and
> ship" it back to the manufacturer, I feel we as Amateurs are taking a huge
> step backward, both for ourselves and for our hobby. 
>
>
> 73 de Mark - N9WYS
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room - testing DSTAR

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I take care of a pretty large EDACS system.  There is a simulator built 
into my COM120B just for EDACS and LTR - even decodes pocsag paging.

This is never used in setting up the base station/repeaters.  The 
procedure uses simple deviation and receiver tests.  Same with 
subscriber units - most (but certainly not all) problems can be caught 
in conventional mode.

On the repeater receiver a sniff point on the discriminator output 
allows basic receiver testing.  This does not simulate DSTAR but gets to 
a go/no go point.  Kind of like the first DPL - I had to buy an 
aftermarket board and wire it to my CE50 service monitor - would encode 
and if the light went out on receive - would decode as well.

I doubt any manufacturer will make a test set for a low volume product 
because there are not enough folks wanting to pay for a DSTAR tester.

Next problem - if the thing is broke - I am not gonna go probing around 
surface mount chips with my simpson and weller - better to box and ship.

Anyhow that another 2 cents - might make payroll if this keeps up...

73, Steve NU5D

Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
>
> And one more point - and it's a major one
>
> You can get P25 test equipment.
>
> Show me one piece of test equipment - an IFR, an HP, a General Dynamics
> (the folks that made some of Motorolas R-series of service monitors) 
> or any
> other test equipment manufacturer that makes a dstar tester. Not even
> the manufacturer has one.
>
> So haw do you verify that a dstar system is actually working right?

[Repeater-Builder] Re: Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too o

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

wb6ymh wrote:
> Technical question: Does a DSTAR radio automatically switch between
> analog and digital?  i.e. can the DSTAR user hear the analog activity
> when his radio is in DStar mode so he can "share" the frequency?
>
> Sharing between digital and analog was tried back in the packet
> days... to say the least it didn't work.
>
> 73's Skip WB6YMH
>
>
>
>   
Hi Skip,

Dang service call broke into coffee time, but I did get to visit the 
local hams for a bit.  As far as I know the DSTAR user radios can be set 
to busy channel lock out, so they will not transmit when there is 
anything on the channel.  They also have an S Meter that will show 
activity, and can be set to monitor for analog or digital.

One down side would be the internet gateway.  I can direct a call to the 
DSTAR repeater in Malibu, CA from here in Temple, Texas  and have no 
idea whether the channel in Malibu had analog traffic or not.  Local 
folks could be observant, but folks thru the gateway would not know.  
This may be how folks contrive the DSTAR repeater to be an AUX Station 
because it can be caused to transmit by another station via the internet 
in another area.  This may be a secondary function, though, because 
primarily the repeater works as a repeater, and I would venture that 2/3 
of the DSTAR systems in the US are not connected to the internet.

73, Steve NU5D

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I think you'll find in most areas where the repeater frequencies are 
> "Full", that there are more repeaters to talk on than there are people 
> to actually talk on them.
>
> And we need more repeaters?
>

My point exactly, Larry - is ham radio best served by more repeaters 
than there are folks to use them blocking folks who want to try and 
revitalize things with a digital system?

Look at http://www.dstarusers.org and see who is talking now.

Maybe this digital stuff is just a fad, and when it dies out, channels 
used for digital should be returned to re-coordination, but to kill an 
innovation at the onset by not allowing a place to operate when there is 
unused / underused space available  just isn't right. 

As far as constant chatter - I would not want that either, but there are 
some repeaters that are just plain dead.  It also seems the assumption 
here is that Joe would not be agreeable to the new folks proposal,  
maybe he would be.

Anyhow this is all intended in the spirit of amateur radio and I don't 
want to provoke any arguments or ill will, as before I am thinking about 
ways to make this work for everyone.  Almost coffee time,  73, Steve NU5D

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Hi Glenn,

If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all 
means leave it alone.  Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well 
with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a 
couple of minutes a day.  The folks wanting the digital repeater could 
help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to 
mess with it.  If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM 
repeater not much different than the others in town.  If they partner 
with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the 
middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore 
Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater 
in the area.

This is only because there are no more 2M or 70CM channels available in 
Joe's neighborhood, and the folks wanting to place the new digital 
system have no other place within the rules to go in the band they want.

Never would I want wholesale run this through and make it happen, but 
thoughtful well planned migration might be a good thing. 

Also like you said, the new equipment would cost more than fixing the 
old system for Joe, but then folks would not have the benefits of the 
digital system - no white noise (garble instead), good comm grade audio, 
and a smaller occupied bandwidth.

I certainly respect your comments, and your points are valid.  I am just 
trying to put forth some ideas that will foster a planned gradual move 
for some folks to digital - by no means a wholesale jump like the 
cellular folks did.  Also there are still folks with radios that don't 
have channel guard tone - some things don't change.

Lets put your 2 cents and a few others together and have a cup of 
coffee,  73, Steve NU5D

(BTW - I can assure you that not all land mobile operators, RCCs etc 
have buckets of money - forced migration in the SMR business was very 
costly for me, and this don't take into account loss of customers who 
didn't want to mess with re-programming radios)  sb.


Glenn Shaw wrote:
> Steve
>
> Wouldnt it be easy and more effective and cheaper if your: ..."hand full of
> folks"  just go ahead and use Joes repeater that is already on the air
> instead of complicating the situation more than it needs to be?  Of course
>
>
> Refarming ham radio wholesale will be ill advised and I dont think you will
> see it in our lifetimes..  The users of ham radio are not the US government
> or public saftey or RCC's with bottomless buckets of money to just go out
> and replace equipment.  We are losing people in the ham radio community not
> gaining them.  Most hams buy a radio and use it for years and dont have to
>
> For those that want to experiment and promote investigation of the new dig
> modulation such as DStar and P25 that is good and we should encourage this
> on new spectrum that can be found that is unused, without destroying the
> existing repeater sub bands.
>
> Just my .02 for thought.
>
> Glenn  N1GBY
>   

[Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

"Illegal is Illegal" period.

Look at what there is to gain by promoting digital repeater technologies
- more spectrum - less interference - better range and better quality
communications - no pots to adjust on your repeater - 1s and 0s

We have it within reach to re-farm present spectrum for a 2 for 1 or
better yield in recovering spectrum by fostering digital technologies,
be it P25 or DSTAR, or other means not to market at present. 

First - voluntary negotiated agreements - ie.  Hey Joe, that repeater
you have, you know, the one on the North side of town with the bad
antenna - our group would like to share the channel and put up a new
digital repeater and would like to partner with you - what do you think ?

Second - Dear Coordinator - Old Joe has an unused repeater pair on the
North side of town.  We respectfully request you re-consider
coordination because we the undersigned (hand full of folks) have
monitored this frequency for the last XX days and find little or no
activity - well beyond the alloted 90 days allowed for repair /
replacement, and respectfully request Old Joe's coordination be waived
to the extent we may construct and operate a digital repeater using part
of the spectrum alloted to Joe while at the same time offering to share
this spectrum with Joe.  (Sharing a frequency is not interference).

Third - Dear Coordinator - We have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate
with Old Joe to share his un-used / underutilized repeater pair, and
while we concede the station to be constructed and operational, we also
note a lack of activity as documented herein and propose our group would
better serve the purpose of amateur radio by being allowed to share this
coordination.

Maybe the wording is not so great, but the idea is to work within the
existing rules to promote more spectrally efficient frequency use to the
end that there is more spectrum for everyone.  I do not believe DSTAR
repeaters to be anything other than repeaters, and unless there is a
proper waiver of the FCC rules, should not be placed in any part of the
band where repeaters are not permitted.

Again, thanks to the volunteer coordinators who do their best to make
things fit for the betterment of our hobby and service,  Steve NU5D 
moderator dstar_digital yahoo group.


MCH wrote:
> I know, but in many areas there are a lot of unused frequencies.
>
> Still, I would never seriously tell someone to operate there. I would
> also not recommend operating repeaters in the parts of the band where
> repeaters are prohibited. Others don't see this prohibition as a
> deterrent, however. The reason? "The repeater bands are full" and there
> is a desire to put more repeaters on the air.
>   
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Digest Number 5793

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I am surprised.  That has not been the case in the Temple/Waco Texas
area.  Steve

Ken Arck wrote:
> At 04:29 PM 9/18/2007, you wrote:
>
>   
>> Your local NOAA Weather station is a good test transmitter for frequency
>> and peak deviation.. Steve NU5D
>> 
>
> <---I disagree. I have seen MANY NOAA WX transmitters off-freq - some 
> well outside tolerance. Usually however, (while their audio quality 
> is overdriven, distorted and generally pure crapola), their deviation 
> *is* within limits.
>
> Ken
> --
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Digest Number 5793

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Your local NOAA Weather station is a good test transmitter for frequency
and peak deviation..  Steve NU5D


JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> If your service monitor showed 13 to 15 KHz deviation from 3 different
> digipeaters in this area, something is definately wrong.  The radios 
> those digipeaters are talking to are designed for 5 KHz deviation 
> receivers.
>
> Are you sure your service monitor is working correctly?  Go listen
> to a local 150 MHz land mobile FM system and see what it measures that
> deviation to be.
>   
>
Be glad I trimmed this puppy ..

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr III

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

try launching the program Mastr.exe /M3 and see if that does the trick.
Steve NU5D


Tina wrote:
>  I recently purchased a Mastr III repeater and the person i bought it 
> from said he would include the software. Well, after over a month I 
> finally got the software and it's for a Mastr IIe (from what I have 
> read they both use the same or similar software) it reads the machine 
> OK but I cannot find where to to change the freq, I can only change the 
> PL tone.
>  Do I have the wrong software, or am I missing something?
>  
>  I really want to use this thing for my clubs main repeater, but I am 
> rather exasperated at this point.
>
>  Please help.
>
>  KE7DZZ
>  SNARS Tech Chair
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Any seen these?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Joe Tryzenski from Aerotron was the sales mgr - they were based in
Raleigh NC - their claim to fame was a fiber optic control cable - the
things would have some kind of malfunction in the control head - massive
overheat - nice radio but poor reliability.  User programmable.  Had 2
units VHF - returned them both dead.  Seems like State of Utah may have
bought a bunch around 1990 or so.  Steve NU5D


Gary wrote:
> Anyone heard or seen the Teletec Corporation IQ 2000 Omni series
> radios/repeaters (circa 1987-?)? I'm looking for info on these so any
> help would be appreciated. I'm aware Teletec has changed hands and they
> claim to have no info on these but I'm still digging.
> Thanks,
> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Digipeater deviation

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I suspect most receivers will start chopping when deviation gets beyond
6 or 7 kc +/-.  Better to run around +/-  4 kc peak deviation and not
clipped or distorted..  My 2 cents, steve nu5d

Nevada Amateur Radio Repeaters, Inc. wrote:
>
> What is the allowable deviation for a two meter *digipeater* in
> amateur service? Is 15 kHz excessive?
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star systems as auxiliary stations?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Except for the Simplex High Speed Data, (128K on 1250 Mhz) the i/o uses 
an offset on DSTAR.  1292 uses either 12/20 Mhz.  440 in Temple uses 5 
Mhz, and 2M uses whatever they can get.  Look at the list of repeaters 
on www.dstarusers.org for more details.


There is a delay caused by coding the voice in the transmitting 
subscriber unit, and then decoding the voice in the receiving subscriber 
unit, plus whatever delay is encounter in the repeater.  There is also 
delay in some squelch tail eliminator circuits - buffer the voice - and 
chop off the burst of noise and unkey before it gets to the 
transmitter.  Works in function like reverse burst, but does not rely on 
tone codes.


So far the only real argument deals with delay, and there are plenty of 
analog repeaters with as much or more delay than DSTAR.  Would running 
your plain old FM repeater's audio thru a dsp board or an audio delay 
for squelch tail elimination make it no longer a repeater ?


Steve NU5D  /K5CTX B


Jim wrote:

MCH wrote:
  

If the I/O is the same, it cannot "simultaneously retransmit" and cannot
be deemed a repeater under the current Part 97 definition.

Part 97 does not consider simplex repeaters to be repeaters.

Joe M.




My point exactly.

  
begin:vcard
fn:Steve Bosshard
n:Bosshard;Steve
adr:;;503 B. South 25th. Street;Temple;Texas;76504;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:254-773-1102
tel;fax:254-773-1174
tel;home:254-770-0111
tel;cell:254-624-4230
url:http://www.bosshardradio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star systems as auxiliary stations? - Delay

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Wonder how much of the delay is inherent in the subscriber units, and 
how much is attributed to the repeater ?  Measure response on simplex, 
then through a repeater, unless of course, these ducks aren't repeaters, 
then it won't matter.  Coffee time,  Steve NU5D /K5CTX B, Temple, Texas

Jamey Wright wrote:
> >From the demo I saw locally, it is near real time.  There is some delay but
> it is only noticeable if you are close enough to hear the transmitting and
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star systems as auxiliary stations?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The first concept of D-STAR that I saw used 10 Ghz for the point to 
point connections between sites.  Internet is cheaper and we are hams.


Some time back I said if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks 
like a duck, it just may be a duck.  I believe DSTAR is a repeater.


I also believe there should be a framework to foster new more spectrum 
efficient technologies.  P25, D-STAR and others not yet dreamed of.  In 
other places there is a process to seek a waiver of the rules when there 
is no other means of operating.  Could this work in our ham radio 
hobby?  Better yet, find an under utilized repeater - meet with the 
owners and see if they would be willing to share - invite and educate 
them about the new proposed system.  Who knows, they may be willing to 
partner with the new system.  DON'T be gutless and spineless and go 
behind someones back and try and take their repeater pair by surprise.


73, Steve NU5D


Jim wrote:

George Henry wrote:

  
The point-to-point communications within a D-Star system take place over a 
LAN, WAN, or the internet, not over-the-air.  Therefore, I doubt very much 
that the claim that D-star systems are auxiliary stations will pass FCC 
scrutiny.   Yes, I know that there already is a D-Star system in the San 
Francisco area operating in that sub-band, but most likely, no one has ever 
challenged its presence.  If someone does, I'm betting it gets shut down.



I would say if the input and output freqs are the same, it is NOT a 
repeater. However, if the input and output are different, it may still 
not be a repeater. Is it TRUE full duplex? Is it near real time vs. a 
store and forward technique? I'm sure there's other questions that 
should be asked as well.


  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Frequency coordinator authority (was Re: subaudibe tones..)

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Nate Duehr wrote:
> But... I'll point out that even the Icom VHF/UHF D-Star systems are  
> just "mobiles in a box"... which anyone who has worked on a properly  
> engineered repeater knows... SUCKS -- on many levels.
>
>   
They are $1500 mobiles in a box.  Not $6000 M3 or the like.  Maybe not a
good value. 
Certainly not top of the line.  Lots of hams see a repeater as a used
base or mobile that
can be converted to repeater operation.  Lots of M2 mobiles out there,
and Micor hand
me down stations.  No argument that the Icom DSTAR could easily be 5
times as
expensive.  No argument that they are a couple of not so hot mobile
radios in a box.
 No argument that they are cheaper than a new Master 3 or Motorola
product.  I don't
think Icom would sell many stations at $6000 to $10,000 a pop.

> But it's selling, so I guess people don't care.
>
> The quality level of these systems will certainly come back to bite  
> someone in the ass, sooner or later.
>
> I keep asking how Icom's planning on allowing for field repairs, and  
> getting nothing from owners.  I guess you send the whole thing back  
> to them... "No user serviceable parts inside."
>   
I don't know about you, but when a system module fails on a M3, (over
$2000 board) or a
 systhesizer goes out of lock - I box and ship the module.  Let a depot
do the repairs.  I am
too damned old to see much of the SOT stuff and could easily do more
damage than good
with a soldering iron.

> Other things as negatives include :
>
> - No service monitor adding the D-Star protocol or Icom's particular  
> "flavor" of it natively to their test suite.
> - Bad behavior when co-channeled with other D-Star or analog systems.
> - Proprietary/closed CODEC (AMBE)
>   
I can't listen to ProVoice either.  I can look at the demodulated
transmit waveform, and I can
inject a signal into the receiver and look at discriminator output, but
I can't take my
COM120B and shoot a ProVoice signal into a radio and listen to it thru
the speaker.

> And I'm certainly not going to gamble club money on all of that.
>   
Better than a club - I took my own money and bought the stuff.  No
government grants,
no committee taking years to decide how to do things.  Benevolent Dictator.
> (Trust me, I love digital technology, and want to see hams using it  
> -- I just find the current products from Icom somewhat hard to take  
> seriously.  Some would say I'm a P25 fan, but not really that  
> either... the callsign-based Internet routing of D-Star gives it an  
> edge for the Ham market that P25 can't touch.  But at least the P25  
> repeater offerings were designed to be repeaters, and the test gear  
> manufacturers all have products that can actually test their  
> performance in real-world conditions.  For commercial operators,  
> MotoTRBO is fascinating too, but again -- lacks "ham specific"  
> features and test gear...)
>
>   
Is MotoTRBO the right tool when you only need one voice path?  or does
it have to
run with 2 time slots ?  H(kind of like AlkaSeltzer - plop plop
fizzz fizzz,do you
 really need 2 tablets or is it a marketing ploy)?

> --
> Nate Duehr, WY0X
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>   
You have good and valid points Nate.  I am just looking at things a
little differently.  Not
a right or wrong thing.  Actually this BP medicine makes me get up in
the middle of the night
and I had the computer running, and stopped to shut it off when I saw
your posts.  Back to
bed,

Best 73, Steve, NU5D

[Repeater-Builder] More efficient use of spectrum.

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

"The full "D-Star stack" of VHF, UHF, and 1.2 GHz all at the same  
physical SITE is a waste of spectrum, and should be avoided also.   

Nate Duehr"

There are around 14 DSTAR users in Temple, Texas, and our neighbors in
Waco and Austin are moving forward with their own systems as well.  The
'full stack' may indeed be a waste of spectrum unless there is a need
for more capacity.  I am finding the 1253. digital HS data repeater
is unique to the system - no voice just 128kb/sec data.  Thus far we
have not set up a network between stations, just tested the internet
connection and it does work at around 80kb/sec.  (3 of the 14 have 1.2
capability and the number will grow).  Also the coverage at 1296 is not
bad (different than 2M or 440, but not bad).

There are many times when a user wants a local chat on 2m/440 (not
necessarily both) and there are times someone wants to use the gateway
to make an out of area contact.  Having 1292.1000 digital voice plus
either 2M (very crowded most places) or 440 (not as crowded here in the
sticks) while not a full stack, does have a place, and 1.2 G is pretty
much under utilized most places.  Propagation on 1.2 Ghz makes frequency
re-use less of a challenge.  Add to this an occasional traveler through
the area, and with the Belton Hamfest bringing several thousand hams to
the Temple/Belton area a couple of times a year, I can see how a single
repeater might be less than ideal.

Having DSTAR Chat run concurrent 1.2kb/sec low speed keyboard chat with
digital voice at the same time on any of the digital voice repeaters is
also a nice added feature that better utilizes spectrum.  (You cannot
have separate voice and data transmissions - low speed data rides with
voice whether you use it or not)  Add to this the 6.25 Khz bandwidth for
still better spectrum utilization.  I cannot see using a 20 Khz channel
in 2M plus a 20 Khz channel in 440 to duplicate efforts unless there is
a real demand, but I can see 23 Cents added to either a 440 or 2M system
to offer some unique features.  Seems like the 23 cent HS data repeater
is a simplex operation that is around 200 Khz wide and could not
pratically be used in the lower bands. 

I believe coordinators should offer incentives to more spectrally
efficient technologies such as P25 and DSTAR.  This will ultimately open
more spectrum over time, and while I agree both P25 and DSTAR are
repeaters, rule changes to foster more spectrally efficient technologies
may be indeed appropriate, especially when dead repeaters block the use
of channels that would otherwise be used.

It does seem (while the new hasn't worn off yet) there is a surge of
activity on DSTAR repeaters while many other repeaters lay virtually
dead.  Time and the market will tell.

Visit http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/dstar_digital for D-STAR ONLY
discussions.

73, Steve NU5D  /K5CTX A or B

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ltr repeater system

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I think I have had enough ESAS for one natural lifetime.  Actually,
except for the remote computers locking up, and loosing track of circuit
index, the stuff actually worked pretty well.  Had it roaming, multisite
dispatch, etc.  Used Multitech VOIP equipment to tie sites together and
remote print servers for RS232 links.  When it worked it worked well. 
Got tired of having to go to sites for hard reset.  Watch dog timers
would not hunt !  Steve


Tom Parker wrote:
> Try to buy a Trident Raider book... $35 hardly buys the postage...
> Also, home channel needs to be FB8 if at all possible.  Steve, want to
> buy some more Uniden ESAS switches?  We have four sites of six
> channels each!
>
> thp
>
> skipp025 wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> Nothing wrong with the way most Zetron Products work. My beef with
>> Zetron is how they dropped all support after 5 years on some high end
>> Zetron Products I have here. Then they tried to charge me $35 f
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
>> Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 
>> 4:29 PM
>>   
>  

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ltr repeater system

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I have 14 channels at 3 sites running Johnson VX on 800 - they tell me 
the VX logic was developed by Trident.  In 460 Waco is a 4 channel 
Uniden Esas, Temple is a 5 channel Uniden ESAS, and Killeen is 5 channel 
ESAS, Killeen and Temple were originally a mix of Ida RLC's and Zetron 
42's - the 42' and RLC's never gave any trouble.  Several other sites 
have a mix of 460 VX with on board logic and RLC's and Model 42's.  Have 
somewhere around 50 channels of LTR running.  Steve


Mike Mullarkey wrote:
>
> Skip,
>
>  
>
> If I can add my two cents in, use the Zetron controllers and your 
> project will be much easer and work. Not knocking the other 
> controllers, im sure there are plenty of good controllers but I just 
> have the most experience with the Zetron controllers.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Mike
>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] LTR Rocks !

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

LTR indeed does not use a dedicated control channel like EDACS or PP - 
control is distributed.  Subscriber units are programmed to seek a HOME 
repeater and if it is not available (busy channel inhibit) the radios 
homed to that repeater are dead.  When the home repeater is servicing a 
call it at the same time tells subscriber units to find a new home on 
RPT #X and will continue to send that data word even after the user on 
the home repeater is finished, so long as the transmission continues on 
the new home to service late entry.

LTR is considered by the FCC as centralized trunking.

De-Centralized trunking lets mobile units decide when to transmit.  LTR 
does not have a provision for the mobile radios not to transmit on a 
busy channel.  In centralized trunking, the site orchestrates mobile 
transmissions.

But I may be wrong,

Steve NU5D



Jim wrote:
> Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
>   
>> Kinda off track for a Ham repeater group, but been there done that.  
>> Mine was due to loss of 800 SMR channels when they were easy to come by, 
>> then later impossible to get due to freezes.
>>
>> Exclusivity.  You need at least one repeater that has exclusive use in a 
>> service area because LTR uses centralized control and the HOME repeater 
>> needs to be exclusive. 
>> 
>
> Not quite true. LTR does not use a control channel, and does not 
> transmit continuously, however, if you do not have exclusivity on a 
> channel-ANY channel-you need a monitor rx on the output cross-connected 
> so that it prevents that channel from keying if it hears other traffic.
>
>
>   Having the second repeater also exclusive is a
>   
>> big plus.  Next narrowband vs wideband.  Depending on location you may 
>> be narrow band - that seems to work OK.
>> 
>
> 512 MHz and down to 136 or whatever will all be narrowband by 2013 
> anyway, except I haven't seen provisions for it for part 95 (GMRS) yet, 
> so it will likely be exempt.
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ltr repeater system

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

An LTR mobile will try and access the repeater - short data 
transmissions, even if the base repeater's transmitter is inhibited.  
Some of the older stuff had to hear the data word from the repeater 
first in order to transmit, but newer radios, though they cannot 
handshake with a dead repeater, will try.  Also if the home repeater is 
locked out, the subscriber units have no way to go to repeater 2 unless 
repeater 1 (locked out due to busy channel) tells the mobile to go to 
rept 2.  So, you need at least one exclusive channel for the system to 
have any reasonable chance of working (or else use a very poor guard 
receiver.)  Steve NU5D


Jim wrote:
> I have to agree with what Skip said. The big issue with LTR (and other 
> trunking formats) is that you have to either 1)have an exclusive license 
> for each channel for the area you want to cover (may be hard to find, 
> and licensing is expensive once you do), or 2) put monitor rx's on each 
> OUTPUT freq. at the site with a cross busy to keep that channel from 
> being assigned when someone else is using it down the road.
> The CSI unit Skip mentioned does have that provision, among most others.
>
>   

[Repeater-Builder] LTR Rocks !

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Kinda off track for a Ham repeater group, but been there done that.  
Mine was due to loss of 800 SMR channels when they were easy to come by, 
then later impossible to get due to freezes.

Exclusivity.  You need at least one repeater that has exclusive use in a 
service area because LTR uses centralized control and the HOME repeater 
needs to be exclusive.  Having the second repeater also exclusive is a 
big plus.  Next narrowband vs wideband.  Depending on location you may 
be narrow band - that seems to work OK.

You need two repeaters and controllers.  Some repeaters like the Johnson 
VX have logic built in.  Others use IDA, RLC, Trindent, Zetron Model 42, 
etc.  You should be able to handle 6 to 10 groups of 10 to 15 radios 
pretty comfortably - probably more.  The curve for users vs channels is 
exponential as adding a channel makes much more capacity than one 
channel by itself.

Best success, Steve NU5D


wadeds2003 wrote:
> Hello group.  Just looking at putting up a ltr system.  I would like 
> to go 2 channels for now just to see how it all works.  My plan is to 
> use it for my business plus sublease some space to other companies.  
> Has anyone here ever tried a 2 channel ltr system before?  How does it 
> work compaired to a larger system?  A tech over at trident told me not 
> to waste my time with a 2 channel system as he said it would not work 
> but I have talked to other people who have done 2 channel systems and 
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones..

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

If you S1 is like mine Chuck, do you remember the low battery alert - 
the user could not hear it, but everyone else could ?

steve - former S1 owner.

Chuck Kelsey wrote:
> Yep. That's what I did, added a ComSpec encoder to my 4AT.
>
> My Tempo S1 has the added encode with DIP switch. Both radios work fine 
> today.
>
> Chuck
> WB2EDV
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Generally the duplexer only makes a slight contribution to the reflected
power.  How doe the reflected power between the transmitter and antenna,
without the duplexer in line look?  Steve NU5D


dallasreact112 wrote:
> Anyone one know what to expect SWR wise with a duplexer?
> I have a DB products 2 meter duplexer on an amateur repeater.
> Measuring with a Bird wattmeter between the duplexer and antenna I
> read 50W forward and a couple watts reverse. That is ok. But when I
> check between the transmitter and the TX port on the duplexer I get a
> about 60 W forward and 25W reverse power. Is there a rule fo thumb for
> a known good SWR value thru a duplexer? Should a good duplexer introduce
> any significant SWR?
>
> Thanks
>
> Bernie Parker
>
> K5BP
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re service monitor repair

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

http://www.kgelectronics.com/


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi All.
> Some one posted a address etc for a repair service in the mid west for IFR 
> Products.
>
> Could you please post it again.  I seem to have lost it in the 1's & 0's of 
> my computer.
>
> Ralph, W7HSG
>
>   
>
>
begin:vcard
fn:Steve Bosshard
n:Bosshard;Steve
adr:;;503 B. South 25th. Street;Temple;Texas;76504;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:254-773-1102
tel;fax:254-773-1174
tel;home:254-770-0111
tel;cell:254-624-4230
url:http://www.bosshardradio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

[Repeater-Builder] TNC Carrier Detect, DCD

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Best I recall there was a choice between hardwiring COR to the TNC or 
using internal Data Carrier Detect for the TNC to recognize activity on 
the radio channel.  This was an input signal from the radio to the TNC.  
Way back whenSteve NU5D




Nate Duehr wrote:
> Nate Bargmann wrote:
>   
>> * Ron Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Aug 03 08:48 -0500]:
>> 
>>> Nate,
>>>
>>> I looked in my KPC-3+ manual and they do call out a DCD line on both the 
>>> RS232 DB25 connector, pin 8, and also on the 9 pin radio connector.  
>>> However, I cannot find any reference to it in the manual.  Probably there, 
>>> but cannot find.  Wonder why they could put in a simple chart saying "pin 
>>> 1, does this, lo or high to turn on/off".
>>>
>>> In the RS232 spec the pin 8, known as CD, is Receive Line Signal Detector.  
>>> It does take the unit on/off line.
>>>
>>> So I am assuming if the CD (DCD here) is in off state then the TNC will not 
>>> do anything including receive or transmit???
>>>   
>> Perhaps this was dropped in the newer KPC-3 command set, but my old
>> KPC-2 version 5.0 has this to say about the CD command:
>>
>> CD INTERNAL | EXTERNAL | SOFTWAREv3.0
>>
>> ...
>>
>> When set to EXTERNAL, the carrier detect is supplied by an external
>> device, connected to the XCD pin on the radio port.
>> 
>
> That's what I remember also... my KPC-9612 is so old, I have no idea 
> what firmware is in it.  Last time I checked the internal battery was 
> dead, and it's been sitting on a shelf for years...
>
> I have lots better ways to move bits around these days than ham radio... 
> sadly.
>
> Nate
>
>  
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cushman CE-5

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Saw this on eham.net

2007-07-14

*KD0YX *

Test Equipment

*FS: About 20 Cushman Plug Mods $50 Ea
*

I have a large selection of about 20 Cushman Plug in Modules. I know
they will work fine for the CE6 Series service monitors but may fit
others like the CE3. Please check your manual. I need to get $50 each
plus shipping. I can take PayPal or a Postal Money Order. I will leave
this listing up on the swap board for remainder of July. In Early August
whatever is left will go on Ebay. I have the following: 301, (2) 304B,
304, (3) 303, (4) 305, (2) 306E, 305B, 305, (2)308, 301,301A, 303 and 308.



hwingate wrote:
> The power transformer in the 301 scope has died. Does anyone
> know where I might find the transformer or a junker for parts ? 
> This scope is used in both the CE-3 and CE-5.
> Thanks
> Henry, K4HAL
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Your old work bench - shop pictures are on ebay!

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Ever run a 6V Carter on 12 V - gets kinda broad on the output.  Steve NU5D
Beats a Mallory 1701 hands down.


Paul Finch wrote:
>
> How about a Dynamotor?  Worked on, talked on 100’s back when I first 
> started in two way business.  Course they had a vibrator in them also 
> for the receiver.  Still have a bad back from them!
>
>  
>
> Paul
>
>  
>
>  
>





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> 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/
 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] non-silver RG-214 was Lloyd is Well was Cable Lengths

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Do I need to call Lloyd again??

Steve NU5D


Bob Dengler wrote:
> At 7/30/2007 02:21 PM, you wrote:
>   
>> Bob
>>
>> That doesn't square with the large body of repeater owners who have used 
>> Wacom cavities. Their UHF products used RG-142. However, their VHF 
>> 
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Rohn 25g Tower

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I tried something a little different in fastening a house bracket.  I
took 2, 4 Ft lengths of 3/8" all thread rod.  I welded one end of each
all thread to 1/2 of a 5" X 7" X 1/4" steel purlin clip.  A purlin clip
is a flat soft steel plate used to join 2 red iron steel purlins.

After welding, the contraption looked like an oversized fly swatter.  I
then drilled 2 holes in the fascia and ran the all thread from the attic
outside the house thru the fascia board.  Next I ran 2, 1/4" X 2 1/2"
bolts thru each clip (plate against the truss) with the bolts going thru
the truss and thru the clip.  I used flat washers on the wood side of
the truss.

This allowed the all thread rods, securely fastened to the truss to go
outside the fascia for attachment of the house bracket.

I believe this gives a little more strength to the attachment.  The
tower was pretty much self supporting to begin with, but this gave an
extra measure of safety.

At 90 mph wind, each foot in length of the tower has 113 pounds of force
exerted by the wind.  This can be a formidable amount of force.

Best success and 73,  Steve NU5D


Jack Taylor wrote:
> Depending upon the wind loading on the tower, I would be cautious about
> fastening *anything* to the fascia board of a modern day house!  If your
> tower
> is self supporting, design the base to handle the load.  Don't rely on the
> house
> else over time you may end up with cracks in the interior walls.  If the
> tower
> is to by guyed, don't use the house for an anchor :-)
>
> But on the otherhand if it is a short tower with little wind load, have at
> it!
>
> Jack  -  N7OO
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Lloyd is Well was Cable Lengths

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The question was a band pass filter between a receiver and a duplexer. 
First thing Lloyd said was lengths between cavities and the output TEE,
comprising a duplexer are extremely critical.  The original post cited a
working system with interference, hence a band pass filter between the
receiver and the duplexer, followed by questions concerning cable
lengths between the receiver and in line filter, and the inline filter
and the duplexer receive port.  The supposition being receiver overload
in the ham repeater coming from the 155? Mhz public safety system. 
Often a BPBR cavity may not reject signals 5 to 10 mhz from the pass
frequency but do a splendid job of rejecting signals 600 khz from the
pass frequency.

Your pdf is excellent and very well done.  Thanks for the great
presentation Jeff.

Best regards,

Steve NU5D


Jeff DePolo wrote:
>> According to Lloyd,  the cable length between a duplexer and 
>> an inline 
>> cavity filter and the receiver makes little or no difference.  
>> 
>
> Steve,
>
> Was the question posed (or probably misunderstood as being) whether the
> cable length between the receiver and the filter being critical, or the
> cables between filter sections being critical?  If the latter, then I would
> have to humbly disagree with the answer, as theory and personal experience,
> as well as the results of the test earlier today, has been to the contrary.
>
>   --- Jeff
>
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

W5AC at Texas A&M has a 2M repeater on 146.820 co-located with an 800 
Mhz PST.  The 146.820 transmitter mixes with one of the 800 mhz 
transmitters and has a direct hit on 146.220.  They use split channel 
guard tones because if in and out tone were the same, the transmitter 
mix would open the receiver.  They could have left tone off the 
transmitter, but then the co-channel 82 repeaters would be an issue to 
folks listening.  The ham repeater is a MastrII.  Seems like they moved 
the 2M repeater from Kyle Stadium to Rudder Hall and the problem 
lessened but did not entirely go away. 

PS - I called Lloyd Alcorn this morning but got his answering machine - 
will call back later in the day. 

Steve NU5D.

Jim wrote:
> Ron Wright wrote:
>   
>> Nate,
>>
>> A local, in Tampa, FL, high profile repeater has a similar problem.
>> They are on 2 meters along side a 800 MHz repeater which gives them
>> interference.  They have to live with it.  However, it is weak and
>> they PL'd their repeater.  Since weak the users can over ride and the
>> PL only allows the users to bring up the machine.
>> 
>
> Wow-an 800 repeater is giving a 2M rx problems? Must be a really crappy 
> rx! Or the antennas are REALLY close!
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

You could always try and scrap the front end from a thrashed M2 mobile - 
kinda lossy but can be used as a preselector - Also even a 3 dB. 
attenuator might help against overload at the cost of 3dB. in RX sen.

Out of curiosity, what kind of repeater are you using?  Probably said in 
an earlier post - don't remember. 

73,

Steve
www.bosshardradio.com


Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 26 12:14 -0500]:
>  
> Thanks for all of your input.  I'm learning more as I go along.
>
> I did not get a chance to performance check the RX on site.  It just
> happened that we were able to stop by the site a week ago and see what
> we were up against.
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Coax length between added cavity and duplexer

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Lots of times those BpBr cans will pass stuff not too far from the 
desired pass freq - A 2 loop BP cavity could very well help with 
receiver overload from a 155 Mhz signal - a simple test would be to hook 
a receiver to the REC port of the duplexer and see how strong the 155 
Mhz signal is.

As far as the placement of the BP cavity in line with the receiver, 
first, kill the transmitter and see what the receiver sensitivity 
through the duplexer might be.  Next, add the BP cavity and see how much 
it impairs the receiver - then you decide - Me thinks the cable lengths 
won't make much difference, but as my friend Jack Daniel at RF Solutions 
sez, but I might be wrong.

Best 73 and let us know how the extra can works out. 

Steve NU5D

skipp025 wrote:
>
> I don't have time to debate or argue the point... 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr III - Anybody using one?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Whilst I have my GE books out, was anyone needing any info on the M3 or 
M2e - lemme know - Steve NU5D



Jim wrote:
> Jamey Wright wrote:
>   
>> Based on the year you specified, it was probably Mastr II or Mastr IIE
>> although it could be Mastr III.  I'm not sure when the Mastr III were
>> introduced.  
>> 
>
> I'll say either '92 or 93. They were still supplying MIIe's in '91 for 
> EDACS systems.
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Mastr III - Anybody using one?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

http://www.bosshardradio.com/m3

discg.doc

You have to send this file to the repeater after you program the other 
info, and resend it every time you reprogram the repeater.  Steve

The Zetron file shows how to wire a Zetron Community Repeater Panel (or 
any other outboard controller - not recommended) to a M3 Station.  Steve

Jim wrote:
>   Steve NU5D wrote
>   
>> Almost forgot - did have a problem with talkies talking down the 
>> 
> channel
>   
>> guard tone - there is a software fix - hex code that once ctcss is
>> detected - will remain detected until RUS goes away.  sb
>> 
>
>
> Hey Steve, care to share that hex code? Having the same issue with a 
> IIe station, HT's falsing the CG.
>
> TNX 
> de Jim / KC2LEB 
>
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr III - Anybody using one?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Bought new around 1991 - lost one driver module in the PA - use internal
CWID/hang time, timeout timer, etc - Have outboard dtmf decoder tied to
a 440 receiver to turn off the repeater, otherwise everything stock from
GE - we do have a doug hall voter wired in using the local receiver plus
3 satellite receivers carried back to the hub on 438 mhz - been very
solid repeater.We do not have any outboard controllers / noise makers
wired in.   The repeater is W5LM in Temple, Texas www.tarc.org  Steve NU5D

Almost forgot - did have a problem with talkies talking down the channel
guard tone - there is a software fix - hex code that once ctcss is
detected - will remain detected until RUS goes away.  sb




Tony L. wrote:
> Does anyone out there have a VHF Mastr III in service as a ham repeater?
>
> Feedback - good or bad?  Sources for purchase of used/reconditioned?
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: [Repeater-Builder] MASTR IIe dozing off

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Be sure the control line is terminated.  I have seen m3's get repeat
disable from voice on the control line (even if remote control is not
used).  Vexing problem.  Steve NU5D - BTW that tip came from Pete
Lascelle at GE, or EGE, or Comnet, or MA/COM now days...

Vincent Caruso wrote:
> Is it out of band?
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Have any of you experienced a MASTR IIe dozing off? No open fuses, no
> > loose connections, it just forgets that it is supposed to key up when
> > the receiver squelch opens. After resetting the control module, it
> works
> > fine for a day or so and then the problem reappears.
> >
> > I'd settle for an over-the-air control module reset code (if one
> > exists), but would prefer to get to the bottom of this.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> >
> _ 

Re: [Repeater-Builder] looking for parts

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Wacom built their duplexers from aluminum irrigation pipe, seems like 
they used several heavy metals in the electroplating process (outside 
company).  I remember when the EPA shut down the electroplating company 
- dumping chemicals into the Brazos River - Wacom had to send their 
goods to Fort Worth for plating.

Steve

Anyone interested in how the Brazos got is's name?  Steve


Ron Wright wrote:
> Some have built coax, hardline type, duplexers for 6.  When using 7/8" I've 
> been told 1 MHz split is needed.  Some have used 1-5/8" with better success.  
> I have the plans from a site of 5 years ago if interested.  Test data was 
> given.
>
> Thars lots of metal in thar 6 m cans and they aint cheap...$2k is a common 
> price new.  Free from most commerical shops just to get rid of them.
>
> 73, ron, n9ee/r
>
>   
>

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal/channel element compensation..

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Just remembered another plus for rock bound equipment - used to be lower 
power consumption (before mosfet technology) because it took less power 
to run a xtal osc than to run a synthesizer plus a crystal reference 
oscillator.  Don't know if power consumption is true today, though.  
Steve NU5D


MCH wrote:
> Which is why I specifically said "for the operating frequency" - to
> eliminate the argument you just made.
>
> My point was that crystals are still fine for a repeater - as is
> temperature stabilization - even though modern radios may not use
> either. Sometimes, newer is not better.
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!
EM11ma - South Mountain, Texas

begin:vcard
fn:Steve Bosshard
n:Bosshard;Steve
adr:;;503 B. South 25th. Street;Temple;Texas;76504;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:254-773-1102
tel;fax:254-773-1174
tel;home:254-770-0111
tel;cell:254-624-4230
url:http://www.bosshardradio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Dual repeater antennas..?

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Sounds like you have the makings of a db 228 if you add the proper 
harness.  Else maybe run the repeater on one antenna, and used the 
second antenna with proper cavity filtering as a diversity (term loosely 
used) receive antenna.  Steve NU5D


s3hampton wrote:
> I presently have a DB-224E as my 'main' repeater antenna.
>
> I have a second DB-224E available to me.
>
> The existing antenna is on a four-foot side-mount at the top of my
> now-40-foot tower.  (The tower was a 140' self supporting unit, but
> suffered a failure; I am now using the remaining 40 foot 'stub' as the
> present position of the side-mounted DB-224E.)
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!
EM11ma - South Mountain, Texas

begin:vcard
fn:Steve Bosshard
n:Bosshard;Steve
adr:;;503 B. South 25th. Street;Temple;Texas;76504;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:254-773-1102
tel;fax:254-773-1174
tel;home:254-770-0111
tel;cell:254-624-4230
url:http://www.bosshardradio.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: crystal/channel element compensation..

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

I was thinking most every radio used a crystal (TCXO) as the reference 
from which everything else frequency wise is derived.  One really stable 
oscillator vs many oscillators.  Steve NU5D


MCH wrote:
> Regardless of how many modern radios use temperature stabilization, that
> does nothing to diminish its effectiveness at keeping the frequency
> stable and eliminating the need for temperature compensation.
>
> Few rigs today use crystals for the operating frequency. Does that mean
> crystals are bad?
>
> Joe M.
>
>   

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

Thanks Ron - 73, Steve NU5D

Ron Wright wrote:
> Steve,
>
> The link to the D-Star you gave is an e-mail address.
>
> Is the new group a yahoo group in the form of:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dstar_digital
>
> This is the normal format for a yahoo group page.
>
> 73, ron, n9ee/r
>
>
>   
>

-- 
Ham Radio Spoken Here !!!  NU5D EM11
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/NU5D
Nickel Under 5 Dollars

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Acronyms-a little OT

[Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D)]

The General Electric MCD (Mobile Communications Division) was big on
TLAs (Three letter Acronyms).  I always hoped there would be an LBI
(Lynchburg Book of Instruction) outlining TLAs.  We have GETC's, MOM
PC,s IEA computers, CSD computers, The MOM looks at CIC's the TRIM,
VMIMs, and AIC's as well as the EDG.

GETC - General Electric Trunking Controller
MOM PC - Monitor Module PC
IEA is the Integrated Ericsson Alarm computer
I don't remember the CSD - took the place of the System Manager
CICs are Console Interface Cards
TRIM is the Trunked Recorder Interface Module
VMIM is a Conventional Interface Module
and then the AIC Audio Interface Card.
EDG is the Ericsson Data Gateway

Ad Infinum

Steve NU5D


John J. Riddell wrote:
> * Eric,  the "Kids"   my grandchildren, use LOL as "Laugh out loud" in
> their E mails *
> * * 
> * 73 John VE3AMZ *
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* Eric Lemmon 
> *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> 
> *Sent:* Saturday, July 07, 2007 10:07 AM
> *Subject:* RE: [Repeater-Builder] Acronyms-a little OT
>
> Doug,
>
> Here's my take:
>
> AFAIK = As Far As I Know
> FWIW = For What It's Worth
> IMHO = In My Humble Opinion
> BTW = By The Way
> FYI = For Your Information
> YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary
> LOL = Lots Of Luck (often misused as a meaningless closer)
>
> 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
>
>