[Repeater-Builder] GE Exec II & UHF Station equipment
The GSA is auctioning off some GE Exec II desk stations & repeater stuff from the Nevada Test Range: http://gsaauctions.gov/gsaauctions/aucdsclnk?sl=91QSCI10177704 http://gsaauctions.gov/gsaauctions/aucdsclnk?sl=91QSCI10177705 http://gsaauctions.gov/gsaauctions/aucdsclnk?sl=91QSCI10177706 Auction closes 3/30/2010 at 3:22 PM CST Cheers.
[Repeater-Builder] Re:Web site issues???
Here's what Google tells me about this site: Quote: Safe Browsing /Diagnostic page for/ repeater-builder.com *What is the current listing status for repeater-builder.com?* Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer. Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 1 time(s) over the past 90 days. *What happened when Google visited this site?* Of the 3 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 2 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2010-04-07, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2010-04-07. Malicious software is hosted on 1 domain(s), including imgdownloads.com/ <http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=en-US&site=imgdownloads.com/>. This site was hosted on 1 network(s) including AS11798 (BLUEHOST) <http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=en-US&site=AS:11798>. *Has this site acted as an intermediary resulting in further distribution of malware?* Over the past 90 days, repeater-builder.com did not appear to function as an intermediary for the infection of any sites. *Has this site hosted malware?* No, this site has not hosted malicious software over the past 90 days. *How did this happen?* In some cases, third parties can add malicious code to legitimate sites, which would cause us to show the warning message. *Next steps:* * Return to the previous page. <http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=en-US&site=http://www.repeater-builder.com/maxtrac/maxtrac-index.html#> * If you are the owner of this web site, you can request a review of your site using Google Webmaster Tools <http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/>. More information about the review process is available in Google's Webmaster Help Center <http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=45432>. Updated 12 hours ago UnQuote: Cheers, Jim M
[Repeater-Builder] FS: Test Panel, Moto TEK-5C
I have a decent condition Motorola radio test panel, TEK-5C for sale. Was perfect condition until I dropped the adapter onto one of the meter bezels...Asking $30.00 for test set. Anyone interested?? Location zip = 03103. You pay packaging & shipping. Motorola TEK-5C Test Set Mobile radio test set with adapter connector and cables. Used for two-way radio shop bench alignment and testing of Mobile Radios. Wt 28 lbs, Dimensions: 19.5 in W X 9 in D X 6.5 in H Contact off forum please. Pic is available. Jim M
[Repeater-Builder] Re: FS: Test Panel, Moto TEK-5C
Tom, Yes, that may be great, but you see, I don't know and I'm not going to research that info for the offering price. A pic is available for those who are interested in the test set. Regards, Jim M ... Re: FS: Test Panel, Moto TEK-5C <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/message/100510;_ylc=X3oDMTJycTN1YTEwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEbXNnSWQDMTAwNTEwBHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEyNzM4MzAzMjA-> Posted by: "Thomas Oliver" tsoli...@tir.com <mailto:tsoli...@tir.com?subject=%20re%3a%20fs%3a%20%20test%20panel%2c%20moto%20tek-5c> n8ies <http://profiles.yahoo.com/n8ies> Thu May 13, 2010 9:50 pm (PDT) You might want to list witch radios the cables work with that come with the test set. tom .
[Repeater-Builder] FTS-12 tone deck
WTB. I'm trying to get a Yaesu FT-33R HT on the air for repeater use and I need an FTS-12 Tone deck for it. Will consider an inoperative or parts rig with a good tone deck. FTT-4 Touch Tone pad would be a plus. E-mail to n8...@arrl.net. TNX/73
[Repeater-Builder] Re: White Noise on Two Meters.....
2 ideas: ground loop - 1 - check rcv antenna cables (all the way to the antenna) with a CLAMP-ON ampmeter. 2 - Get hold of a spectrum analyzer & scope the receiver feedline. Jim - KB6OKH --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have an interesting thing happening on our two meter repeater. We > have what appears to be a blanking white noise that is present on the > input. The repeater is a split site system with a 440 link from the > two meter receiver site over to the transmitter site about 2000ft > away. There are no duplexers in the system to cause problems. > > The link on 440 is clean of any noise, so we are quite confident the > link is not a problem. > > On two meters, when a signal is anything less than full quiteing, we > get a white noise that will almost mask the audio. We have tried > different receivers such as the GE MVS and now a GE Master II. We > have removed the preamplifier with minimal results. The receivers > have excellent sensitivity and the tuning process of the receivers is > correct. We have also tried putting pass cavities ahead of the > receiver with no appreciable change. The antenna is a DB-224 mounted > on a broadcast tower just below the bays of an FM broadcast > commercial transmitter. We have turned OFF the fm broadcast > transmitter at times to check if perhaps this was the problem but no > change was noted. > > ANY IDEAS from anyone??? > > THANKS! > Gary - W5GNB > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Wanted 146.94T/.34 R Crystals for Master II
I am looking for a set of crystals for the 146.94 T/ 146.34 R repeater pair for a GE Master II Repeater. If they are in TCXO's, I will also provide a set of working TCXO's in return. Jim - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Needed old Motorola Exciter
Jeff Regan wrote: > Your idea is right. Since there are so many varieties of slugs out there, > it's best to actually replace the coil, or at least take a slug from the same > replacement coil. > > Jeff - - NJ5R > > Kris Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suspect this is pre-Micor, but while tuning a repeater, we broke a > slug on a VHF Motorola repeater station exciter. The slug is in a coil > form, and we are looking at our options for replacing the slug. > > http://catonic.us/broken-arrow/ Yup-it's a Motrac station exciter. Maybe that'll help you find spares. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] [Fwd: [SCOM-Controllers] 7330 pricing and other news]
Ed Yoho wrote: > Nate (or Bob if he's lurking), > > Do you know if the software will accept site prefixing on a per port > basis (similar to Link-Comm or the old Palomar Telecom controllers)? > This is a make or break for many system owners that have multiple sites > interconnected. > I have always been impressed with the S-COM products except for this > limitation on earlier products. > > Ed Yoho > WA6RQD I don't understand this myself. When you program a macro for something, you just make sure you use different commands for each site. What's the problem? About the only thing I could see would be the _capability_ to make the macro command more digits, maybe 8? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Some East and West Coast Repeaters - Mandate to 5 Watts Max
Nate Duehr wrote: > We may have the Chinese government to "thank" for the recent need to > enforce (the rules aren't new) the ERP rules near the RADAR sites. Waayy OT, but how many people know that bank we're seeing ads for now, HSBC, is the Bank of China? You know, state-run by the government? Giving them money is supporting the government of China... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Macro & Prefix formats for multi site programming
Nate Duehr wrote: > In this case, you set up 1* to mute DTMF. Your end-of-activity macro > now must both copy the local macros back to "parking" and unmute DTMF. > > (In fact, if you do this you don't need the start-of-activity macro > at all, but I like that one better. You could have *1 do both setup > of the macros and the DTMF mute.) > > To make this work, the default "*" as "enter" key option in the S- > Com, must be on. This is so users don't even have to unkey to have > the 1* execute. > > The users don't have to know the preceeding 1* is a separate > command. They just know to prefix any local "simple" command with > 1*. If they hit 1* and drop key, the local controller will > immediately revert back to only responding to the SITECODE commands, > and unmute DTMF, resetting everything back to the state where any > machine in the system can respond to either a local or remote > SITECODE prefixed command. > > -- > Nate Duehr - WY0X > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Actually, how about if 1* mutes DTMF to the *LINK* transmitter? Or even DROPS the link tx? Then none of the other sites would hear any DTMF, except for the 1*? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Macro & Prefix formats for multi site programming
Nate Duehr wrote: >> <---By the way Skip, I meant to ask if you're inferring something >> about those of us whom are 1st person familiar with SoCal repeater & >> remote base design? > > What, massive multi-State linking that ties up huge swaths of the spectrum > for a single two-person QSO, deliberately ignoring the "use only the > power/spectrum you need to make the contact" rules? > Okay so ... who's in... coast-to-coast, via RF... the Route 66 repeater > system! > > (Note I carefully picked a route too far south to participate in. LOL!) > ROFL! Ya know, a group in Ohio had a multi-state linked system for a while, piggybacked onto someone's microwave system. It only got used by truckdrivers rachet-jawin' just like they were on 27.125. It's gone now. Another guy had several 440 rptrs RF-linked along the Lake...same result. It went away. The individual machines are still there, just not linked anymore. They're actually usable now. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] New SCom 7330 controller pictures posted
no6b wrote: > ...in the photos section. > > Bob NO6B SWEET! Tnx, Bob! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] bag phone for repeater 911
Thomas Oliver wrote: > I scored a bunch of old analog bag phones at Dayton and was wondering > if anyone has interfaced these to thier repeater for 911. I think it > would be a worthwhile project but with the number of cell phone > everyone has I don't know how much use if any it would get. These > phones do not seem to have any extra ports ot hook up outboard stuff > but there are some motorola phones that use a standard DB25 connector > that don't have wires on all the pins. > > tom I hate to say it, Tom, but I wouldn't put much into it. Analog Cellular will likely go away in a few years. I keep forgetting the exact date, but at that date, carriers will no longer be required to keep analog channels on their system, which pretty much guarantees they'll be gone. Right now, the only reason they still work is the carriers are required to keep some analog channels up. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] bag phone for repeater 911
Maire-Radios wrote: > February 2008 > Thanks! I knew it was soon, but not quite that soon! Tom-I hope you didn't put much money into those... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] bag phone for repeater 911
Don KA9QJG wrote: > __ > Well Here in N/W Indiana any Cell Phone even if not in Service Will work to > Call 911 . But I go Fishing in a lot of Places that the handheld Cell will > not work So I tried to get My old Analog 3 Watt with the roof Mount ant > activated No Way I was told No New Activation for Analog But if I would of > kept it active I could. For a little longer Just to clarify, Don-the point is that after Feb of '08, doing that with an analog bag phone is not likely to be an option. There will likely not be any channels for analog phones to talk to. Not even for 911. It will be going the way of IMTS. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] bag phone for repeater 911
Mike Morris wrote: > After the magic date there won't be any analog > equipment for your bag phone to talk to. > > And you aren't the only one - there are a LOT of GM Onstar > customers that are going to be left high and dry. heh-my answer to that is-'hah hah!' That's what you get for getting a cell phone integrated with the car... Same with GPS-bad idea. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Maxar UHF to Ham Band?
Rick Lutzinger KD6ZR wrote: > I have a few UHF Maxar's that are in the 450-470Mhz range. Do these > move down to the 440Mhz range without component swapping? Maybe just a > re-tune after re-crystaling? Comments? > > Thanks > Rick KD6ZR Basically, yes. We've taken numerous tx side down to 445 with no degradation. Rx may lose a little below about 443 or 444, but probably still usable (at or under spec). They make good link radios. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Remote Base/Repeater Question From a Newbie
kdf9511 wrote: > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jay Urish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Well hell! >> You win! >> >> It would be easy to take 1 vhf and 1 UHF and one of those repeater > maker >> cables and just plug and play (After programming of coarse). >> > That may be an idea I seriously think about. I would have to find a > realy good deal on the UHF rig though. The VHF ones I am getting > are free. The programing isn't going to be a problem as I will have > a full programing setup with them. > > I need to do something though. I was sitting out on the patio last > night with my HT and was having trouble getting into a couple of > repeaters. > > Kerry > KE5OFO I fully expect that. Handhelds can *NOT* be expected to give decent coverage, especially on 2M. First, you have the lower power level. Then you have an antenna that is typically 5-10dB of LOSS. Plus there's no good groundplane for it. Then you get into multipath and so on. We tell people that the repeater is not designed for portable coverage, and cannot economically be made so. And DO NOT, under ANY circumstances, try to repeat another 2M freq onto a 2M repeater input!!! That's just asking for trouble! Interference, loss of control, and likely followed by some nasty comments from the repeater trustee! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] simple lowband rig needed, Maxar, Moxy, etc.
KP3FT wrote: > It's for a beacon project, so > receive capability is not needed, only transmit. You still should have rx on it, with an 'interlock' to keep it from keying up on other activity on the freq. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Programming Software for Amateur Use available online?
skipp025 wrote: > Is there any of the older GE radio software available online? > > MVS or MPA radios > > A ham friend wants to try and use these radios and I have little or > no GE Radio Software. For MPA's it matters a bit which logic board they have, and which flash is in them (although that can be changed easy.) The best board is the 19D903081G(n) (called the '081 board), which can be flashed to EDACS/conventional or conventional only, and can accept the AEGIS digital board. This can be programmed with EDACS-4 (windows-based), EDACS-1, (DOS), or MPA CONV with the conventional only flash. Another is the '628 board, which is EDACS/conventional only, and does not accept digital boards. This can only be programmed with EDACS-1 I believe. There is also an older board that is unflashable, and is conventional only, but I don't remember the number right off. And it only programs with MPA CONV. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Combined/Coupled Repeaters/Transmitters
Jamey Wright wrote: > Hey Kris, I have the following on one combiner here at work: > > 856.2125 > 857.2125 > 858.2125 > 859.2125 > 860.2125 > 859.7625 > 860.7625 > 866.8125 > 867.0625 > 867.3125 > > This setup is good for about 6 dB of loss. 100W from the transmitters is > about 18-20 watts (calculated) at the antenna feed point. > > We are actually getting ready to split the combiner into 2 combiners and run > half of them on one antenna and the rest on another antenna. > > Subtract 45 MHz from those freqs and we have those on a RX only antenna with > a tower top amp and then a RX multicoupler in the shelter. Should be even more interesting when the 866/867 freqs get bumped down 15 Mhz. Where you're at, it should be REAL soon! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star demo
Bob Dengler wrote: > Sounds like DStar MAY have an edge over P25 Phase I, at least in terms of > occupied bandwidth. No-there won't be any difference in bandwidth, since the only difference is how the bits are arranged. The modulation technique is the same. Just like Motorola Astro and M/A-Com Aegis and Pro-Voice. They are all C4FM, with the same IMBE vocoder. >> (Good luck finding test equipment that supports D-Star. Ever.) > > I guess you weren't at Dayton. > > Bob NO6B I can't imagine anyone making test equipment for D-Star, but tell us what you saw! Maybe a decoder that could be attached to any discriminator output, including most service monitors...and a serial port link to a PC...that *could* be affordable... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: D-Star demo
Nate Duehr wrote: >> Bob Dengler wrote: >> >>> Sounds like DStar MAY have an edge over P25 Phase I, at least in terms >>> of >>> occupied bandwidth. >> No-there won't be any difference in bandwidth, since the only difference >> is how the bits are arranged. The modulation technique is the same. Just >> like Motorola Astro and M/A-Com Aegis and Pro-Voice. They are all C4FM, >> with the same IMBE vocoder. > > One's AMBE, one's IMBE... I don't think that is correct. > OK-I had been told it was IMBE. That does make a diff... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: DCS decoder software
Geert Jan de Groot wrote: >> A real handy box that I've not seen and I wish someone would sell is >> something that you could feed discriminator audio to and display >> the currently heard DTMF string, DPL or tone PL. >> An enhancement to the DPL / tone PL display function would be a >> storage feature so I could park it and a receiver (i.e. a 18ah gell cell, >> a Maxtrac or a scanner, an antenna and this box) on a hilltop and a >> week later it would tell me what tones/codes are in use on a >> particular channel. > > Optooelectronics used to make a box exactly like this, with serial port > for PC logging and all that. > I have one and and I'm *very* happy with it. > (I'm sorry, but I'm not selling mine!) > Connect Systems used to make a box like this too, one that did PL, DPL, and DTMF, and another that did LTR...it was also nice setting up a new community rptr! CD-1 and CD-2??? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: DCS decoder software
Geert Jan de Groot wrote: >> A real handy box that I've not seen and I wish someone would sell is >> something that you could feed discriminator audio to and display >> the currently heard DTMF string, DPL or tone PL. >> An enhancement to the DPL / tone PL display function would be a >> storage feature so I could park it and a receiver (i.e. a 18ah gell cell, >> a Maxtrac or a scanner, an antenna and this box) on a hilltop and a >> week later it would tell me what tones/codes are in use on a >> particular channel. > > Optooelectronics used to make a box exactly like this, with serial port > for PC logging and all that. > I have one and and I'm *very* happy with it. > (I'm sorry, but I'm not selling mine!) > Connect Systems used to make a box like this too, one that did PL, DPL, and DTMF, and another that did LTR...it was also nice setting up a new community rptr! CD-1 and CD-2??? Just checked: CD-2 is the PL/DPL decoder w/DTMF, LT-2 is the LTR decoder. And they still carry both. > http://www.connectsystems.com/public_html/products/cd2.htm
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Do Anyone Use Their Repeater For This
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote: >> As for pagers, parts are hard to imposssible to find for most pagers. Since >> the paging market dried up with the advent of cell phone based text >> messaging the supply of pagers has also dried up rather quickly. > > Good point. If you are going to use pagers, it's probably best to > get a bunch and > shelve the extras. Think "lifetime supply". Some used a specialized > nicad and > a charger, others used AA or AAA cells. > And many pager receivers are crystal controlled, and most of them > won't go down > to 2m or 440 amateur. Those that will still need crystal, and they > won't be cheap... > And those that are programmable and in surplus generally aren't analog. > Motorola still makes the Minitor V, just an updated Minitor III. There's a few others on the market as well, for 2-tone. Also there is several companies out there that make POCSAG and FLEX pagers for different bands. 900 is a good band for that type of stuff, btw... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between the TX and diplexer
Kerincom wrote: > Hi guys .I have been wondering and trying to find out the correct length of > coax between the diplexer and the tx.and rx and someone has brought it up on > another group.here is a snipit > > Is the length between the exciter -pa-TX on duplexer a quarter wavelength or > multiple there of. Is the rx-preamp(Is the rx-preamp(if used)-rx input of > duplexer the same number of wave lengths as the TX path > > So hopefully this will help answer the above enquiry. > The correct length is the length that reaches without stress. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Do Anyone Use Their Repeater For This
>> At 12:11 AM 5/31/2007 +, you wrote: >>> Does anyone out there that is using their repeater to support >>> emergency operations, have it setup to also send out a page to pagers >>> that emergency operators may have. >>> >>> Here is what we want to do, we wish to obtain some 2 meter voice >>> pagers, Minitors or similar, like those used by most volunteer fire >>> departments, and set them to receive on the same frequency as our >>> repeater, when they receive a proper 2 tone signal from the repeater. We found the same thing as Joe-no one wanted to carry the pager and a handheld all the time for too long. The novelty wore off after a couple years. (We used PageboyII's back in the 80's.) What we wound up with, however, is a bunch of Plectron's on the repeater output at key locations around the county, dispatch centers, sheriff, 911, etc. We can set them off for Skywarn alerts or EMA responses. That has served us well for a long time. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
[Repeater-Builder] FYI-
a stack of VHF MastrII stations will be going up on ebay very soon...not from me tho...but keep your eyes peeled...theres a couple of aux rx's in there too... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE MASTR III - Conversion to Amateur Radio
Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote: > Doug, later VCO's have dip switch range programming on VHF, and I have > changed a couple of caps on UHF to get them to downband. That appears to have been an intermediate version, as the VHF MIII's that just came thru here did _not_ have that dip switch. I went looking because the first manuals we got with the stations showed those, and we were programming and aligning them in house. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to see if they would go down-band... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: VSWR Issues - Repairs Complete
Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: > This is a follow up to my original post. > Bottom line: Almost all the advice I got here was 100% on-the-mark. Thanks > to all who contributed. and please don't shoot me for not replacing the > hardline. I don't get to make those decisions! I wouldn't worry about it-as you said, it's a ham project, and as long as it checks good, leave it. I would've done the same thing on my system. Now-for a PS agency, no. It is actually cheaper in the long run to replace it then pay someone to splice the old, just to have a problem again in 5 years or so. But when you have to pay someone to do something, the cost of that is a HUGE factor, and frequently is the majority of the cost of whatever is being done. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: VSWR Issues - Repairs Complete
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Paul Finch wrote: >> Yeah, and your repeater is probably responsible for the Honey Bee >> decline as well as the Lightning Bug becoming extinct. Durn Ham radio >> operators! Wait-lightning bug becoming extinct? Not around here! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: VSWR Issues - Repairs Complete
Jeff DePolo wrote: >> You forgot to blame him for birds flying into towers and being >> killed > > In a given year, somewhere around a dozen birds die by crashing into the big > windows on the front of my house. In contrast, I might see one or two dead > birds per year in total at all of the 50 or more tower sites I go to (I > spend 30 to 40 hours a week at tower sites), and even then, who knows > whether they died from flying into the tower versus having died of natural > causes. Maybe we should outlaw windows instead? One of the guys here at work found a dead bird on the roof here the other day. It was in two pieces. We're trying to figure that one out. Only conclusion is that we are close to a big airport... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] any MITREK experts??? (WHAT sort of beast did i get "gifted with" yesterday???)
Kris Kirby wrote: > On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, k3csa wrote: >> Transmitter info: CC1147 Receiver info: RC0213 Model #: T51JJA1000AK >> Serial#: 433HDQ1072 > > Lowband boatanchor. > >> can anybody tell me exactly what i've got??? I wouldn't call it a boat anchor...the low split radio will go to 10M, and the high split will go to 6M just fine-either make excellent repeater rx's, not as good as a Micor or MII, but better then most. Tx is only ok-they aren't continuous duty by any means. Wasn't there a mid-split, ie, 36-42 sorta thing? Those aren't much good for anything, to hard to move. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] any MITREK experts??? (WHAT sort of beast did i get "gifted with" yesterday???)
Mike Morris wrote: >> Wasn't there a mid-split, ie, 36-42 sorta thing? Those aren't much good >> for anything, to hard to move. > > Nope. Mitreks came in only two ranges, the breakpoint was at 39mhz. Check...tnx -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] First repeater?
mch wrote: > Found once source: > <http://www.qsl.net/ecara/wayback/page17.html> > > But it doesn't say where the first modern (automatic retransmitting) > repeater was... or whose callsign. > > Joe M. Hmmm-there must be a few errors in there about the exact band segments. The first FM repeater here was a RACES machine down in the 145 segment (different rules), but the first non-RACES repeater was 146.34 in and 146.76 out, circa 1968?, next was 146.46 in and 146.82 out in 1969, right after that was 146.88 in, 146.40 out (that's right!). The .76 machine was 'whistle-up', the other two were carrier squelch. Also the UHF repeaters that I know of were 449.0-449.95 in, and 447.0-447.95 out. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] First repeater?
mch wrote: > What area are you talking about? > > Joe M. > Cleveland -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] TS64 as repeater controller
>> Maire-Radios wrote: >> >> I thought the TS-64 is a tone panel/ controller. We have added them >> to a R-100 repeater to give them a group of users for a GMRS group we >> had here at one time. Nope-it's just a newer version of the TS-32 CTCSS decoder. It is NOT a controller of any kind. It can be used to drive a circuit that keys the transmitter and provides TOT and hang-time. And you're right, GMRS repeaters don't HAVE to have an ID'er, but it's a pretty good idea. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] First repeater?
mch wrote: > Huh? When were they not legal? W6MEP's repeater was on in 1956. > > Maybe your friend didn't have a control link? > > Joe M. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I have a buddy (WA5QKE) who had a repeater on the air in Conroe TX >> before they were legal. He was headed to a site with an FCC engineer >> one day when it got keyed and the squelch tail was plainly audible >> along with the ID. He had to take it off the air for several years >> until they were legalized. >> >> 73 - im W5ZIT And it seems to me there was a point in there where it had to be licensed as a repeater. If he didn't have that, I could see his dilemma. But I don't think there was ever a time they were completely illegal here in the US. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: TS64 as repeater controller
G. Beat wrote: > Here is the ComSpec TS-64 product page > http://www.com-spec.com/ts64.htm > > The TS-64 is not a modern repeater controller, per se (ComSpec does > not build controllers) Well, they do make the TP-3200 tone panel-that does qualify. Nice tone panel btw. I highly recommend it to the original poster. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL 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] First repeater?
mch wrote: > Reepaters were first licensed in 1972 when the FCC issued the repeater > rules. They were granted 'WR' callsigns in 1974 (which was discontinued > around 1978). > > They were never prohibited in Part 97 AFAIK based on my research of > repeaters. They were required to have a control operator at a control > point (or locally) until 1998-ish when the FCC authorized automatic > control. > > Joe M. And don't forget that I think in the same 1978 ruling they cut back on logging requirements. Used to be that ALL transmissions through the repeater had to be logged. =:cO -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Cable formula not required.
I'll third that...even though duplexers are typically reactive, if it's right, length of the cables should not be an issue. If it is, I would look at either the duplexer or the antenna/feedline. As always, put a dummy load after the duplexer and see if all is well. If it is, it's an antenna system problem. If not, it's a duplexer problem. (barring repeater internal problems...) -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote: > Roger, Roger, Roger.Steve NU5D > > mch wrote: >> *The length from the repeater to the duplexer is not critical (or SHOULD >> not be when properly tuned). Therefore, there is no 'formula' other than >> you want it as short as possible yet allowing enough flex/extra that it >> won't get stressed.* >> >> Joe M. >> >> Don Morehouse wrote: >> >>> Does anyone know the formula for the cable length between a repeater >>> and the duplexer? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Don VE7EDA
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ctcss and dcs at same time?
ku4zs1 wrote: > Is it possible to run CTCSS and DCS at the same time on a > transmitter? Aside from the fact that most radios will not allow you > to select both at the same time (I will be using an outboard DCS > encoder and the built in CTCSS encoder). I am not sure if they are > capable of both running at the same time. Thanks. Chances are-the transmitter will be perfectly happy. The decoder on the other end most likely will not. I have never been successful at it, even using a good service monitor with an outboard DCS encoder (test instrument grade, I think it was a Motorola box) as the 'trasnmitter'. Several different radios, none would decode both. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] ctcss and dcs at same time?
WD7F - John in Tucson wrote: > Tell us how, please. I ended up using PL and DPL but not at the same time. > The Kenwood's community panel allows multiple PLs and crossover as required > but only one can be used at a time. Another quirk is that the repeater must > drop before it will respond to a different PL or DPL input. > > So, how did you go about simultaneous PL/DPL? > It definitely does require 2 encoders-one of each. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL 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] Are there any advantages to DCS ?
First-was this thread on another list? This post was the first it showed up here... >>>> And that, my friends, is exactly why a Kenwood, >>>> Icom, Vertex, Bendix-King, >>>> Maxon, etc., mobile or portable radio may not >>>> properly mute when accessing a >>>> Motorola repeater! Likewise, a Motorola mobile or >>>> portable radio may not >>>> properly mute when used with a repeater or base >>>> station made by the other >>>> brands. Anyway, it's interesting to note that all of the Kenwood's I have (2 made-for-ham handhelds, a ham mobile, and two commercial mobiles) mute quietly and reliably with my UHF Micor with factory PL board. As far as number of codes goes, a DCS code is octal, if you notice there is no numbers greater then 7 in any code. Technically, you have every combination of 0-7 in each position. But as others mentioned, the end result pattern on many is the same as many others, and others have patterns that are too similar to other patterns, and can result in falsing, so that limits the number of usable codes. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Are there any advantages to DCS ?
Rusty Coleman wrote: > I believe it is the addition of more codes, also there is the option > of inverse dpl, which adds even more codes. What? "Inverse codes" are going to be the same pattern as another "normal" code. I have never setup a radio with an "inverse" code, however, many older GE's (Phoenix's especially, MPA's too) use the "opposite" code. For instance, to get what everybody else calls, say, 612, you have to program 254. You can run two dcs > codes at once (and maybe more), which kind of acts like a password > for your repeater. What? Huh? uh, no. The decoder will try to match the pattern it receives to ONE code, and it will fail. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Are there any advantages to DCS ?
Laryn Lohman wrote: > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> First-was this thread on another list? This post was the first it > showed >> up here... >> >>>>>> And that, my friends, is exactly why a Kenwood, >>>>>> Icom, Vertex, Bendix-King, >>>>>> Maxon, etc., mobile or portable radio may not >>>>>> properly mute when accessing a >>>>>> Motorola repeater! Likewise, a Motorola mobile or >>>>>> portable radio may not >>>>>> properly mute when used with a repeater or base >>>>>> station made by the other >>>>>> brands. > > The text pasted in above was in the fourth post on the thread. The > first post was 73239. Email black hole?? > > Laryn K8TVZ Apparently... Yaa-Phoey!!! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Hamtronics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Anyone with experience with the Hamtronics 200 or 200T repeater > please advise of your satisfaction rating/comments. . > > We are considering one for the local ARES standby repeate and your > inputs are important.. > > Thanks in advance. > > Gene Don't bother. For the same money you can get a Kenwood TKR-850, and it will be stable, commercial grade, and, well, not a kit. This sounds like something you want to plug in and pretty much forget about it. The 'made-for-ham' grade repeaters don't fill that need very well. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mocom 10 info?
JOHN MACKEY wrote: > I thought that Mocom-10's were ONLY in the 35-50 Mhz range. > Nope-LB, HB, and UHF. UHF wasn't too common, at that time UHF was mostly Mocom-35's and the Industrial Disaster, er, Dispatcher that used HT200 boards with a small PA. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mocom 10 info?
JOHN MACKEY wrote: > Actually, I meant to say the 25-50 MHz range. I think if you look closely the > Mocom's you see in the HB and UHF range are actually Mocom-30, Mocom-35, & > Mocom-70. > Nope-there was a Mocom-10 on both bands, but I think Glenn was right, most of them looked like a M-35. There were some, definitely high band at least, that were a VHF version of the LB units you're familiar with. And I'm sure there was a UHF version as well. No, they didn't sell well for some reason. Wish I still had the price and spec books my father had from back then... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Bi-directional Amplifer
Kent Chong wrote: > Good day everybody, > > For an off-air repeater, we normal use bi-direction amplifier (BDA). > A BDA is constructed using two amplifiers for uplink and downlink, > interconnected with two duplexers (or circulators) at the front end. > In order to prevent the BDA from looping oscillation, the duplexer > (circulators) must provide sufficient isolation. > > We have built such BDA; however, we face the oscillation problem. We > are thinking of breaking the BDA into two parts: uplink and downlink. > And we amplify uplink and downlink separately. In this way, we need > four duplexers (or circulators). Would this method work? Anybody > could advise? If you're having oscillation problems, either there is not enough isolation between the antennas, ie, too close, or the gain of the amps is too high, or a combination of both. Measure the isolation between the two antennas. It should be at least 12 dB MORE then the gain of the BDA. TX-RX and EMR are two major BDA manufacturers, also check out <http://www.rfsolutions.com/> There's several cheap BDA companies out there that make junk. If you see a BDA with a price tag of only $1000 or so (new), run away! Also, a good BDA will occupy more space then, say, an external modem, by a factor of at least 10. (Yes, it's bigger then a bread box!) -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
Gary Schafer wrote: > Intermod IS the result of mixing. The mixing can take place in your receiver > (commonly called receiver intermod). > Mixing can take place in your own transmitter, which generates a product > that falls on your receive frequency(or on someone else's) or the mixing can > take place in someone else's transmitter with the resulting product falling > on your receive frequency. It is all intermodulation. i.e. the result of > mixing of two or more frequencies in a non linear device. > ...like a rusty joint on a tower... ...or a guy wire... ...or a fence... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Mastr III - Anybody using one?
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. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Mastr III - Anybody using one?
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
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Coax length between added cavity and duplexer
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! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Using SPLAT or RM to "reverse plot" a repeater?
Nate Bargmann wrote: > * Kris Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007 Jul 31 04:41 -0500]: >> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Bill Powell wrote: >>> Looking for experience and advice in using SPLAT or RM to "reverse >>> plot" a repeater. >>> >>> What I'd like to do is identify holes in the current coverage and run >>> a plot with SPLAT or RM with the holes as the center point to identify >>> potential repeater sites. Do I use mobile parameters (antenna height) >>> at the hole or do I use an estimated height of 100' assuming that I'll >>> have a 100' tower at the new site? Restated - how do I insure that >>> reciprocal results are reliable? >> You're gonna need a lot of computing power. >> >> A LOT of computing power. > > As compared to? I routinely run SPLAT! coverage plots on my trusty > 1.333 GHz Pentium III based T23 laptop. Yes, it may take a couple of > minutes to chew through some of the more demanding plots. For SPLAT! > purposes, enough computing power is available on the used market for > even the most frugal ham. > > Even in the case of SPLAT!, memory is more important than CPU speed. I > have 768 MiB in the laptop and a full GiB wouldn't hurt, but it really > isn't worth tossing a 256 MiB chip for a 512 MiB one. Opening the > PPM files generated by GNU Plot in the Gimp is no problem for my T23 > either. I do this work on a Slackware partition which is quite a bit > leaner than my Debian partition which I have set up for as a rich > desktop. > > 73, de Nate >> Oh, duh, missed your OS...;cP -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Using SPLAT or RM to "reverse plot" a repeater?
Nate Bargmann wrote: > Even in the case of SPLAT!, memory is more important than CPU speed. I > have 768 MiB in the laptop and a full GiB wouldn't hurt, but it really > isn't worth tossing a 256 MiB chip for a 512 MiB one. Opening the > PPM files generated by GNU Plot in the Gimp is no problem for my T23 > either. I do this work on a Slackware partition which is quite a bit > leaner than my Debian partition which I have set up for as a rich > desktop. > > 73, de Nate >> Especially since I remember seeing somewhere that Win98 won't correctly allocate more then 512M of RAM. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Your old work bench - shop pictures are on ebay!
I swear I saw a 4-channel chassis for a prog line! Scarce as hens teeth even back then! -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL Mike Morris wrote: > You know you are getting old when you recognize that > stuff as past project radios... > > At 04:11 PM 07/31/07, you wrote: >> Your old work-bench and/or shop pictures on ebay! >> >> In case you didn't take any pictures of your bench or >> shop in years past... some of your equipment found >> its way onto ebay. :-) >> >> LOT OF TUBE GENERAL ELECTRIC & MOTOROLA PARTS >> Ebay Item number: 140143649238
Re: [Repeater-Builder] tone encoder/decoder board
retiredcss01 wrote: > I have an ICOM H-16, VHF HANDHELD. Our system has changed to > apparently a DCS tone of 306 and the tones on the H-16 only go to 254. > My question is, is there any way, add-on or mod, to get this tone for > encoding and decoding? > > Thanks, > Tom > retiredcss01 DCS means Digital Coded Squelch. There is no tone. The only way to get DCS in that radio would be to add a board, like the Com-Spec DCS unit. Not pretty. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re service monitor repair
[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 Here's who we've been using: Cardinal Electronics 847-797-7820 <http://www.cardinalelec.com/> They have found problems others couldn't. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: ltr repeater system
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. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] LTR Rocks !
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. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones..
Bob Dengler wrote: > One concept that really helps in this area is CTCSS tone frequency > standardization, IOW tones by region. All you then need to know is the > freq. being used in the area you're traveling to. Many areas are already > well established: 110.9 in Rochester NY, 107.2 in Niagara Falls & San > Diego, 131.8 in Santa Barbara, 127.3 in Springfield MA. Even if you don't > know what tone is in use, all you have to do is find the tone of one > system. After that you can find the others by kerchunking (with ID of > course!) all the other pairs with that tone. > > Bob NO6B Right-Cleveland area 2M repeaters have used 110.9 since the mid-70's, since most of the PD's & FD's in Cuyahoga Co. used it on VHF, and 131.8 on UHF, thus an abundance of reeds back then. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: [AR902Mhz & Repeater-Builder] PURC 5000 questions
Bob M. wrote: > A third has an actual numeric keypad on the front > panel, but it's usually locked so it can't easily be > changed. Either a password or flipping a DIP switch > inside the unit would be necessary to allow frequency > programming. > The default password is 5000, and I have yet to see one where it had been changed. But yes, I remember there is a dip switch or push-on jumper that can disable the keypad. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones..
Jack Taylor wrote: > PL access is a useful tool when all other means have been taken to get > rid of undesirable audio artifacts on a repeater. Usually this includes > harmonious > coordination with the other users at a site and a knowledgeable technical > approach to the problem. > > All to often though, mandatory PL is just a band aid to hide the lack of > expertise of those concerned. > Not in Ohio-too many repeaters to avoid it. And then you get band openings along Lake Erie and suddenly a repeater in Buffalo is hand-held accessible in Cleveland, Toledo, and Detroit. Or vice versa. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones..
MCH wrote: > Which results in OH 'claiming' 30 of the 32 (or 38) available tones. > > That leaves 2 or 8 tones for everyone else. Not a particularly fair or > reasonable plan. > > Joe M. ?? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] OT- Weather Radio Recall
tgundo2003 wrote: > This is a bit off-topic, but I thought it would be important to get > the word out as life safety is involved... > > Tom > W9SRV > > Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 203-4921 > CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 > CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908 > > Weather Radios Recalled by Oregon Scientific Due to Failure to > Receive National Weather Service Alerts I've never cared for Oregon Scientific-they're the ones that put all those "wireless" weather stations in the middle of the 433 MHz ham band-and are getting away with it! My father tells me that 430-440 is totally useless at his house in rural N. AZ because of all the "unlicensed wireless" junk. > Manufactured in: China > Why does that NOT surprise me? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Wal Mart effect makes it to the Communications Hard (feed)-Line industry
skipp025 wrote: > The Wal Mart effect* makes it to the Communications Feed-Line industry > (*Global Economy) > > enjoy, > s. > > [paste text] > Building upon the market success of its two most significant cable > products, Andrew Corporation has announced they will be streamlining > its long-running and market-leading HELIAX� product portfolio by > discontinuing its LDF series cable and featuring alternative products > that offer higher value. > > Andrew will cease regular production of LDF5 and LDF7 series coaxial > cables on December 31, 2007 with equivalently sized HELIAX Andrew > Virtual Air� (AVA�) and HELIAX AL aluminum series cables serving as > direct replacements. ummm-LDF *IS* Heliax.. _ / o_O -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] OT- Weather Radio Recall
Peter Dakota Summerhawk wrote: > On that topic I found that a pager works just as well: > http://www.iinc.com/ggcomm/pager.html > Been using one for quite a while now with good results. > Dakota Summerhawk Only problem-those don't do the SAME code, just the generic tone. You'll get everything that transmitter sends out, which I know in my case would be a LOT more then I would want to hear about. Probably only 1 out of every 7-8 pages would be of interest. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Range : Estimate Program Available
Ralph Mowery wrote: > > Then my refferance (ARRL Antenna Book 1974 version > page 11) must be wrong. Gee-that would be a surprise...NOT! BTW, I've been meaning to put this up for a long time: anyone want a 2006 ARRL Antenna book, still in the wrapper? At least I think it's '06...no older then '05...is it worth as much as $25??? -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
[Repeater-Builder] F S stuff
Cleaning out the storage shed... If you can use any of this make me a offer and will see what we can do to get the stuff to you.. located near Flint MIchigan. if no interest will try e-bay have a good day thanks jim FOR SALE ANTENNAS DB-201-D 46.42 MEG GROUND PLANE TYPE COULD BE SHORTENED TO 6 METERS DB-212-2-B 39.140 MEG FOLDED DIPOLES 2 EACH MOTOROLA TAD6073A AHIR PIN DIPOLE 150-162 MHZ. MOROTOLA RADIOS MOBILE UNITS MITREKS T83JJA3900DK 8 EACH MICOR RADIO MOBIL UNITS. T73RNT3190B 1 EACH T73RNT1190A 1 EACH GE MASTR II MOBIL UNITS. MC76KFU66A 1 EACH MX76KAU66A 1 EACH NC64KEU33A 3 EACH OLD COMMINATIONS RADIOS HEATH HWA-2036-3/M POWER SUPPLY / MANUAL HW12A 75 METER XCEVER / MANUAL SB-100 NATIONAL NC-57 NC-100 NC-2-40C / SPKR HAMMARLUND HQ-129-X 2 RADIO SHACK TRS-80 MODEL 2000 COMPUTERS. DISK CARTRIDGE SYSTEM 4 CARTS. EXTERNAL HARD DISK 35 MEG SYSTEM 1 COLOR CRT 1 B&W CRT. WITH OPERATING MANUAL AND SERVICE MANUAL James Boyer KD8YX [EMAIL PROTECTED]Lapeer County Michigan146.620 Mhz using a Scom 7K into a GE Mstr II Radio442.750 Mhz using a Scom 5K into a GE Mstr II Radio1-810-797-4661 Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] 220 Repeater Stuff
Andrew G. wrote: > A few years ago...Qrz is like that, there are guys in there who have > been dead quite a while and are still listed. > > Andy > I bet if he's still on QRZ.com, he's still in the FCC db, which means they were not informed of his passing. Look up his call in ULS. Jim Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] APRS string/transmissions interspersed with voice
Jack Bitzer wrote: > The intended system is for desert and mountain travelers so most of the > time it would be unused. APRS packets would be limited to every 5 > minutes or as a DCS type "tail" on a transmission if I can figure out > how to do that. You mean ANI-automatic (unit)number indentification. DCS is digital coded squelch, aka DPL. Jim Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Dayton Hamvention Input Wanted.
skipp025 wrote: > Dayton Hamvention Input Wanted. > > My friend Tom is directly involved with the Dayton > Hamvention. His position in the 2006 year project > is more toward the public relations side. > > He has asked me to poll you folks for new ideas, > opinions and information for the 2006 Hamvention. > > The primary goal of this poll is to source ideas, > which will be used to make the whole Hamvention > event more attractive to non-hams... ie spouses > and persons not normally attending the Hamvention. > > The quesion is: "What would it take to get your > spouse to want to come to the Dayton Hamvention or > spend time in the Greater Dayton Area while you > attend the event?" > > We're looking for ideas regarding things we can offer > at the Hamvention and off site. One example might > be a special shuttle service to available local > shopping, tours of historical locations and culture. > A list of good pubs would work! ;c) Jim WD8CHL Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] please any one can told me what is the usefull for the deviation in the repater ????
hussin reda wrote: > Please any one can told me what is the usefull for the deviation > in the repater > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > troll Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] New Repeater--Need Advice!
jrinnebraska wrote: > I'm putting up a repeater in my local area--coordinated frequency is > 146.895, going to tone it at 123.0. > > The repeater is a Kenwood 270--I know it's not a big Motorola box, > etc., but the price was right--FREE! I've had it checked and reset > for the new frequency and it works just fine--puts out 48 watts > steadily. > Huh? The only Kenwood that matches up with that number is the TK-270 handheld. VHF Repeaters are TKR-720, -730, -740, -750, and -7400. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Static Cling (was - polyphaser)
What, no Uncle Fester jokes? Jim John J. Riddell wrote: > Good one Kevin...I know several people who should keep a "Static-Buster" in > their mouth > at all times ! :-)) (Non Hams of course) > > John VE3AMZ > > > - Original Message - > From: "Kevin Custer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 8:46 AM > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Static Cling (was - polyphaser) > > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> >>>Hey, ya drag your feet on the carpet .. aren't you thus 'connected' ?? >>>Shockingly, no. >>> >>Interesting that this would come up... Last year, before installing a >>whole house furnace humidifier, I got zapped every time I reached for a >>light switch (screws are grounded). Many times it would draw an arc of >>1/4 inch or more. Just for the heck of it, I did a test. I put on my >>shoes and drug my feet across the carpet and with a NE-2 neon bulb, >>touched the screw on a convenient lamp switch. Many times I would build >>up enough static electricity that I could make the bulb burn for about a >>second, and sometimes it would snap (arc across?). >> >>I took one of the Static Busters and put the end that gets mounted in my >>mouth. I did the test again, and was very surprised that I couldn't >>build up enough charge to make the bulb light. >> >>Kevin Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] MICOR the meaning of it.....
Neil McKie wrote: > Motorola UHF Business Dispatcher - U34DRT ... for those of us > who serviced them, was closer to D34DiRT ... Let's not forget it's parent, the D33BAT Industrial Disaster! Jim Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Help with duplexer
John Lloyd wrote: > Steve, > > This Motorola Duplexer will work great with your repeater. You should be > able to make the cables yourself. They are made with good quality > Amphenol PL259 connectors. Don't use the radio shack ones. Use the ones > with the white teflon center insulator. > ...and not the white nylon ones =cP -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor Amp TLE1713A
Does Anyone have a Manual or link for the TLE1317 UHF Amp in PDF or Word format? Thanks, Jim Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor Amp TLE1713A
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does Anyone have a Manual or link for the TLE1317 UHF Amp in PDF or > Word format? > > Thanks, > Jim Oops i mean TLE1713A Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Static / desense problems
Gene Colson wrote: > And I am going to once again proclaim that with proper connectors, LMR 400 > is as good as it gets.No more noisy that RG213. I am using it on 900 , 440 > and VHF duplexers and assure you , there are no problems, > Gene W7UVH > Of course not-RG213 is unsuitable for duplex as well, as it is NOT double shielded!!! Or do you mean RG-214, which IS double-shielded? And Andrews LDFwhatever-50 is as good as it gets for feedline for ANY application! (well, maybe a few exceptions, like if you need radiating feedline, or plenum-rated...) -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Static / desense problems
Chuck Kelsey wrote: > Both the antenna and feedline are suspect in my opinion. > > Yes, both have been used without problems in certain installations. But, > more times than not, this isn't the case. > > If you expect professional results, you need consider professional > components. Ham-grade parts usually yield less than professional results. > > Trust me, you won't see these components installed by a competent two-way > radio shop on your local police or fire department repeater. > > Chuck > WB2EDV > Exactly...key word there is "competent". I've seen some shops put in some real crap, kinda stuff not even a good ham would put up, more like one of those 'know-it-all' CB types (usually these kind of shops do CB 'mods' as well.) -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Static / desense problems
Dan Hancock wrote: > Why do you believe that double shielded cable is > necessary for an antenna run? What are you trying to > keep the signal out of? uhhh-the receiver??? > Inter-cabling within the cabinet needs to be double > shielded to prevent interaction between the TX and RX > portions, but once those signals are merged at the > output of the duplexer they are both on the same > feedline anyway and double shielding is expensive and > unnecessary. > For short antenns runs, RG213 is actually an excellent > choice. Not for a permanent installation. I might run it for a test antenna at home, but that's it. > The only exception to this is if there is no duplexer > being used and the repeater is operating on split > antennas with parallel feedline runs, then 100% > shielding is necessary. Under these circumstances > LDM400 or 9913 would be a good choice if heliax is not > available affordably since the cables are not being > used in a duplex setting. > > Dan N8DJP I would still say not for any length. 100' of 9913 has about 1.5 dB loss on 2M, which is getting close to the high end of tolerance for that length. At UHF, it's more like 3dB, and if you're only 100', the height won't be enough to compensate for the loss, unless you're on a buiding top, and even then, going to hardline will be a NOTICABLE improvement. My UHF rptr (on a rooftop) has abt an 80-90' run. I went from 1/2" to 7/8"-just that difference was astounding. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Static / desense problems
Dan Hancock wrote: >>Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:47:59 - >> From: "Laryn Lohman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Re: Static / desense problems >> >>H-- what about the case where your single >>shielded >>cable runs >>past a high power paging antenna, > > > Unlikely, since that stuff is normally at the TOP of > the tower, but special circumstances require special > solutions. Not true-of the tower mounted antennas in the system we maintain, about as many are mounted somewhere in the middle as at the top. > > I have never seen this. But I do have an acquaintance > who wondered why all the jumpers on his duplexers made > noise when he touched them. Of course failing to > solder the shield in the PL259's had something to do > with that. heh > > >>Bottom line-using solid >>shield coax is almost never a bad choice. >> >>Laryn K8TVZ > > Never said it was. Sometimes people can't afford it > though. If I was doing a building-top installation > with a short feed-line run, had a limited budget, and > had to choose how to spend my money, I'd put more into > the antenna and use RG213 before I would skimp on the > antenna just to buy 30' of heliax. > > Dan N8DJP Probably true for something I put up on my own, especially if I needed to get it up and 'making noise' quickly, but I would want to work towards better, 100% shield feedline as fast as posssible. And I would expect, and be the first to tell users, that it's not going to work as well as it could with better coax, that there will probably be some desense or noise on windy days, etc. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Corner Reflectors and UHF Repeaters
Gregg Lengling wrote: > While I've never done it on UHF we have a number of VHF repeaters for a > Gas Utility that we designed this way due to the tower site being on the > corner of their service area and needing to cover a metro area with > better signals. Been running for over 20 years now and works great. > Likewise-the guys on the other side of 'the wall' from me maintain a VHF network using a pair of corner reflectors back-to-back fed from a power splitter to cover the toll road. Again no need to cover more than a few miles off the road, but need end-to-end. As long as construction of the antenna is solid and stable, it shouldn't be a problem. That's really the problem with antennas that don't work well duplex-the mechanical stability of the design rather than what 'style' of antenna it is. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] A good price on Motorola equipment in rack
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Actually the bid is at $99. As far as the conversion, that is questionable. > it receives on VHF and transmits on UHF. That is not a setup we would use in > ham radio. Go to HREF="www.repeaterbuilder.com">www.repeaterbuilder.com and see what it > says there on the > conversions. I think there is a link to Micors. Maybe someone with hands-on > experience will speak up. > > > 73. > > CHRIS WILKIE > W1LKE > Jonesboro, Georgia Sounds like a good candidate for a remote input...oh and the high split Micors should be good candidates to go up to 220. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] rg-142 cable assembly
Tom Parker wrote: > I guess if building your own is not an option, I've used pre-built cables > from > Advanced Communications before. Their address is > www.advancedreceiver.com/index1.html. They'll rund you between $12.00 and > $24.00, depending on what length between 12" and 24" you want. They don't > have > a minimu and accept all Credit Cards. > > my 2 cents > > n1ofj wrote: > >>Looking for a rg-142 cable assembly, terminated BNC male on one end >>and N-male on the other. Can be 1-2 feet long. Every business I >>have contacted has a $100 minimum to order. Does anyone know of >>somewhere I can get just this one assembly without dealing with this >>minimum order situation? >> >>Thanks, >>Dave >> You can't put your own connectors on? What are you doing owning a repeater? -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: NOAA Weater alerts
bill Croghan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<<<< > > I believe the issue should be the AUTOMATIC retransmission, rather than the > content. From the quote below, it appears National Weather service is > permitted, but is it permitted to be done automatically without an amateur > radio > operator controlling the transmission? > If not, then it's time for a rule change petition, to include Amber Alerts > which are going to be included with many NWS transmissions in the near future. > Perhaps a ruling change that would permit anything sent by the EAS system > EXCEPT > required weekly and monthly tests. > I know repeaters can be on automatic, but can the retransmissions of other > services that are permitted by 97.117 be automatic? > > Bill Croghan, CPBE, WB0KSW > Co-Chair, Las Vegas Area EAS system > Chief Engineer, > KOMP/KXPT/KENO/KBAD > Lotus Broadcasting, Las Vegas, NV > There should definitely be means of controlling it, remotely if an unmanned site. I think this falls under 'ancillary communications', and doesn't qualify for automatic operation, just like autopatch. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] NOAA Weater alerts
bill Croghan wrote: >>I know I can retransmit NOAA, but they (ARRL) told me that it can not be >>automatic. This is what I wanted to do. So then I asked about the weather >>alert radio changing my courtesy tone to a "W" so I could then bring up the >>link. The ARRL could not give me a straight answer on that one. > > > I'm a broadcast radio engineer not a lawyer, but my reading of the rules > and > interpretations over the years has been that the problem with lack of control > is > when the repeater transmits because someone/something other than a licensed > ham > causes it to transmit. If the receipt of the weather alert radio changed the > courtesy tone but did not cause it to be transmitted, I believe, in my never > to > be humble opinion, that the result would be both legal and helpful. If the > repeater, at some point shortly thereafter should ID, on it's own or because > of > a user keying up, and the courtesy tone were heard, a controlling amateur > could > then turn on the relay of the WX receiver, or play back a digital recording of > the alert that caused the tone to change. It might be stretching the rules a > bit, but after changing the courtesy tone, maybe the controller could be set > to > ID every ten minutes until acknowledged. To fit into most EAS machines, the > alert is usually less than 2 minutes in duration and that is a pretty easy > thing > to digitally record with modern stuff. That way, the playback could be > repeated > for others to hear as many times as needed, BUT ALWAYS UNDER THE CONTROL OF > THE > HAM. Sounds to me like a good idea. I've often wanted to see a distinctive > courtesy tone or letter to indicate emergency in progress to warn hams away > from > tying up a machine that was in the midst of something critical. Another tone > might indicate RACES active, still another one Club meeting tonight. Just a > few > letters of the Morse alphabet could indicate a lot. Might even encourage the > no-coders to learn the code!. > > Bill Croghan, CPBE, WB0KSW > Chief Engineer, > KOMP/KXPT/KENO/KBAD > Lotus Broadcasting, Las Vegas, NV Remember-the CONTROLLER is controlling the transmitter, NOT NWS! You as the trustee have programmed the controller to do a certain function when it receives a certain input. As long as you have means to override it and turn it off remotely, YOU are controlling the transmitter. Now, when this occurs, the repeater is no longer operating as a repeater, but as a remotely controlled station, so 'automatic opertation', as defined by the FCC, cannot occur. So just make sure you have means to override it and turn it off either by phone, or RF above 222 Mhz. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Regency MCCUO1R Exciter
Hi All, I am trying to identiy the final transistor in my Regency UHF Repeater. I have the Regency part# (4804-3402-301). It appears to be a Motorola manufactured transistor. Stamped on it, from top to bottom is the classic Motorola "M" then 301, below that 696-9, and at the bottom 423. M 301 696-9 423 The exciter puts out a maximum of 800mw, however once keyed it drops slowly to about 730mw over a 3 minute timespan (most likely due to heat). I was hoping to get the exciter to 1w output in order to drive a Micor TLE1317A PA. Since it seems the final will not put out any more then 800mw, i am considering replacing the final in order to get a 1w- 1.5w drive. In the meantime we will probably be replacing the thermal paste and heatsink on the Final in order to try and provide better heat dissipation and prevent the drop in wattage. Thanks, Jim KB2WMP Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?
Adi Linden wrote: > Hi, > > Are High-band VHF Syntors any good for amateur radio use? Are they similar > to the Mitrek just with synthesized tuning? Do they have synthesizers for > RX and TX independently (for duplex mods)? > > Thanks, > Adi > -- Sure-there are two main variations. The just plain Syntor uses a PROM (single-use) for programming. It's more narrowly tuned, so it probably won't spread 2M and commercial. The model # will be something like T43SRA. The Syntor X mostly used a EEPROM module that is easy to program (if you can get a burner for the 2816 it uses), and will spread 144-162 or better with little or no effort. The model # will be something like T43VBJ. HOWEVER-it is only one synthesizer, and CANNOT be duplexed. Other than that, they work great! -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?
Dexter McIntyre - W4DEX wrote: > A pair of Syntor UHF units configured as a repeater has performed flawlessly > for several years at this site: > > http://www.w4dex.com/kc4fwc/444575.htm > > Dex > >Rich Mountain is located just north-west of red square Your repeater is just north-west of Red Square? Say hi to Putin! ;c} jk! nice pics! -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Motorola Syntor, any good?
Tom Manning wrote: > Adi > The Syntor makes a very good vhf mobile radio but requires an extensive > modification. Go to www.piexx.com/synDoc/syndoc.html. > This makes a very good mobile radio. > Tom Manning, af4ug > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > No, it doesn't-just program it and tune it up. No mods. The link you provided is a *really* nice add-on (wish I could afford it for my low-band X), but isn't absolutely necessary to make a good functional radio on ham freqs. BTW, you have to back up to the main page-the syndoc.html page isn't there. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [[Repeater-Builder] Spectrum Communication SCR1000 VHF Manual]]
Joe Cody wrote: > Hi Coy. > I have a master2 exec.converted to a repeater. Just FYI-Mastr II and Exec II are two different radios. Which do you have? -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Good repeaters ???
fish_497072000 wrote: > Hi- With all comments on the Spectrum gear,what is a good line of > repeater gear ,out side of the M and GE brand?? Our local repeater > is using a Sprectrum exciter board with an amp,but I don't know as > it has all the troubles that has been listed of late. TKS,W8KQ > Kenwood makes a number of good boxes. The discontinued TKR-720 (VHF) and -820 (UHF) might be somewhat readily avialable. Both are 25W desktop-type rptrs. Very reliable if you keep them at about 25W and not try to run them much higher. Some of their newer stuff has 100W amps also. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
Kevin Custer wrote: > In the context of the difference between the Mastr II and Mastr Exec > > Virden Clark Beckman wrote: > > >>The executive line does not have the dual squelch stuff that was the big >>thing in 72 when that idea debuted... >> > > > You mean when the GE engineers dissected the Micor to help build the > Mastr II? > > Motorola debuted the dual squelch in the late 60's. > > BTW: No one needs to flame me on the first comment. I have recently > been introduced to two top engineers that worked for GE's Two-Way radio > division when the Mastr II was developed. Both fully admitted that the > Micor was used to help design the Mastr II. If you doubt this, I'm > sorry, but all you need to do is look at the facts: > > 5 LARGE Helical resonators. > 11 Meg I-F > Dual Squelch > Elementized Channel Oscillators > Power sensing RF protection > Numerous other things mechanical, electrical, and physical, but it's too > early to remember them all > > > Kevin Custer > In fact, the first schematics (VHF) for the MII were IDENTICAL to the Micor schematics at the time, except for a very few minor changes that they probably did to keep it out of copyright court. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] GE Stuff.....
eveloped all the good radio technology, simply not true! I have worked on > both, I like both but prefer the GE radios. Show me an actual circuit that > is similar, that's what counts! Again, look at the schematics. Some things like PA's and oscillators are > so generic there is only one way to design them but there is a lot of > differences between the Master II and Micor radios. If Motorola truly > thought GE copied their design Motorola would have been all over GE, just > like GE got all over RCA! GE changed it JUST enough to prevent that. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: GE Stuff.....
ac0y5 wrote: > WHAT GE C O P I E D the MICOR? The engineers that told you that > was on drugs! If the Micor was looked at it was on HOW NOT to build > a radio. The Micor works but not as well as the MASTRII. (boy am I > going to get killed for that) The MASTRII is a GREAT BASIC radio. > The MASTR PRO must have been copied from the Micor also, because it > to is modular. A receiver module , a Exciter/ PA module, and a power > supply. All modules are solid components. It is more than SOME Micor > repeaters that I've seen. I think the Progress Line was some what > modular, and so was some of the pre Micor Motorola's (trying to use > some Very rusty brain cells). > 73 > AC0Y Ya know something? I'm getting real tired of this guy. He just won't shut up. He obviously has no clue. The Micor came out first. As I stated, the original MII schem. was identical to a Micor schem. except for a few cosmetic changes to keep it 'legal'. The Mastr Pro is before the Micor, and was competition for the Motrac. Being 'modular' has nothing to do with it, and no one said so. Micors DO work better than MII's, but not by a whole lot, and I would be happy to take either one. And Spectrum sucks-that's why they don't make repeaters any more. -- Jim "The higher you are, the harder it is to pump." -Cleveland Mayor Jane Cambell, after the big black-out of 2003 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
