[Repeater-Builder] Zetron Question
Can anybody tell me if Zetron still supports the Model 45B Z-PATCH or the Model 38A repeater Panel? I need some/all the chips for them. Or at least the ones that are not available from mouser. Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Computer noise in 2M Repeater
You should try to get with the internet company. I manage a site where there is a VHF commercial repeater that was having a serious range problem. Started sniffing around and decided to unplug the wireless internet UPS for a few seconds and the repeater was perfect. Of course, you don't want to do that until you get permission, but that may be an option for you. FYI, the internet company replaced a board on top of the tower and it helped, but did not solve the problem 100%. Hope that helps, Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Russell" wrote: > > Thanks for the input from all of you. I went to the tower site this > afternoon to give another look at the problem. The noise has gotten worst. > Our receiver is greatly desensed. The only equipment on site is the site > owner's UHF repeater, our two meter repeater and the Internet equipment. The > site owners equipment doesn't seem to be affected. The strobe lamp puts a > buzz in our receiver each time it fires. I noticed one of the green lamps on > the Netgear switch get brighter when the strobe fires. I'm sure the Internet > equipment is affected by that. The two meter is our primary machine used in > our storm watch activities. I tried to contact the Internet company today > with no answer. Will try again Monday. Again thanks for the information. > > Jim WK5Y > > - Original Message - > From: Eric Lemmon > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 9:15 AM > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Computer noise in 2M Repeater > > > > > > Jim, > > This situation happens all too often, and it usually occurs because cheap > equipment is used (plastic boxes to contain the amplifier, unshielded cable, > no ferrites, ineffective grounding. etc.) to keep the installation costs > down. This is a misguided approach, because repeated visits to fix a > leakage problem will always cost a lot more than a first-class system would > have cost. Sound familiar? > > Another possible factor is that *some* wireless installers are primarily IT > (Information Technology) folks who have relatively little experience with > the RF environment at a repeater site. I have met a few of these clueless > guys, whose eye glaze over when I talk about an interfering carrier from a > CPU crystal or intermodulation. They're used to installing APs and bridges > in office buildings, and don't see anything different about tie-wrapping a > more powerful box to a tower that supports many other services, except > perhaps using some electrical tape and silicone goop to waterproof the > connectors. Don't laugh- it happens! > > So, to answer your question, immediately contact the wireless system owner > and advise him that his system is interfering with yours, and it must be > fixed promptly. Don't quote the FCC rules quite yet. If the polite > approach does not get results, contact the site owner. Above all, do not > just sit and wring your hands. The wireless owner must comply with Part 15 > rules, but he must be told if there is a problem. > > 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim Russell > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 7:20 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Computer noise in 2M Repeater > > Does anyone have any suggestions on how to eliminate noise generated by a > Wireless > Internet System. The owner of the tower where our club has our 145.370 MHz > repeater > has rented space to a group who have mounted a wireless Internet "relay" on > the tower. > The system is simple, it consist of a Netgear switch, a Microwave dish and a > smallYagi. > There is approx. 300 feet of Cat 5 wire going up and 300 feet coming down > the tower. > Their antennas are mounted within a few feet of ours on the top of the 260 > ft. tower. > We unplugged the netgear switch and the noise cleared, we disconnected our > antenna and the noise goes away. The noise rides on the repeater receiver > squelch tail. > We do use a PL tone or we wouldn't be able to use our repeater at all > > Jim WK5Y >
[Repeater-Builder] Re:Anyone have this happen?
Well! That turned into an interesting thread! This is the first problem that I have ever had with a crystal from Bomar. And I am pretty sure that it is not a crystal problem anyway. It is weird that the element just went haywire, but after-all, the radio is only 30 years old, right? I will test some more and see what happens. If I start having problems I may order new ones from somewhere else and try them out. But I have always liked Bomar. As always, thanks for all the info. -Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Beat" wrote: > > I have no idea why you are using Bomar, > other than maybe to save a couple of dollars. > > I have always used ICM (as well as all 2-way / LMR technicians I have known) > ICM guarantees their work for life and replaces crystal/elements. > > w9gb >
[Repeater-Builder] Anyone have this happen?
Hello, Hello I have a Micor UHF repeater station on amateur. I have had it tuned and tested perfect since last fall. I sent my elements to Bomar and had them temperature compensated and all that good stuff. After the repeater has set out in the garage all winter, (unheated, in Indiana) I powered it up today to find that the transmitter didn't appear to be working. After some tests I found that the element was off frequency. I tuned back to frequency and tested. It stayed on frequency for about 2 minutes and then drifted off about 40 Kc. From that point on it would not tune up. I installed the crystal in another element and it tuned right up and stayed that way for the hour that I left it running before I had to leave. I am wondering if it was as simple as the element being bad or maybe something else going on. If it is just the element, I wonder why it just decided to take a dump??? Any thoughts? Thanks -Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] VXR-1000 Mobile repeater on ham
Has anybody gotten a VXR-1000 to program on frequencies lower than 450 MHz? I am using ver 2.10 and am having no luck. Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: NHRC-Squelch Board
Oh yeah, After doing some more reading, I see where the RLC-MOT has a de-emphasized repeat audio output option. So That should allow me to use flat audio to the voter panel. My question now is, Has the PL pass-thru actually been done using the RLC-MOT? --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Cort Buffington wrote: > > Sure, the squelch board is going to be responsible for (in full or in > part) keying your transmitter, it doesn't mean you can't run your > discriminator output into your exciter past the pre-emphasis stage. > > On Dec 23, 2008, at 6:13 PM, twoway_tech wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for the info guys. In reply to Eric's post, this Mitrek is part > > of a voted receive repeater system. I don't think an audio delay board > > would work with a voted system. The main receiver is a Micor and > > obviously I want the Mitrek to sound as close to the Micor as > > possible. My plan is to keep the remote Carrier squelch and and decode > > the user's PL at the Voter deck as explained in one of Kevin's (I > > think it's Kevin's) writeups. Although, I started thinking about how > > those squelch boards interface and now I am wondering if I can still > > pass the user's PL thru the Mitrek while using the squelch board. > > Anyone know the answer to that? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jordan > > > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer > > wrote: > > > > > > Jordan, et al, > > > > > > The RLC-MOT circuit uses the famous Motorola MICOR squelch chip, > > so it > > > works identically to what is found in the MICOR. Motorola decided > > some > > > time ago to end the production of the chip, and I suspect the recent > > > jump in cost is a result of this. As Scott has mentioned, I did a > > test > > > of some of the commercially available add-on squelch boards that > > were > > > advertised about two years ago. This included the NHRC-Squelch, the > > CAT > > > SQ-1000, and the Link-Comm RLC-MOT. > > > > > > The following is a personal opinion - no more, no less. The best > > one I > > > found is the RLC-MOT, but then again, I find no fault with the > > action of > > > the MICOR squelch. In my opinion, there is no better. The other two > > > work fairly well, and I don't remember if one was any better than > > the > > > other. The biggest fault I found with the latter two units is (in my > > > opinion) they don't have enough sections of high-pass filtering, and > > low > > > frequency noise is considered in the evaluation. This tends to make > > the > > > user set the squelch tighter than he/she should have to - - to > > keep the > > > unit from falsing. This may not be a big deal for some, but I like > > to > > > have a squelch I can set on the hairy edge without falsing, like the > > > MICOR squelch. Both the NHRC and the CAT have near instant turn off > > > when the carrier is near full quieting and then removed. They both > > have > > > 'variable' hysteresis - as the signal is reduced, they produce a > > longer > > > noise burst after removal of the carrier. In the NHRC, there are > > four > > > progressive steps with differing time - depending on how it's > > > configured. The manual for the CAT unit doesn't offer how the time > > > delay is handled. They both use a processor to evaluate the noise > > and > > > set the amount of hysteresis. The MICOR has only two different > > > hysteresis levels. > > > > > > As the availability of the MICOR squelch gets increasing higher in > > cost, > > > or becomes no longer available, these other units may be the only > > choice > > > for those who want to replace the carrier squelch circuitry. That > > being > > > said, Scott and I have done a great deal of research and believe > > we can > > > reproduce the action of the MICOR squelch with circuitry that > > doesn't > > > include a micro-processor. > > > > > > Kevin Custer > > > > > > > > > > Jordan, > > > > > > > > The RLC-MOT works very well since it is an exact copy of the > > squelch circuit > > > > found in the Micor. The only problem is it is now VERY expensive. > > > > > > > > Kevin had done some extensive testing on the dual squelch modues > > some time > > > > ago. Maybe he can chime in here... Kev?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Anybody have any NHRC-squelch boards in service? I am looking at > > > >> getting either one of those or a RLC-MOT board from link > > > >> Communications. Is one better then the other? Do they do the same > > > >> thing? Anybody try to clone an NHRC board? (they look easy) I am > > > >> wanting to install something on a Mitrek for that nice Micor type > > > >> squelch. Actually, I just want to get rid of that Chkccc! > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Cort Buffington > H: +1-785-838-3034 > M: +1-785-865-7206 >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: NHRC-Squelch Board
Thanks for the info guys. In reply to Eric's post, this Mitrek is part of a voted receive repeater system. I don't think an audio delay board would work with a voted system. The main receiver is a Micor and obviously I want the Mitrek to sound as close to the Micor as possible. My plan is to keep the remote Carrier squelch and and decode the user's PL at the Voter deck as explained in one of Kevin's (I think it's Kevin's) writeups. Although, I started thinking about how those squelch boards interface and now I am wondering if I can still pass the user's PL thru the Mitrek while using the squelch board. Anyone know the answer to that? Thanks, Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer wrote: > > Jordan, et al, > > The RLC-MOT circuit uses the famous Motorola MICOR squelch chip, so it > works identically to what is found in the MICOR. Motorola decided some > time ago to end the production of the chip, and I suspect the recent > jump in cost is a result of this. As Scott has mentioned, I did a test > of some of the commercially available add-on squelch boards that were > advertised about two years ago. This included the NHRC-Squelch, the CAT > SQ-1000, and the Link-Comm RLC-MOT. > > The following is a personal opinion - no more, no less. The best one I > found is the RLC-MOT, but then again, I find no fault with the action of > the MICOR squelch. In my opinion, there is no better. The other two > work fairly well, and I don't remember if one was any better than the > other. The biggest fault I found with the latter two units is (in my > opinion) they don't have enough sections of high-pass filtering, and low > frequency noise is considered in the evaluation. This tends to make the > user set the squelch tighter than he/she should have to - - to keep the > unit from falsing. This may not be a big deal for some, but I like to > have a squelch I can set on the hairy edge without falsing, like the > MICOR squelch. Both the NHRC and the CAT have near instant turn off > when the carrier is near full quieting and then removed. They both have > 'variable' hysteresis - as the signal is reduced, they produce a longer > noise burst after removal of the carrier. In the NHRC, there are four > progressive steps with differing time - depending on how it's > configured. The manual for the CAT unit doesn't offer how the time > delay is handled. They both use a processor to evaluate the noise and > set the amount of hysteresis. The MICOR has only two different > hysteresis levels. > > As the availability of the MICOR squelch gets increasing higher in cost, > or becomes no longer available, these other units may be the only choice > for those who want to replace the carrier squelch circuitry. That being > said, Scott and I have done a great deal of research and believe we can > reproduce the action of the MICOR squelch with circuitry that doesn't > include a micro-processor. > > Kevin Custer > > > > Jordan, > > > > The RLC-MOT works very well since it is an exact copy of the squelch circuit > > found in the Micor. The only problem is it is now VERY expensive. > > > > Kevin had done some extensive testing on the dual squelch modues some time > > ago. Maybe he can chime in here... Kev?? > > > > > > > >> Anybody have any NHRC-squelch boards in service? I am looking at > >> getting either one of those or a RLC-MOT board from link > >> Communications. Is one better then the other? Do they do the same > >> thing? Anybody try to clone an NHRC board? (they look easy) I am > >> wanting to install something on a Mitrek for that nice Micor type > >> squelch. Actually, I just want to get rid of that Chkccc! >
[Repeater-Builder] NHRC-Squelch Board
Anybody have any NHRC-squelch boards in service? I am looking at getting either one of those or a RLC-MOT board from link Communications. Is one better then the other? Do they do the same thing? Anybody try to clone an NHRC board? (they look easy) I am wanting to install something on a Mitrek for that nice Micor type squelch. Actually, I just want to get rid of that Chkccc! Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: SAV-15 full data sheet
Mel, I am working on a 200 conversion project and I am having troubles finding the silver-mica caps that i need to complete the conversion. Do you have any ideas or hints on sources for these components? Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor to 222 MHz PA Conversion
Joe, Are you in the process of building or do you already have a Micor on 220? I am starting on a 220 conversion project with a high band mobile and am running into problems finding some of the silver-mica caps to use in the conversion. Any idea on sources? Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] GE MASTR II cards and modules
I have a bunch of GE Mastr II boards and modules. Repeater control, 10V cards, and more. Some of them are standard cards and some are for the Marc stuff. I don't really know much about this stuff, but Let me know if you are looking for something and I can look for it. Otherwise this stuff is getting scrapped out. Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Looking to 100 Hz Motorola Tone Reeds
Hello, Does anybody have any 100 Hz tone reeds for micor repeater station? I need encode and decode. I need at least one set, but may be interest in a few extras if the price is right. Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor oscillator mod question
Sorry for the confusion... Maybe I wasn't very clear on my post. First
of all, my Micor is a repeater station, unified chassis.
I performed this mod:
For the Transmit Exciter, you have a choice:
1.) To enable the exciter all the time, connect pin 19 to pin 20 on
the top row of 30 {transmitter} interconnect board pins that come
through the backplane. These are the 3 sets of 10 pins sticking
through the backplane board on the top. Pin 19 is F1 channel element
select and pin 20 is ground.
2.) For those who don't care to have the transmitter oscillator
running all the time, you can use the (switched ground) logic provided
by the Station Control Card that was originally intended to drive the
antenna change-over relay to key the exciter channel element during
PTT. The Station Control Module Modification explains how to do this.
Ensure that you place the transmit and receive channel elements into
their respective F1 positions.
SO NO, the exciter itself is not on until the repeater is keyed up..
I have a bird & dummy load on the exciter (no PA) and I have about 2.5
Watts out when the repeater is keyed up. BUT with the mod in place, I
have no power out to the bird, but do have a signal (which I'm calling
the oscillator). Is this mod just for the base station and not the
repeater station? I don't see any performance difference with the mod
in or out. (other than the signal floating around :) )
Thanks everyone,
Jordan
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Milt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The exciter should NEVER be run full time.
>
> A Micor exciter will develop 400 milliwatts, that's 0.4 watts and
that much
> loose RF running around loose in the station is asking for trouble.
>
> Running the channel element full time is often done, but not a good
idea,
> it's much better to switch the channel element on as needed. The
use of the
> antenna switch transistor on the station control module as shown on
repeater
> builder is an excellant idea.
>
> Milt
> N3LTQ
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:41 AM
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Micor oscillator mod question
>
>
> > No one has answered his original question, that is:
> >
> > What benefit does he get by wiring the exciter to be
> > ON all the time?
> >
> > I think he's discovered one of the non-benefits and is
> > trying to figure out if the leakage he's experiencing
> > is worth the effort. Even a well-shielded and filtered
> > repeater station will leak something.
> >
> > Personally, I think I'd only keep just the oscillator
> > running all the time, not the entire exciter. The only
> > reason I can think of doing this is if the oscillator
> > is slow to come up to frequency when the station is
> > keyed. I would expect it to take only milliseconds for
> > stability to occur, so there really shouldn't be any
> > noticeable benefit. The exciter is putting out a whole
> > lot more RF power than the oscillator. Perhaps this is
> > really what he's done, or should do.
> >
> > Bob M.
> > ==
> > --- Eric Lemmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Jordan,
> >>
> >> Assuming your Micor station has a unified chassis,
> >> was it always a repeater,
> >> or was it converted to repeater use from a base
> >> station? Repeater stations
> >> have a great deal of extra filtering in the
> >> interconnect boards that connect
> >> the RX and TX shelves to the backplane. The
> >> repeater chassis also is
> >> equipped with extra shield plates that cover the RX
> >> and TX shelves, which
> >> plates should be secured with all screws in place.
> >> The purpose of the extra
> >> filtering and shielding is to prevent (or greatly
> >> attenuate) any direct
> >> radiation from the exciter oscillator or the RX
> >> injection oscillator.
> >>
> >> 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> >> Of twoway_tech
> >> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 9:15 PM
> >> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> >> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Micor oscillator mod
> >> question
> >>
> >> I just modified my micor UHF for the exciter to be
> >> on all of the time.
> >> I am not for sure that I really like this mod. The
> >> oscillator signal
> >> seems to carry pretty far. Can someone tell me
> >> exactly what is gained
> >> by wiring the exciter to be on all of the time. Is
> >> it just for faster
> >> transmit response time?
> >> Thanks & I'm sure there will be more questions to
> >> come!
> >>
> >> Jordan, K9NZF
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking for earth-friendly autos?
> > Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
> > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor oscillator mod question
So,is there any point to leaving the oscillator on all the time? jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Custer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > twoway_tech wrote: > > I just modified my micor UHF for the exciter to be on all of the time. > > I am not for sure that I really like this mod. The oscillator signal > > seems to carry pretty far. Can someone tell me exactly what is gained > > by wiring the exciter to be on all of the time. Is it just for faster > > transmit response time? > > Thanks & I'm sure there will be more questions to come! > > Station? We use the (unused) antenna switch logic (on the SCM) to > control the channel element ground. > Works great, less filling... > > Kevin >
[Repeater-Builder] Micor oscillator mod question
I just modified my micor UHF for the exciter to be on all of the time. I am not for sure that I really like this mod. The oscillator signal seems to carry pretty far. Can someone tell me exactly what is gained by wiring the exciter to be on all of the time. Is it just for faster transmit response time? Thanks & I'm sure there will be more questions to come! Jordan, K9NZF
[Repeater-Builder] WTB: VHF Micor Mobile Manual
Anyone have an extra manual laying around for VHF mobile micors. Doing a 220 conversion and need a service manual. If so, email me with a price. thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Repeater builder booth at hamvention?
Is there going to be a repeater builder booth at dayton this year? Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] GE mastr II repeater UHF
I will probably get in trouble for this. If anyone is in need of a mastr II UHF repeater, I have two to get rid of. Contact me off list. Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Micor RX frequency ranges?
Thanks for the info guys, Yeah, the receivers that I have are actually stamped with TLE8032B. This is stamped near where the channel element plug into the board. On the other side of the board,(the side visible when the board is mounted in the chassis) the number TE1203BA is stamped. According to the manual, TLE8032B is the 450-470 band. (the receivers are on 453.XXX) Mainly what I was wondering was if the 450-470 receivers would tune down to 420 or 433 without much time and money involved. (I wasn't holding my breath) :)by-the-way,. the main receiver will be on 448.325. I ASSUME that won't be too much of a problem. -Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Mike Morris WA6ILQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 11:14 AM 04/23/07, you wrote: > >I have some spectra-TAC micor receivers, they are the 403-512 bandsplit. > > > >Has anyone put them on 420 or 433 with much problem? Are they REALLY > >403-512? :) > > > >Thanks, > > > >Jordan > > Micor receiver boards came in 406-420 MHz, 450-470 MHz, 470-494 MHz > and 494-512 MHz. > > What's the number that's rubber stamped in black ink on the actual > receiver board? > It will be a TRE number, perhaps with some letters and numbers > after the 4 digits. > > Mike WA6ILQ >
[Repeater-Builder] Micor RX frequency ranges?
I have some spectra-TAC micor receivers, they are the 403-512 bandsplit. Has anyone put them on 420 or 433 with much problem? Are they REALLY 403-512? :) Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Johnson PPL 6060 manual needed
Well, keep me posted on your findings with these things... I have a few laying around that I already have Xtals for and want to get going. I'll let you know if I find anything new. -Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "ka3hsw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "twoway_tech" > wrote: > > > > Well, Speaking of EFJ PPLs, has anyone accually performed the repeater > > mods that are descibed on the repeater builder page? I have done one > > radio, but I am getting RF into the receiver. Jim Sharp (the author) > > mentions putting a shield around Q1, but the transistors are not > > labeled that way. I don't really see any EASY way to install any > > shield that would do much good due to the trace layout on the board. > > [snip] > > Haven't done one yet, but have been studying the docs and, according to > the block diagram and schematic, the first RF amp is actually Q201. > There is a picture of where to solder the shield in the "updated-ppl- > board.doc" file, linked from the conversion page. It goes on the foil > side of the board, almost dead-center side-to-side, about 1/4 of the > way forward from the rear edge. > > George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413 >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Johnson PPL 6060 manual needed
Well, Speaking of EFJ PPLs, has anyone accually performed the repeater mods that are descibed on the repeater builder page? I have done one radio, but I am getting RF into the receiver. Jim Sharp (the author) mentions putting a shield around Q1, but the transistors are not labeled that way. I don't really see any EASY way to install any shield that would do much good due to the trace layout on the board. By-the-way, I tried to contact Jim Sharp and had no luck. Anyway, I am trying to use one of these radios for a remote receiver on 448.325RX and 433.050TX (radio tuned up fine). When the radio keys up, I get a squealing noise. Even when there is just squelch noise and no RX signal. It sounds like RF to me. If anyone has hints of ideas, let me know. Also I want to thanks Eric for the manual posting! -Jordan --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > George, > > The PPL series radios are very good as well as being easy to work on. You > can almost trace the signal path without a schematic even without > experience, I do but I worked on them when they first came out in the late > 70's early 80's. You can do a lot with these little radios. > > Paul > > > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Lemmon > Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 5:10 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Johnson PPL 6060 manual needed > > George, > > By an amazing coincidence, I am just now scanning a Johnson PPL-6060 Service > Manual into PDF for posting on the RBTIP. I can send you the same file this > evening. Some PPL-6060 info is already available here: > > > > 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Henry > Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 2:08 PM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Johnson PPL 6060 manual needed > > Just picked up a bunch of these on eBay, 2 of which supposedly need > repair Anybody got a manual I can copy & return, or buy outright? > > George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413 > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/690 - Release Date: 2/16/2007 > 2:25 PM > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/690 - Release Date: 2/16/2007 > 2:25 PM > > > > > Visit http://www.ourphonelist.com";>OurPhonelist.comIt's free and you'll never lose track of a phone number again! >
[Repeater-Builder] MICOR BASE OR REPEATER ON BATTERIES?
Does anybody have any info on how to get a Micor bas or repeater to run on batteries12V)? The only micor we ever tried to run on 12V wouldn't even turn on. I seem to recall that the power supply output was 15V. Anyone ever come accrossed this? Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Micor base/repeater on battey backup?
I seem to recall the micor base and repeaters have a wierd power supply voltage (around 15VDC). Has anyone had any luck running them off of 12VDC battery backup? My boss has a Micor repeater and we never could get it to work with batterys becuse of the power supply voltage it was looking for. Any Ideas? Thanks, Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Super Sataionmaster Disassembly
Steve, You have to take a torch and heat up/desolder the top copper tip then you can pull the antenna out of the fiberglass from the bottom. I took an old piece of cable with an N connector(or whatever connector is on the antenna) and used it to help mepull the antenna out. Also, those antennas don't need those ground raials. We have used them on some and not on others and it doesn't really seem to make any difference. So I personally wouldn't worry about them. Hope that helps, Jordan -- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone have info on the proper way to disassemble a VHF Super Stationmaster > antenna (PD220?) This one has 3 flat-head allen screws in the aluminum base > section about an inch from where it meets the fiberglass as well as two bolts > in a ring accessible from the bottom where the connector is. I've removed all > of them but wasn't able to get anything to budge. It could be that it just > needed a bit more persuasion but I thought I'd ask before I break anything. > > Also are the 3 radials around the base standard on all models? I'm missing them > but figure I could easily fabricate something if they're needed. I think I > read somewhere they were not necessarily a ground plane" but a decoupling > device. Anyone have dimensions/construction info for it? > > Thanks, > > Steve >
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Spectra TAC question
Thanks Kevin and mark for your help so far. I have ALOT of research to do and ALOT more questions to ask before I decide exactly what I am going to do for a voter system. I appreciate your time and support. -Jordan
[Repeater-Builder] Spectra TAC question
Has anyone had much luck with a specra tac voter? I found one at a good price, but I was wanting to know if it would be worth messing with for my amateur repeater. I was told that they require a 100% transmit on the links, but someone else also told me that they could be used normally as well. (when a remote receives a signal, the link keys up) Any info at all would be appreciated. Thanks, Jordan
