Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Ahh...but it is. If you transmit a command to a control receiver, you are technically in auxiliary operation. Convoluted, I know, but it goes all the way back to the old block diagram days at the candy company. ;^) 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 1:04 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Don't confuse auxiliary operaton with a Remotely controlled station. The latter was quite legal in 2M even before the rules change. Joe M. Nate Duehr wrote: Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal...
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Ug. forgot about the Echolink guys! As for Control Receivers, I think I agree with Paul's post on that. True, they don't transmit, but they are part of a closed system. I've gotta keep Part 97 in front of me for this discussion! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:04 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
The rules did state what frequencies could be used for control. It was the same as AUXILARY frequencies. Recent changes did add 2 meters and included 145.5-145.8, out of the repeater band. Some started putting D* repeater in this segment thinking they could also use for repeaters. Remote bases were legal, but still required a 222 and above or the other 2 types of control. Now can use 2 m. Anyone can remotely control a ham station including a HF rig. Kenwood got into problems for they wanted to use their 2m/440 dual bander. Made it much simpler, but not legal until recently. See what money will get with the FCC, hi. I did like the change. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ug… forgot about the Echolink guys! As for Control Receivers, I think I agree with Paul’s post on that. True, they don’t transmit, but they are part of a closed system. I’ve gotta keep Part 97 in front of me for this discussion! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:04 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Ron, Have you seen any sort of bandplan for auxiliary operation on 2 meters besides what’s in Part 97? I’m in conversation with SERA now, but haven’t received an answer on that question yet. Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Wright Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 10:17 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link The rules did state what frequencies could be used for control. It was the same as AUXILARY frequencies. Recent changes did add 2 meters and included 145.5-145.8, out of the repeater band. Some started putting D* repeater in this segment thinking they could also use for repeaters. Remote bases were legal, but still required a 222 and above or the other 2 types of control. Now can use 2 m. Anyone can remotely control a ham station including a HF rig. Kenwood got into problems for they wanted to use their 2m/440 dual bander. Made it much simpler, but not legal until recently. See what money will get with the FCC, hi. I did like the change. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ug… forgot about the Echolink guys! As for Control Receivers, I think I agree with Paul’s post on that. True, they don’t transmit, but they are part of a closed system. I’ve gotta keep Part 97 in front of me for this discussion! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:04 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Mike, Yes 2 meters can be used for aux stations. Normally the repeater freq, but also 145.5-145.8. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Besemer (WM4B) Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:14 PM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link It certainly makes sense. With all the randomness in the universe, I guarantee that two of us in the same town would probably pick the same control frequency and tone! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Ray Brown Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:46 PM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link - Original Message - From: Howard Klino SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Missouri Repeater Council is thatway, too. Ray KBØSTN
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Mike, Our Florida council recommends in their band plan for AUX stations the simplex segments including like 430 and 445-447. I don't think they do any coordination for anything other than repeaters. They just try to give recommendations since in law I don't think their coordination would mean anything, but just be some sort of keeping Hams seperated. Our council is not up to date in that they have nothing for 2 m AUX. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ron, Have you seen any sort of bandplan for auxiliary operation on 2 meters besides what’s in Part 97? I’m in conversation with SERA now, but haven’t received an answer on that question yet. Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Ron Wright Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 10:17 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link The rules did state what frequencies could be used for control. It was the same as AUXILARY frequencies. Recent changes did add 2 meters and included 145.5-145.8, out of the repeater band. Some started putting D* repeater in this segment thinking they could also use for repeaters. Remote bases were legal, but still required a 222 and above or the other 2 types of control. Now can use 2 m. Anyone can remotely control a ham station including a HF rig. Kenwood got into problems for they wanted to use their 2m/440 dual bander. Made it much simpler, but not legal until recently. See what money will get with the FCC, hi. I did like the change. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ug… forgot about the Echolink guys! As for Control Receivers, I think I agree with Paul’s post on that. True, they don’t transmit, but they are part of a closed system. I’ve gotta keep Part 97 in front of me for this discussion! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:04 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
There is no specifics for AUX in the WPA bandplan (on purpose). People using SkyCommand and the like are encouraged to use the 145.510 - 145.670 MHz segment on a SNP basis. Joe M. Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ron, Have you seen any sort of bandplan for auxiliary operation on 2 meters besides what’s in Part 97? I’m in conversation with SERA now, but haven’t received an answer on that question yet. Mike WM4B *From:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Ron Wright *Sent:* Saturday, May 17, 2008 10:17 AM *To:* Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link The rules did state what frequencies could be used for control. It was the same as AUXILARY frequencies. Recent changes did add 2 meters and included 145.5-145.8, out of the repeater band. Some started putting D* repeater in this segment thinking they could also use for repeaters. Remote bases were legal, but still required a 222 and above or the other 2 types of control. Now can use 2 m. Anyone can remotely control a ham station including a HF rig. Kenwood got into problems for they wanted to use their 2m/440 dual bander. Made it much simpler, but not legal until recently. See what money will get with the FCC, hi. I did like the change. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Ug… forgot about the Echolink guys! As for Control Receivers, I think I agree with Paul’s post on that. True, they don’t transmit, but they are part of a closed system. I’ve gotta keep Part 97 in front of me for this discussion! Mike WM4B *From: *Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Repeater- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] *On Behalf Of *Nate Duehr *Sent: *Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:04 AM *To: *Repeater-Builder@ yahoogroups. com *Subject: *Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link Mike Besemer (WM4B) wrote: Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? A couple of hundred EchoLink and IRLP simplex node owners, even prior to the law change? Or anyone who was in-band linking VHF repeaters? FM 2m remote bases? All of those were doing it before it was legal... :-) or is that :-( ??? What do you mean, Anybody dared try it yet? What are you specifically thinking about when you see the words, Auxiliary Station? It's not really related to control receivers, since they don't transmit. Nate WY0X No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1433 - Release Date: 5/14/2008 4:44 PM
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Howard K2IMO
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Many repeater coordinators want to know control freqs so they can advise if maybe a repeater input/output they want to protect. This way someone not so familiar with the band plans does not put something on that will lead to problems for both another repeater or to ones self. Also the coordinator can keep up iwith where control is and away from other services. 73, ron, n9ee/r Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome. On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Howard Klino wrote: SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Howard K2IMO
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
- Original Message - From: Howard Klino SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Missouri Repeater Council is thatway, too. Ray KBØSTN
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
It certainly makes sense. With all the randomness in the universe, I guarantee that two of us in the same town would probably pick the same control frequency and tone! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Brown Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:46 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link - Original Message - From: Howard Klino SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Missouri Repeater Council is thatway, too. Ray KBØSTN image001.jpgimage002.jpg
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link
Speaking of which, if I read it correctly, 2-meters is now available for auxiliary stations. Anybody dared try it yet? Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Besemer (WM4B) Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:14 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link It certainly makes sense. With all the randomness in the universe, I guarantee that two of us in the same town would probably pick the same control frequency and tone! Mike WM4B From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Brown Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:46 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Control Link - Original Message - From: Howard Klino SERA does require that you co-ordinate your control frequency. It will be an unpublished frequency. Also suggest that you use a sub tone. They will probably request that anyway. Missouri Repeater Council is thatway, too. Ray KBØSTN image001.jpgimage002.jpg
