RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
-Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wd8chl Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 4:41 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non- quality John Transue wrote: Well, I wanted to use GM300s until I found out that I can't afford the software and cable to program these radios. Now it looks like I will have to settle for new ham gear. With the Motorola radios, I'd have to take the radios to a shop and pay $45 per radio every time I wanted to change something, even the squelch setting. I can't afford that. 73 de John AF4PD What do you want this repeater to do? Ham, right? 2M or UHF? High profile, low profile, quiet site, noisy site (RF-wise), easy access, hard access (snowed in half the year, etc)? Low/Solar power? A Micor or MastrII station is FAR cheaper than a pair of GM300's plus s/w or paying to get it programmed, etc. And it'll outperform them hands-down! If you put more than $200-300 or so into something like a Micor/MastrII/MSR2000 or even an MSF-5000, somethings not right. 2M though can be more if you have to have a duplexer. UHF duplexers on the other hand are cheap. For a first repeater, made-for-ham is NOT the way to go either. Jim WD8CHL Jim, My only point was that the software is expensive enough to make the use of good cheap old commercial radios (made by Motorola) far more expensive than I had imagined. But to get to your questions, what I am planning and costing is a remote receiver (VHF) with a UHF link back to the base VHF repeater. The space we have under negotiation is in a high rise building. Getting to the equipment will involve keeping on the good side of the building engineer and not making a nuisance of myself. The base repeater is used for ham nets and general chit chat, but it is available (and is used) in emergencies and public service events. Currently I favor using ICOM ICF121S and ICF221S radios. John T. AF4PD
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
AJ wrote: I concur - I would *love* to see a write up with photos (preferrably with arrows and captions pointing out actual issues rather than playing Where's Waldo?) up on the RB site. Half the battle is encouraging folks to do it right the first time - the easier we, as a community, make it for new and soon-to-be Repeater Builders to mimick the proper, correct and respectable way to build, upgrade, repair or maintain their own repeaters, the sooner we'll be able to put these sort of installs behind us and in to the history books as where we've been, where we are now where we're going to be in the future. 73, AJ, K6LOR Course there's also all the new 'Wi-Fi' junk going in all over...
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Nate Duehr wrote: We could discuss how utterly useless ham radio is these days, or my favorite point recently that anyone with a satellite dish, ability to aim it, and an IP-based service, can do more communications good in a disaster area with that IP, an Asterisk box, and some cordless phones to hand to the real emergency services folks... Until the sat fills up and is overloaded-which usually only takes a dozen or so calls, if that. I never bashed ALL hams. I bashed hams who install CRAP repeaters made out of RG-58 jumpers, smashed hardline, on frequencies not authorized by the head site manager, with cheap ham-grade antennas at 120', a mobile duplexer, an open cabinet, no grounding other than a polyphaser, and a power supply that looks like it came out of someone's junk box to run their Heathkit. Please - get a grip on reality. That type of installation makes us ALL look bad, and you know it. And if you're touchy about it because you personally have such an installation, get it down off the commercial site and put it in your backyard where it won't be a mess for others to deal with. Agreed-I know of one multiple tower owner who won't allow ham repeaters on his towers-at least not the transmit side-for just that reason. Oh, he is a ham himself. But there is also even more just-as-crappy commercial installs too-especially RG-58 jumpers on repeaters...and lack of grounds...
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Nate Duehr wrote: (Raise your hands if you've put personal money into a club radio system to make it better... and never gotten reimbursed! I bet more than 1/2 the room's hands go up on this one!!!) How about putting money into a project for a club repeater (including buying crystals), installing it, and then after it's running, being told to 'take it out we don't want to use that, we want something anyone can work on', which turns out to be some made-for-ham junk? Jim WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Nate Duehr wrote: snip good stuff I've SEEN this work in person... the right people tell the right people that the ham standing there with the test gear knows what he's doing, and the gear goes in the back of the truck and off they go. It's rare, but in the REALLY big events... any qualified help you can get, is utilized if you know they'll do it right. Nate WY0X -- Well said, Nate. Jim
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Yep. Get that GE junk out of here. A few guys around here have been through that one :-( Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - How about putting money into a project for a club repeater (including buying crystals), installing it, and then after it's running, being told to 'take it out we don't want to use that, we want something anyone can work on', which turns out to be some made-for-ham junk? Jim WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
I've seen two cases in which club boards, over the advice of the tech people, insisted on ordering new ham-grade repeaters so they'd be covered by a manufacturers warranty. Apparently, the directors didn't consider how ticked-off the users would be when the new repeater had to be out of service for 3 or 4 weeks to be fixed. Old Moto or GE stuff is both better quality and way cheaper than new ham-grade stuff, meaning you can keep a stack of spares around. Buying an expensive, poorly-shielded box of low-quality surface-mount chips so anybody can work on it is actually pretty funny. Obviously they've never worked on older commercial stuff, which usually has manuals so detailed any chimpanzee with patience could get it fixed. 73, Paul, AE4KR - Original Message - From: Chuck Kelsey To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality Yep. Get that GE junk out of here. A few guys around here have been through that one :-( Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - How about putting money into a project for a club repeater (including buying crystals), installing it, and then after it's running, being told to 'take it out we don't want to use that, we want something anyone can work on', which turns out to be some made-for-ham junk? Jim WD8CHL
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
If you ever install anything that looks this HamSexy at a commercial radio site, and don't keep the kiddie-show to your back-yard repeater, I'm personally coming to your house to kick your ass. Sorry to burst the bubble. Really sorry. Just because someone wears a MOTOROLA shirt doesn't mean a thing, nor should it. Get a grip here fellas. WE ALL know that. There are plenty of MONKEYS walkin' around thinking their ..don't stink because they are in the 'business'. And those of you who are HONEST know this. That does not excuse poor practices, unadvised practices, and out and out stupidity, whether by a 'HAM' or a 'PRO'. But there are plenty of amateur repeaters out there that are well engineered and perform as such. Having access to a FREE rack that has a picture of 'Barney' or another favorite 'kiddie-show' character shows a person, a builder, or group, may be frugal or just lucky..that's it. These racks are usually located in a dark, scary room where someone thought better of those in their building and did NOT install a toilet. So who cares what the RACK looks like? I dare you to tell me what is inside that rack may be any more inferior to what is in your designer cabinet. How would you know anyway? Site 'owners' or 'moderators' or whatever you want to call them have the right to question what shares space in their house and may want to look inside at the engineering..fine. But to simply assume based on aesthetics that one is 'cleaner' than another is preposterous. Here in Florida no one that I know is allowed to use 'amateur grade' ( for the lack of a better term ) antennas on a roof top due to nature of our annual tropical storm season. You don't see many Ringos here reported flying around in a hurricane. -Mike From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of wd8chl Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 11:52 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality Nate Duehr wrote: We could discuss how utterly useless ham radio is these days, or my favorite point recently that anyone with a satellite dish, ability to aim it, and an IP-based service, can do more communications good in a disaster area with that IP, an Asterisk box, and some cordless phones to hand to the real emergency services folks... Until the sat fills up and is overloaded-which usually only takes a dozen or so calls, if that. I never bashed ALL hams. I bashed hams who install CRAP repeaters made out of RG-58 jumpers, smashed hardline, on frequencies not authorized by the head site manager, with cheap ham-grade antennas at 120', a mobile duplexer, an open cabinet, no grounding other than a polyphaser, and a power supply that looks like it came out of someone's junk box to run their Heathkit. Please - get a grip on reality. That type of installation makes us ALL look bad, and you know it. And if you're touchy about it because you personally have such an installation, get it down off the commercial site and put it in your backyard where it won't be a mess for others to deal with. Agreed-I know of one multiple tower owner who won't allow ham repeaters on his towers-at least not the transmit side-for just that reason. Oh, he is a ham himself. But there is also even more just-as-crappy commercial installs too-especially RG-58 jumpers on repeaters...and lack of grounds... __ NOD32 4051 (20090504) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On Thu, 7 May 2009, wd8chl wrote: How about putting money into a project for a club repeater (including buying crystals), installing it, and then after it's running, being told to 'take it out we don't want to use that, we want something anyone can work on', which turns out to be some made-for-ham junk? That's the exact reason why I went with a Mastr II repeater instead of a hacked-together pair of GE Rangrs. While the Rangrs get the job done, trying to explain the whats and whys of what's actually happening in the machine is difficult. The time-out-timer is in the radio's software; the COS line is the Audio PA Enable line inverted, which is activated by the reciever's microprocessor (which itself does the PL detection). There's a basic level of competency required in building something to last ten or twenty years -- an assumption that the heirs will be able to work on the machine and that it will be possible to find someone who knows how. OTOH, far more customization has been done to GE Mastr IIs, where a radio shop would take the basic radio and then customize it in a non-standard way. We're into the appliance-operator era; hams who know how to solder are getting fewer and farther between. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Well, I wanted to use GM300s until I found out that I can't afford the software and cable to program these radios. Now it looks like I will have to settle for new ham gear. With the Motorola radios, I'd have to take the radios to a shop and pay $45 per radio every time I wanted to change something, even the squelch setting. I can't afford that. 73 de John AF4PD -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Plack Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 1:03 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality I've seen two cases in which club boards, over the advice of the tech people, insisted on ordering new ham-grade repeaters so they'd be covered by a manufacturers warranty. Apparently, the directors didn't consider how ticked-off the users would be when the new repeater had to be out of service for 3 or 4 weeks to be fixed. Old Moto or GE stuff is both better quality and way cheaper than new ham-grade stuff, meaning you can keep a stack of spares around. Buying an expensive, poorly-shielded box of low-quality surface-mount chips so anybody can work on it is actually pretty funny. Obviously they've never worked on older commercial stuff, which usually has manuals so detailed any chimpanzee with patience could get it fixed. 73, Paul, AE4KR
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On May 7, 2009, at 11:02 AM, Paul Plack wrote: Buying an expensive, poorly-shielded box of low-quality surface- mount chips so anybody can work on it is actually pretty funny. Obviously they've never worked on older commercial stuff, which usually has manuals so detailed any chimpanzee with patience could get it fixed. Hey! I resemble that remark! -- Nate Duehr, WY0X n...@natetech.com (A chimpanzee with patience and a pile of LBI's my mentors made me read. LOL!)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
John Transue wrote: Well, I wanted to use GM300s until I found out that I can't afford the software and cable to program these radios. Now it looks like I will have to settle for new ham gear. With the Motorola radios, I'd have to take the radios to a shop and pay $45 per radio every time I wanted to change something, even the squelch setting. I can't afford that. 73 de John AF4PD What do you want this repeater to do? Ham, right? 2M or UHF? High profile, low profile, quiet site, noisy site (RF-wise), easy access, hard access (snowed in half the year, etc)? Low/Solar power? A Micor or MastrII station is FAR cheaper than a pair of GM300's plus s/w or paying to get it programmed, etc. And it'll outperform them hands-down! If you put more than $200-300 or so into something like a Micor/MastrII/MSR2000 or even an MSF-5000, somethings not right. 2M though can be more if you have to have a duplexer. UHF duplexers on the other hand are cheap. For a first repeater, made-for-ham is NOT the way to go either. Jim WD8CHL
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason or another. The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be installed. You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and the culprit may lie there. Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is uncalled for! Have a great day! Louis Upton - K1STX
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Ryan, It is not always just a privilege for an Amateur Radio Repeater to be on a tower. In many instances, the Amateur Radio operator and/or club pay just as much as whatever commercial outfits are on that tower. In other instance, the Amateur Radio repeater and/or club takes care of the maintenance and upkeep on said tower and other structures. Maybe not the case in your small part of the world, but in others. Cheers! Louis Upton - K1STX --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ryan n3...@... wrote: Totally agree with Nate, Hams can talk great distances using the least expensive means. and have seen my fair share of ham and commercial installsm usally revolves making the sale at any cost. this is the 2-way radio industry everyone is cutting everyones prices. Personally hams should be the best clients insted of shotty installs and listen to the hams bad mouth the tower owners or tower mangers. Hams need to remember its a privlage not a right to be at a tower site and take all steps to be with in compliance with mechanical and electrical codes. Yes owning a repeater is not cheap but the upfront expences pay off down the road. Ryan n3ssl
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
And... I should have read the rest of the thread before replying! Dang Digest Mode! Apologies to all! Louis - K1STX --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Louis k1...@... wrote: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason or another. The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be installed. You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and the culprit may lie there. Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is uncalled for! Have a great day! Louis Upton - K1STX
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: k1...@yahoo.com Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 12:32:57 + Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! possibly not , if it is then it will be moderated I guess Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason or another. relevance ? The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be installed. what ever it is the facts remain legality and commonsense prevail ? You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and the culprit may lie there. Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is uncalled for! the target is legality as I read it not the hams specifically Have a great day! ditto Louis Upton - K1STX _ Looking to change your car this year? Find car news, reviews and more http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801459%2Fpi%5F1004813%2Fai%5F859641_t=762955845_r=tig_OCT07_m=EXT
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Having been involved with many repeater installs, it's very simple. You either do it the right way or not at all. It's so important to use propper filtering, and make sure your repeater meets code. I've heard hams whine and complain so many times, and i tell them all the same thing, do what they ask you to do. One particular area that hams will often cut corners with are antennas. I've had so many people ask me, can we use a cushcraft or ringo on a commercial tower, and the anser is no, as it should be. That stuff is junk, and not suitable for repeater operations. I've always been one of those people, even if it takes me 3 or 4 months longer than planned, build the repeater so i don't have to go back to the sight for several years, a lot less headaches. Sincerest Regards, Jed _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Louis Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:36 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality Ryan, It is not always just a privilege for an Amateur Radio Repeater to be on a tower. In many instances, the Amateur Radio operator and/or club pay just as much as whatever commercial outfits are on that tower. In other instance, the Amateur Radio repeater and/or club takes care of the maintenance and upkeep on said tower and other structures. Maybe not the case in your small part of the world, but in others. Cheers! Louis Upton - K1STX --- In Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com, Ryan n3...@... wrote: Totally agree with Nate, Hams can talk great distances using the least expensive means. and have seen my fair share of ham and commercial installsm usally revolves making the sale at any cost. this is the 2-way radio industry everyone is cutting everyones prices. Personally hams should be the best clients insted of shotty installs and listen to the hams bad mouth the tower owners or tower mangers. Hams need to remember its a privlage not a right to be at a tower site and take all steps to be with in compliance with mechanical and electrical codes. Yes owning a repeater is not cheap but the upfront expences pay off down the road. Ryan n3ssl
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis k1...@yahoo.com said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason or another. Yeah yeah, whatever. I'm a ham, which you'd know if you had been paying attention for the last oh what... seven or eight years I've actively posted here on RB. Are you new here? We could discuss how utterly useless ham radio is these days, or my favorite point recently that anyone with a satellite dish, ability to aim it, and an IP-based service, can do more communications good in a disaster area with that IP, an Asterisk box, and some cordless phones to hand to the real emergency services folks... instead of sitting around playing with FM 2-way... but I won't go there here on RB, since the point here *is* building repeaters. But you hand any emergency services guy a working phone and a working laptop with medium-speed Internet service and dial-tone, and you've made their day... they don't want to pass traffic on our systems, they want to make a phone call or send an e-mail. The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be installed. You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and the culprit may lie there. Already done. And the tower was COMPLETELY CLEAN -- it's a new tower, specifically set aside for hams (a VERY nice gesture by the commercial operators of the site), an old Motorola tower and fiberglass building -- just for us. The standards were agreed to over a YEAR ago, and I walk in on Saturday to do a clean install, and find the new tenant has already broken every site rule at the site. Not to mention that we THINK the repeater also went from 220MHz to 440MHz with NO contact to the main site guy, and now he'll be within a MHz of my link frequencies I've been using there for over a decade. We are all pretty rightly PO'ed about it, okay? If you don't have the whole story, trying to make me feel better about the mess, isn't going to help. I'm sorry I posted, but I know there's a LOT of potential new repeater owner/operators that hang around here, and I want to make it VERY clear that when one ham does things like this on a site, they ruin things for ALL hams on the site. Frankly, too many new repeater owner/operators think this is about slapping junk like this on the air, and that'll be the next great repeater in the area. It just doesn't work that way, and that was my only real purpose for the rant. Perhaps your life is only to serve as a warning to others, as the jokingly sarcastic Demotivator poster showing a sinking vessel, states. Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is uncalled for! I never bashed ALL hams. I bashed hams who install CRAP repeaters made out of RG-58 jumpers, smashed hardline, on frequencies not authorized by the head site manager, with cheap ham-grade antennas at 120', a mobile duplexer, an open cabinet, no grounding other than a polyphaser, and a power supply that looks like it came out of someone's junk box to run their Heathkit. Please - get a grip on reality. That type of installation makes us ALL look bad, and you know it. And if you're touchy about it because you personally have such an installation, get it down off the commercial site and put it in your backyard where it won't be a mess for others to deal with. Have a great day! Already having it! You too. :-) Nate WY0X -- Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Nate - May I suggest that you do a write-up with photos that could be posted on the RB site? Maybe the right way and the wrong way would be helpful for guys making installs. And explain why it's done this way, not that way. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis k1...@yahoo.com said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. SNIP
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
I concur - I would *love* to see a write up with photos (preferrably with arrows and captions pointing out actual issues rather than playing Where's Waldo?) up on the RB site. Half the battle is encouraging folks to do it right the first time - the easier we, as a community, make it for new and soon-to-be Repeater Builders to mimick the proper, correct and respectable way to build, upgrade, repair or maintain their own repeaters, the sooner we'll be able to put these sort of installs behind us and in to the history books as where we've been, where we are now where we're going to be in the future. 73, AJ, K6LOR On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com wrote: Nate - May I suggest that you do a write-up with photos that could be posted on the RB site? Maybe the right way and the wrong way would be helpful for guys making installs. And explain why it's done this way, not that way. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com nate%40natetech.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis k1...@yahoo.comk1stx%40yahoo.com said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. SNIP
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Well the real question is when is the Federal Government going to wake up and get rid of the no longer need advanced CB radio people! When they removed the tech from Ham radio it died. And what a gold mine they are sitting on (frequencies) the government just did it to the tv stations why are the CB people why are they so special! A good example last evening we lost power not a person on the local repeater to render assistance. Cell and land line phones also went down for a short time I think the cell site lost power also. A logger got a three-phase line. Nate Duehr wrote: On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis k1...@yahoo.com mailto:k1stx%40yahoo.com said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. Let's hope you never need the services of a Amateur Radio Operator during a disaster, when the so-called Professional Installs have failed for one reason or another. Yeah yeah, whatever. I'm a ham, which you'd know if you had been paying attention for the last oh what... seven or eight years I've actively posted here on RB. Are you new here? We could discuss how utterly useless ham radio is these days, or my favorite point recently that anyone with a satellite dish, ability to aim it, and an IP-based service, can do more communications good in a disaster area with that IP, an Asterisk box, and some cordless phones to hand to the real emergency services folks... instead of sitting around playing with FM 2-way... but I won't go there here on RB, since the point here *is* building repeaters. But you hand any emergency services guy a working phone and a working laptop with medium-speed Internet service and dial-tone, and you've made their day... they don't want to pass traffic on our systems, they want to make a phone call or send an e-mail. The next step would be, to consult the tower owner and found out what criteria he/she/they required when allowing the Amateur repeater be installed. You may find, that the hardline that was run up the middle of the tower, was already there, and unused, and the tower owner said, sure, you can use it. Some tower owners require a professional bonded tower climber to do the work, and the culprit may lie there. Already done. And the tower was COMPLETELY CLEAN -- it's a new tower, specifically set aside for hams (a VERY nice gesture by the commercial operators of the site), an old Motorola tower and fiberglass building -- just for us. The standards were agreed to over a YEAR ago, and I walk in on Saturday to do a clean install, and find the new tenant has already broken every site rule at the site. Not to mention that we THINK the repeater also went from 220MHz to 440MHz with NO contact to the main site guy, and now he'll be within a MHz of my link frequencies I've been using there for over a decade. We are all pretty rightly PO'ed about it, okay? If you don't have the whole story, trying to make me feel better about the mess, isn't going to help. I'm sorry I posted, but I know there's a LOT of potential new repeater owner/operators that hang around here, and I want to make it VERY clear that when one ham does things like this on a site, they ruin things for ALL hams on the site. Frankly, too many new repeater owner/operators think this is about slapping junk like this on the air, and that'll be the next great repeater in the area. It just doesn't work that way, and that was my only real purpose for the rant. Perhaps your life is only to serve as a warning to others, as the jokingly sarcastic Demotivator poster showing a sinking vessel, states. Bashing all Hams because of something that you feel is inadequate really is uncalled for! I never bashed ALL hams. I bashed hams who install CRAP repeaters made out of RG-58 jumpers, smashed hardline, on frequencies not authorized by the head site manager, with cheap ham-grade antennas at 120', a mobile duplexer, an open cabinet, no grounding other than a polyphaser, and a power supply that looks like it came out of someone's junk box to run their Heathkit. Please - get a grip on reality. That type of installation makes us ALL look bad, and you know it. And if you're touchy about it because you personally have such an installation, get it down off the commercial site and put it in your backyard where it won't be a mess for others to deal with. Have a great day! Already having it! You too. :-) Nate WY0X -- Nate Duehr
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On Tue, 5 May 2009, Daniel L. Fargo wrote: Well the real question is when is the Federal Government going to wake up and get rid of the no longer need advanced CB radio people! When they removed the tech from Ham radio it died. And what a gold mine they are sitting on (frequencies) the government just did it to the tv stations why are the CB people why are they so special! Right about the point where FEMA makes a grab for the amateur spectrum, since ARES/RACES has already demonstrated the effectiveness of the spectrum and provided all the EMAs with radios. After all, in a state of emergency, who needs a ham to use a radio? -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On Tue, 5 May 2009 16:48:13 -0400, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com said: Nate - May I suggest that you do a write-up with photos that could be posted on the RB site? Maybe the right way and the wrong way would be helpful for guys making installs. And explain why it's done this way, not that way. Chuck WB2EDV Much of it is there, but maybe not in one document... but it's a great idea, Chuck. I think I'll add it to the ever-lengthening to-do list. Probably will have to be a winter project though -- site work, some other personal hobbies, and a yard that really needs to just be scraped off and the landscaping re-done, plus two presentations at the upcoming ARRL Regional Convention on D-STAR... realistically probably blows my entire summer at this point in time. (My wife was booking family visits out into the end of July already today in our shared calendar... ugghh!) One of my elmers has a story where he got permission to have repeaters on a VERY nice site in NY a decade ago. A local Federal agency came up to inspect the site once, and the big-wig started talking about how the Amateurs and others on the site needed to make their installations look as good as THIS one, as he pointed to a cabinet full of MASTR II's installed 100% to factory specifications, down to the lock washers and grounding kits in the LBI diagrams. One of his underlings had to interrupt him and quietly tell him that WAS the ham repeater, and this other rack over here sir, is OUR repeater... the big-wig immediately declared the Federal installation as not up to par, and the site owner smiled and nodded at the ham who'd installed the gear. In other words, he told me... Try to make your installation look better than everyone else's. You do it right, and EVERYONE else on the site looks bad for NOT doing it right, and you get to STAY when the axe falls. I'm definitely NOT saying all of my installations are up to perfect standards ... but let me add the word: YET. We're always working on making them look and operate better. If the Amateur that installed the junker has the same attitude, and is willing to work hard on it -- there were at least three people on the site who were already saying things like, Man, we need to find him some 7/8ths hardline! and other such comments. Hams are a community and we're not trying to see him tossed, but it's GOT to be a little better than RG-58 jumpers to the mobile duplexer... for most of us to want to get involved, because we've all also been in situations where you offer to HELP someone get the right things and get their system right, and they immediately think you're DOING it for them... it can't work that way. (Raise your hands if you've put personal money into a club radio system to make it better... and never gotten reimbursed! I bet more than 1/2 the room's hands go up on this one!!!) Good repeaters are an investment that last a long time, and don't need tons of maintenance. That guy's stuff next to my cabinet could interfere with us, mix and make it so that we're interfering with others, etc... and generally cause me to have to make multiple 100 mile trips to this site to figure it out. That gets painful after a while. When everything's CLEAN at a site, and these things happen -- you know the other participants are willing to take the time to go fix whatever it is. When there's a junk-box on the site, you sit there with your test gear trying to prove/disprove that they're the culprit. It just wastes an enormous amount of time. I love the idea of some photos and a documentation series on well-installed repeaters. Maybe we could make it into a grading system and discuss the pros/cons of some of the different techniques? Anyone willing to step into the breach and share your photos first? I'd be willing to do so, if I had any decent photos of the last three years of re-work on our sites... I'll try to get some and share this summer. But maybe someone already has some photos they'd share and a good attitude that they won't get personally offended at constructive criticism? Nate WY0X -- Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
I agree. There's a nice article on r-b about what you should think about and do when building a repeater. That's great if you already have an inkling about what to do. But people don't always have the same vision after reading something, so pictures definitely are worth thousands of words. There's plenty of stuff on the web telling and showing people the right way. A little bit of here's what NOT to do would be a welcome addition. It may embarrass a few people enough so they clean up their act a bit too. If we can't put a what not to do article up on r-b, it can always find a welcome home in the Humor section. Bob M. == --- On Tue, 5/5/09, Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com wrote: From: Chuck Kelsey wb2...@roadrunner.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 4:48 PM Nate - May I suggest that you do a write-up with photos that could be posted on the RB site? Maybe the right way and the wrong way would be helpful for guys making installs. And explain why it's done this way, not that way. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis k1...@yahoo.com said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. SNIP
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
On Tue, 05 May 2009 17:01:43 -0400, Daniel L. Fargo dfargo5...@yahoo.com said: Well the real question is when is the Federal Government going to wake up and get rid of the no longer need advanced CB radio people! When they removed the tech from Ham radio it died. And what a gold mine they are sitting on (frequencies) the government just did it to the tv stations why are the CB people why are they so special! A good example last evening we lost power not a person on the local repeater to render assistance. Cell and land line phones also went down for a short time I think the cell site lost power also. A logger got a three-phase line. I don't think we want to go that far on this list. We're all here to build Amateur repeaters, and we'll cross any bridge washouts (loss of spectrum) when we come to them. There ARE good Amateurs out there with well-run emergency training and systems. They shouldn't be lumped in with the others. And the FCC and others realize that there's no way to do quality control on volunteer efforts that's 100% effective. I don't think it's wise to state that we're useless yet, but we COULD learn to show up with tools like IP connectivity and networking experts, along with our 2-way FM systems, and be a hell of a lot more useful to the public safety folks. All it takes is a little forethought -- How can we best serve, and does it ALWAYS need to be on Amateur equipment? How many times have you seen Public Safety folks need QUALIFIED help to put up a temporary repeater. Folks on THIS list CERTAINLY can assist with something like that... if they know you locally and trust you. (This leads back to the quality of installations on our fixed repeaters... if the local PS guy has SEEN that work, and knows you do it right... and has MET you... he'll happily hand you the $15K portable repeater box and antennas, and ask you to drive it up the hill so he can work to get the HT's programmed. We're a pool of TECHNICIANS, not just operators of our own systems... ya know? You show up with proper test gear, and tell the guy I have a port on a combiner on X hill and you need that coverage really badly right now... let's tune up your portable repeater, and I'll head up there in my Jeep and have it working by nightfall... that's the type of skill they're BEGGING for out of us. I've SEEN this work in person... the right people tell the right people that the ham standing there with the test gear knows what he's doing, and the gear goes in the back of the truck and off they go. It's rare, but in the REALLY big events... any qualified help you can get, is utilized if you know they'll do it right. Nate WY0X -- Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
+1 excellent idea To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: wb2...@roadrunner.com Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 16:48:13 -0400 Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality Nate - May I suggest that you do a write-up with photos that could be posted on the RB site? Maybe the right way and the wrong way would be helpful for guys making installs. And explain why it's done this way, not that way. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr To: Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality On Tue, 05 May 2009 12:32:57 -, Louis said: Interesting, this looks like one of those Hams/bash-hams discussions that is not suppose to take place on this forum! Sometimes you just have to rant when you see something this bad. I didn't name names, and I didn't attack any individual. Yes, I will agree their are those that cause havoc with a tower site owner, or other lessors, but the number is minor compared to those Amateur Radio installs that are done properly and well maintained. I hope so. From the proud papa photos around the Internet, I'd say it's closer to 50/50, but luckily that ratio gets better at commercial sites, where my club's gear often lives. _ Want to stay on top of your life online? Find out how with Windows Live! http://windowslive.ninemsn.com.au/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr n...@... wrote: The above CRAP jobs are often why hams aren't welcome at commercial sites. I hate it when hams do this. Had to vent. There were some newbies along on the trip, and I think they got the point when I stated, If you ever install anything that looks this HamSexy at a commercial radio site, and don't keep the kiddie-show to your back-yard repeater, I'm personally coming to your house to kick your ass. Nate, I have an amateur VHF P25 machine at a public safety site. I have to agree that you need to look the part if you want to retain access to the prime real estate. My entire rack is built to R56, right down to using a 15 ton hydraulic Burndy crimper for the battery and ground lugs. Here's another example: There is a Motorola Nucleus paging transmitter on 152.0075 MHz co-resident with my VHF machine. We took the time to obtain permission install a set of cavities and a Snclair circulator panel on the Nucleus. To make up for the loss from the panel and cavities, The 1/2 hardline feedline was replaced with 7/8 at my expense. Result: no pager interference, and the Nucleus is now clean and happy. End result, Site staff is happy - so happy when I asked if I could install a DSL line, I was given access to the internet, with a static IP on a T3 pipe. Martin
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
The funny/sad thing is I've seen professional installs that are on the same par as that also. It's hard to believe people get away charging for these type installs and stay in business. In fact I was at one of my work sites today installing a PDR3500 as a temporary repeater and saw a similar setup by a commercial company that I know sells time on their community UHF repeater. GE mobile as a receiver, Motorola radius as a transmitter hooked to a Selectone community tone panel with RG58 strung across the room to the multicoupler/combiner. What sad is my backyard repeater is setup much better than that and pry works much better too. Glenayre pager transmitter and Motorola Spectra-Tac receiver with a Link Comm Club Deluexe controller hooked to my Kenwood TS-2000. Hardline on everything but the HF off the Kenwood. What even sorrier is when people (hams at one of my work sites) spend thousands of dollars on a complete D-Star system and computer with internet line to the site and run RG-8 and Ham sticks on the tower for their antennas. What a waste, that's the best thing you can do to kill a brand new would have been good system. Least they could have done is buy some good commercial mono band antennas for the repeaters. Would have only cost a couple hundred extra, and the system would have worked ten times better. Oh well can't make everyone understand common sense and logic. T.J. Ham installation quality/non-quality Posted by: Nate Duehr n...@natetech.com wy0x Date: Mon May 4, 2009 11:53 am ((PDT)) Nightmare f-ing Hams! story from this weekend: I went to a site this weekend, and the new Amateur repeater in the new building the hams are moving into had 200' of 1/2 Andrews hardline on it that I don't even know how it was operating... it looked like someone had taken a ballpeen hammer to it at 5' lengths all the way across the ice bridge and up the tower. The hardline run was done INSIDE a tower leg instead of properly up the outside cable tray/unistrut with no hangers, and no grounding kits on the run of 1/2 anywhere. There was a ham grade Comet triplexer bolted to the back of an open rack, with two ports terminated, and one open, and three mobiles and a mobile duplexer for the repeater sitting on a shelf, everything connected with RG-58, plugged into the triplexer so the link radio could be connected to the same feedline/antenna, and then 9913 for the jumper from the diplexer to the polyphaser panel (amazingly, they used a polyphaser!)... then a dual-band ham-grade antenna (also looked like a Comet - we didn't send the tower climbers up there) at the very tippy top of the tower that was already looking like it was loose in the sites regular 50+ MPH winds. The power supply looked like maybe it was a Micor supply, but more likely was homebrew to run someone's gear at home, years ago. The whole repeater cabinet was plugged into the tool power outlet on the wall, and not to the overhead 15A twist locks at the site that are supposed to be equipment power. No grounding cable was attached to the cabinet or to the overhead halo system. Meanwhile the two groups that went up were installing brand new 7/8 hardline and connectors on the new tower, putting that hardline into the cable trays, new polyphasers, RG-400 or better jumpers from the panel to their enclosed cabinets, new Sinclair antennas, grounding kits on all hardline, etc. We also ripped down all the abandoned 7/8 and chunks in the hangars, took all the clipped and abandoned wire ties on the tower and ice bridge off and threw them away, removed extra hangars and stored them in the building, removed three runs of #8 bare copper wire strung down the ice bridge as a ground from the tower to the building, which would just be an intermod/noise-maker, reattached the tower ground the both the ice-bridge and the ground rod temporarily, (were going to do a cadweld, but it was raining and no one had a grinder to clean the surfaces properly), picked up all site trash, etc. There are GOOD ham radio tenants, and bad ones... that's for sure. If it were up to me, I'd have made ONE phone call to this guy saying his repeater was no longer welcome at the site, disconnected it, changed the door code, and set that mobiles in a cabinet hunk of junk out in rain under a tarp for later pickup, along with stripping his virtually destroyed 1/2 hardline and noisemaker antenna from the tower while we had the crew up there. RG-58 for duplexer connections?! WTF??? Politically, I have to be a little careful here... I actually know the ham that put this junk up, and if he reads this, I hope he's not too offended -- but it's a nightmare waiting to happen for the rest of us on the site. It's so far from commercial grade it just shouldn't be up there. A backyard is a nice place for a repeater like that. The above CRAP jobs are often why hams aren't welcome at commercial sites. I
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Ham installation quality/non-quality
Totally agree with Nate, Hams can talk great distances using the least expensive means. and have seen my fair share of ham and commercial installsm usally revolves making the sale at any cost. this is the 2-way radio industry everyone is cutting everyones prices. Personally hams should be the best clients insted of shotty installs and listen to the hams bad mouth the tower owners or tower mangers. Hams need to remember its a privlage not a right to be at a tower site and take all steps to be with in compliance with mechanical and electrical codes. Yes owning a repeater is not cheap but the upfront expences pay off down the road. Ryan n3ssl
