Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Chris, What is the closest you've operated your R/C to your repeater if your R/C is on 6M, and how close in frequency? Joe M. Chris Curtis wrote: It's hard sometimes to work out differences between hams when neither ham is fully versed in the other's chosen activity. My first exposure to real RC was my brother back in the 70s. he had an FCC license just for RC. He saved up to be able to carry rocks in his pocket. Any time he went to a gathering of other RC guys, they would have to coordinate their colors. The little colored streamers hanging off their transmitters to let each other know what frequency they were on. So having multiple tx frequency crystals was and is common. Also, a LOT of rx units in the RC craft are synthesized and broad as a barn door. Only the TX is fairly tight and stable. This causes the interference problem but keeps the cost of swapping out frequencies down. So the cost of changing the operational freq is minimal. The RC guy could call up bomar and get 4 new frequencies for his TX for about the minimum order requirement. Only 1 at a time is needed of course but would give some latitude. Now, as for changing bands altogether. I certainly don't discredit the benefits of moving to a newer technology. However, I can see the RC guy give you a funny look and say: how about YOU move up above 2gHz and see how you like it! 6m RC is the coolest and can certainly play well in the shadow of a 6m repeater. 53.45/51.75 is my machine. Good luck on elmering each other, could be a fun learning experience. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of m...@nb.net Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzb GsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaH BmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
It's not my r/c. ;) But 50.8~50.9 has been run within 6 miles of my 6m repeater site. Now most of the time at about 9 miles at the fairgrounds on the other side of the city limits. Also, my repeater output is 53.45 and 50 watts erp. so that's about the size of it. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of MCH Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 4:43 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Chris, What is the closest you've operated your R/C to your repeater if your R/C is on 6M, and how close in frequency? Joe M. Chris Curtis wrote: It's hard sometimes to work out differences between hams when neither ham is fully versed in the other's chosen activity. My first exposure to real RC was my brother back in the 70s. he had an FCC license just for RC. He saved up to be able to carry rocks in his pocket. Any time he went to a gathering of other RC guys, they would have to coordinate their colors. The little colored streamers hanging off their transmitters to let each other know what frequency they were on. So having multiple tx frequency crystals was and is common. Also, a LOT of rx units in the RC craft are synthesized and broad as a barn door. Only the TX is fairly tight and stable. This causes the interference problem but keeps the cost of swapping out frequencies down. So the cost of changing the operational freq is minimal. The RC guy could call up bomar and get 4 new frequencies for his TX for about the minimum order requirement. Only 1 at a time is needed of course but would give some latitude. Now, as for changing bands altogether. I certainly don't discredit the benefits of moving to a newer technology. However, I can see the RC guy give you a funny look and say: how about YOU move up above 2gHz and see how you like it! 6m RC is the coolest and can certainly play well in the shadow of a 6m repeater. 53.45/51.75 is my machine. Good luck on elmering each other, could be a fun learning experience. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of m...@nb.net Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzb GsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaH BmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.18/2437 - Release Date: 10/16/09 18:39:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Well, when *I* was referring to channels, I was talking about the fact that he mentioned 4 different 6M frequencies he was using. There were only 4 frequencies - not 5 as I said before. (my mistake) Joe M. George Henry wrote: No, the number of channels in an RC system refers to controlled functions of the aircraft, not RF channels. For example, a plane with rudder, elevator, ailerons, throttle, and retractable landing gear would need 5 channels. The system still only occupies ONE RF channel. George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413 - Original Message - From: m...@nb.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. Yahoo! Groups Links Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Jeff DePolo wrote: CB is substantially wider :-) My point exactly. ;-) Assuming a 100W transmitter, 1dB of cable losses and 5.16dBi (3dB) of antenna gain, at 20 miles there is -32.442dB of path loss. Methinks there's some disinformation there, better check your path-loss math. I think the calculator was in meters instead of miles: 20 miles at 50MHz is 96.58 db of loss, for a recieved signal strength of -53dBm, or ~452 uV. Which probably isn't strong enough to amount to any interference, so matter how wide the reciever is. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Seems rather insane to feel the need to operate an RC Airplane at frequencies that are known for ducting/skipping and actually being somewhat functional in NLOS conditions - it screams I want to be interfered with!. 2390-2400 MHz seems about the right place to run an RC airplane thats not actually a drone - and the spectrum is practically worthless for anything else except linking LOS repeaters and data work and even then its fairly rare. JS Chris Curtis wrote: It's hard sometimes to work out differences between hams when neither ham is fully versed in the other's chosen activity. My first exposure to real RC was my brother back in the 70s. he had an FCC license just for RC. He saved up to be able to carry rocks in his pocket. Any time he went to a gathering of other RC guys, they would have to coordinate their colors. The little colored streamers hanging off their transmitters to let each other know what frequency they were on. So having multiple tx frequency crystals was and is common. Also, a LOT of rx units in the RC craft are synthesized and broad as a barn door. Only the TX is fairly tight and stable. This causes the interference problem but keeps the cost of swapping out frequencies down. So the cost of changing the operational freq is minimal. The RC guy could call up bomar and get 4 new frequencies for his TX for about the minimum order requirement. Only 1 at a time is needed of course but would give some latitude. Now, as for changing bands altogether. I certainly don't discredit the benefits of moving to a newer technology. However, I can see the RC guy give you a funny look and say: how about YOU move up above 2gHz and see how you like it! 6m RC is the coolest and can certainly play well in the shadow of a 6m repeater. 53.45/51.75 is my machine. Good luck on elmering each other, could be a fun learning experience. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com mailto:Builder%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of m...@nb.net mailto:mch%40nb.net Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com mailto:k7pfj%40skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzb GsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaH BmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Don't forget the FCC rules...in this case, I am only to assume (knowing MCH's identity) that this is taking place in Western Pennsylvania. That being said, my question is, if the repeater is coordinated by a governing body (WPRC) why would he/she complain about RC operations? The FCC rules, as far as I see them and have read, grant governing authority to the regional coordinating body to authorize said band plans per region. The operator of the RC equipment needs to yield way to the authorizing entity. Logical thinking, regardless of rules, would dictate that amateurs be good stewards of the frequencies they occupy and utilize appropriate 'channels' that do not interfere with other equipment. I would concur with 'DCFluX' in terms of getting crystals reground for a mere $50 (let's say) versus a repeater operator re-pairing, recalibrating, and retuning the entire repeater station. All the best, John, NF3Q MCH wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Keep in mind that he believes repeater operation in 52-54 MHz will cause him interference. I already suggested the 50.800-51.000 MHz RC band. I have also mentioned that repeaters have been operating on the 52-54 MHz band for decades, coexisting with RC operations. I suggested that he has likely coped with signals on 53.490 and 53.510 MHz many times - only 10 kHz away. So, I asked him for any evidence that repeaters within 30 kHz cannot coexist with RC operations. Joe M. John D. Lewis, NF3Q wrote: Don't forget the FCC rules...in this case, I am only to assume (knowing MCH's identity) that this is taking place in Western Pennsylvania. That being said, my question is, if the repeater is coordinated by a governing body (WPRC) why would he/she complain about RC operations? The FCC rules, as far as I see them and have read, grant governing authority to the regional coordinating body to authorize said band plans per region. The operator of the RC equipment needs to yield way to the authorizing entity. Logical thinking, regardless of rules, would dictate that amateurs be good stewards of the frequencies they occupy and utilize appropriate 'channels' that do not interfere with other equipment. I would concur with 'DCFluX' in terms of getting crystals reground for a mere $50 (let's say) versus a repeater operator re-pairing, recalibrating, and retuning the entire repeater station. All the best, John, NF3Q MCH wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. Yahoo! Groups Links Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
I didn't want to play the coordinated vs uncoordinated card with him at this time, but that would dictate that he is primarily responsible for resolving any interference problems - including frequency selection on his part. There is no way there could be any interference to the coordinated operation (the repeater), and I believe interference to the uncoordinated operation (his RC receiver) would not exist, either. Keep in mind that RC operations can exist anywhere, so if you 'prohibit' operation even within 30 kHz of the RC channels, you are eliminating approximately 80% of the repeater channels as candidates for repeater operation. RC cannot be granted exclusive use of most of the 53-54 MHz band - especially after decades of use of the band by established repeaters. Joe M. DCFluX wrote: Tell him to buy another set of crystals for his remote. They are changeable for reasons like this. On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 9:58 PM, MCH m...@nb.net wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, MCH wrote: BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? Call a radio shop and get a quote for what it will cost to change the frequency of the repeater and realign the duplexers. If you're in an area where coordination entities charge, mention the charge, and note the amount of time that it would take to be cleared for another channel. Bonus if you can get the coordinator to tell you now what the next available channel is and it's proximity to his frequency of interest. I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). Beg, borrow, or steal a service monitor and find out. I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Standard broadcast AM is 10KHz, and is wider than most other forms of AM (except CB, where they will do anything they want with the signal). Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Calculate the pathloss from the repeater to the flying site. Assuming a 100W transmitter, 1dB of cable losses and 5.16dBi (3dB) of antenna gain, at 20 miles there is -32.442dB of path loss. 100W = +50dBm, so there is an apparent signal of +17.558 dBm at the flying site. This corresponds to 56.99mW, or .05699W. You could probably push this number even lower by calculating the mW per centimeter. Even with a relatively non-selective front end, his radio should be able to be free of front-end overload from your repeater. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR Disinformation Analyst
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
I operated an RC Aircraft on 53.5 for quite a few years, and the receiver in the model was wide open. The transmitter used on/off keyed pulses, with the carrier on the air most of the time and short interruptions (200 milliseconds) of the carrier being the control method. A reverse pulse position modulation scheme. I can tell you that operating the model within 50 miles of a channel 2 TV station would paralyze the receiver in the model as soon as it was airborne above a few hundred feet. I usually had time to recover the control when the model descended under the big signal from the TV transmitter, but it was a real pain to try to use it that way. The receiver IF was at 455 kHz and was only 5 kHz or so wide, but the transmitter used no bandwidth reduction and was probably at least 100 kHz wide. The low power and ground level antenna of the transmitter probably prevented interfering with other operations on six meters, but the potential was there. If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT --- On Sat, 10/10/09, MCH m...@nb.net wrote: From: MCH m...@nb.net Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC To: Repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 11:58 PM Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
The Academy of Model Aeronautics went through a standards change a while ago. AM radios are no longer certified for exactly this reason. If he's using radios that don't meet modern performance standards he is invalidating both the airfield and his insurance. I'd like to know how he determined it is the repeater causing the interference under the conditions you describe. I'd also suggest he reread the regs on model control in the ham band. Oz MCH wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Good info. BTW, the repeater isn't even on the air yet. Joe M. Oz-in-DFW wrote: The Academy of Model Aeronautics went through a standards change a while ago. AM radios are no longer certified for exactly this reason. If he's using radios that don't meet modern performance standards he is invalidating both the airfield and his insurance. I'd like to know how he determined it is the repeater causing the interference under the conditions you describe. I'd also suggest he reread the regs on model control in the ham band. Oz MCH wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.387 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Can you give me a lead as to what I'm looking for? Joe M. Oz-in-DFW wrote: I'd also suggest he reread the regs on model control in the ham band. Oz
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs. RC
Hardly anybody used 50 MHz ham in RC anymore since 2.4 GHz digital came about. Tell him to look at a new system. The cost of changing your system to another channel would exceed the cost of a new RC transmitter by three fold. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of MCH Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:58 PM To: Repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of MCH Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Tell him Tower Hobbies has the best deals on the web. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of MCH Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaHBmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
It's hard sometimes to work out differences between hams when neither ham is fully versed in the other's chosen activity. My first exposure to real RC was my brother back in the 70s. he had an FCC license just for RC. He saved up to be able to carry rocks in his pocket. Any time he went to a gathering of other RC guys, they would have to coordinate their colors. The little colored streamers hanging off their transmitters to let each other know what frequency they were on. So having multiple tx frequency crystals was and is common. Also, a LOT of rx units in the RC craft are synthesized and broad as a barn door. Only the TX is fairly tight and stable. This causes the interference problem but keeps the cost of swapping out frequencies down. So the cost of changing the operational freq is minimal. The RC guy could call up bomar and get 4 new frequencies for his TX for about the minimum order requirement. Only 1 at a time is needed of course but would give some latitude. Now, as for changing bands altogether. I certainly don't discredit the benefits of moving to a newer technology. However, I can see the RC guy give you a funny look and say: how about YOU move up above 2gHz and see how you like it! 6m RC is the coolest and can certainly play well in the shadow of a 6m repeater. 53.45/51.75 is my machine. Good luck on elmering each other, could be a fun learning experience. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of m...@nb.net Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzb GsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaH BmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
No, that price is for a complete replacement - TX, RX and servos. Unless his system uses mechanical reeds and germanium transistors all he will need is an RX per plane (~$65) and a new TX, so buy a $200 Kit and four RX's $500 tomorrow, $350 if you shop. m...@nb.net wrote: So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com mailto:k7pfj%40skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - F -- mailto:o...@ozindfw.net Oz POB 93167 Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport)
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Have you ever seen 53.400 or 53.500 MHz used? Also keep in mind that changing the frequency is not an option for him, as: 1. He is using 5 of the 9 6M RC frequencies available on 6M. 2. He believes that any repeater within 100 kHz is in his passband. 3. He doesn't want a repeater anywhere in the 52-54 MHz repeater segment due to interference concerns. He is basically laying claim to HALF of the 6M band. The 50.800 - 51.000 MHz segment was already suggested as an option. Joe M. Chris Curtis wrote: It's hard sometimes to work out differences between hams when neither ham is fully versed in the other's chosen activity. My first exposure to real RC was my brother back in the 70s. he had an FCC license just for RC. He saved up to be able to carry rocks in his pocket. Any time he went to a gathering of other RC guys, they would have to coordinate their colors. The little colored streamers hanging off their transmitters to let each other know what frequency they were on. So having multiple tx frequency crystals was and is common. Also, a LOT of rx units in the RC craft are synthesized and broad as a barn door. Only the TX is fairly tight and stable. This causes the interference problem but keeps the cost of swapping out frequencies down. So the cost of changing the operational freq is minimal. The RC guy could call up bomar and get 4 new frequencies for his TX for about the minimum order requirement. Only 1 at a time is needed of course but would give some latitude. Now, as for changing bands altogether. I certainly don't discredit the benefits of moving to a newer technology. However, I can see the RC guy give you a funny look and say: how about YOU move up above 2gHz and see how you like it! 6m RC is the coolest and can certainly play well in the shadow of a 6m repeater. 53.45/51.75 is my machine. Good luck on elmering each other, could be a fun learning experience. Chris Kb0wlf -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater- buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of m...@nb.net Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M. On Sun 11/10/09 8:04 AM , k7...@skybeam.com sent: A nice system you can pick up for under $300 and even under $200 if you want basic. Mike Mullarkey K7PFJ 6886 Sage Ave Firestone, Co 80504 303-954-9695 Home 303-954-9693 Home Office Fax 303-718-8052 Cellular - FROM: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] ON BEHALF OF MCH SENT: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:55 AM TO: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com SUBJECT: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC Can you define very cheap? Joe M. Jim Brown wrote: If the complainant is trying to control a model, there are lots of options now that do not include a six meter frequency, with the new 2.5 gig systems very cheap. No more frequency interference between models, since they can all operate at the same time with the spread spectrum control system. 73 - Jim W5ZIT No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Links: -- [1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMWZubnZ1BF 9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzb GsDc 3RuZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTI1NTI2MjY0Ng--[3] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater- Builder;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYWlrdWpwBF9TAzk 3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwNDE2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjMxMDgEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDaH BmBH N0aW1lAzEyNTUyNjI2NDY-[4] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
At 04:54 PM 10/11/2009, you wrote: Have you ever seen 53.400 or 53.500 MHz used? Not part of the usual coordinated frequency set Also keep in mind that changing the frequency is not an option for him, as: More accurately, it not what he *WANTS* to do. His options, however, may vary. 2. He believes that any repeater within 100 kHz is in his passband. He is flat wrong. PERIOD. Not subject to discussion. 3. He doesn't want a repeater anywhere in the 52-54 MHz repeater segment due to interference concerns. He is basically laying claim to HALF of the 6M band. This PARTICULARLY is where he is - to use the old expression - SH*T out of luck. He cannot lay claim to the frequencies - because as we all know - no one owns frequencies within the amateur spectrum. He is being high-handed and hasn't legal leg to stand on. Larry Wagoner - N5WLW VP - PRCARC PIC - MS SECT ARRL
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Standard broadcast AM is 10KHz, and is wider than most other forms of AM (except CB, where they will do anything they want with the signal). Standard AM *audio*, in the US, is low-pass filtered at about 10 kHz, so the RF bandwidth is about 20 kHz (double sideband). CB is substantially wider :-) Assuming a 100W transmitter, 1dB of cable losses and 5.16dBi (3dB) of antenna gain, at 20 miles there is -32.442dB of path loss. Methinks there's some disinformation there, better check your path-loss math. --- Jeff WN3A
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
So an AM signal (20 kHz) should only be slightly wider than a NBFM signal (16 kHz), and the receiver, properly designed, should work fine with an FM signal 30 kHz away that is 20 miles distant? (even line-of-sight?) Joe M. Jeff DePolo wrote: Standard broadcast AM is 10KHz, and is wider than most other forms of AM (except CB, where they will do anything they want with the signal). Standard AM *audio*, in the US, is low-pass filtered at about 10 kHz, so the RF bandwidth is about 20 kHz (double sideband).
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
It might be worth while to build a couple pole L/C band pass filter for the 6m model band. Still About the only reasons I can see for using 6m: 1W transmitter power could be useful for drones and aircraft with 440 ATV back haul. Gain somewhat more protection from 72 MHz operators. see again the use of multiple crystal pairs. Last time I bought these for a VEX remote I got 4 pairs for $16 Same radio useful for ground and air models. People scratch their head trying to figure out what the color code flags mean when they cant see the channel plackard.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
No, the number of channels in an RC system refers to controlled functions of the aircraft, not RF channels. For example, a plane with rudder, elevator, ailerons, throttle, and retractable landing gear would need 5 channels. The system still only occupies ONE RF channel. George, KA3HSW / WQGJ413 - Original Message - From: m...@nb.net To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:09 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC So he is looking at $1000, as he has 5 channels/aircraft. Does that include the TX and RX units? Joe M.
[Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Repeaters vs RC
Tell him to buy another set of crystals for his remote. They are changeable for reasons like this. On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 9:58 PM, MCH m...@nb.net wrote: Does anyone have any experience with repeater operation vs RC operation (Remote Control)? I have an RC operator who is 'raising a stink' about a repeater that is 30 kHz away from one of his RC channels. BTW, he also wants to 'compromise' by offering to relocate the repeater off the 52-54 MHz segment so they will not impact his RC operations. Some compromise, huh? I think he has the impression that RC channels are 100 kHz wide (they are standard AM) because the 6M RC channels are spaced at 100 kHz (53.100, 53.200, 53.3500, 53.400, Etc). I've told him they cannot be more than 10 kHz wide, if that, and that the FC repeater would be only 16 kHz wide, and at 30 kHz away the two can coexist without interference. Oh, the repeater in question is at least 20 miles away from his flying site. Any input out there? Exactly how wide is his AM signal? Thanks, Joe M. Yahoo! Groups Links
