Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Good story !! My 2 meter repeater was co-located with two high-band paging transmitters that were 630 kHz apart. After hearing the occasional burps for years, I added CTCSS and never looked back. It was either ask the paging transmitter people to move (I liked the money) or shut down the repeater. Neither was a good option. 73, Neil - WA6KLA Kevin Berlen wrote: > > On one of the systems that I take care of, we fought interference > from a paging transmitter for about 12 months before making the > choice to go to PL access full time. In our case, the signal was > weak enough that a mobile on the fringe of our coverage area could > cover it, but strong enough to hit the receiver and bring the > repeater up. We tried different receivers, additional cavities, etc. > until the only alternative was to take the system down or go PL. In > some (perhaps most) situations, despite expending a great deal of > time, energy, and expense, the only workable solution to solve an > interference issue is to go to tone access. > > Incidentally,a properly implemented PL tone decoder will detect > subaudible tone before the squelch circuit in your receiver will > unsquelch. This should have the effect of slightly increasing your > talk-in range compared to a non-pl repeater. 73, > > Kevin, K9HX > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
On one of the systems that I take care of, we fought interference from a paging transmitter for about 12 months before making the choice to go to PL access full time. In our case, the signal was weak enough that a mobile on the fringe of our coverage area could cover it, but strong enough to hit the receiver and bring the repeater up. We tried different receivers, additional cavities, etc. until the only alternative was to take the system down or go PL. In some (perhaps most) situations, despite expending a great deal of time, energy, and expense, the only workable solution to solve an interference issue is to go to tone access. Incidentally,a properly implemented PL tone decoder will detect subaudible tone before the squelch circuit in your receiver will unsquelch. This should have the effect of slightly increasing your talk-in range compared to a non-pl repeater. 73, Kevin, K9HX At 08:10 AM 12/3/2004 -0500, you wrote: >I think that CTCSS is used too often on input as a crutch for "solving" >(covering up) interference problems. I'll bet a properly-operating >carrier-squelch repeater will work better than one with a tone, simply >because it is open to interference that must be FIXED, not just covered up >with tone. I learned this the hard way. I have a 6 meter machine at 51.7 >right next to a TV channel 2 and a 70 MHz pager link transmitter, and many >other high-power devices. It was toned input at first, (to shut it up) and >operated very poorly until I spent time and money on filtering and a good >receiver. I am proud to say now that it is open carrier squelch with no >problems. I do have a tone on the output, where the user can implement it >or not for receiving trouble. I do believe that outputs should have tone, >just out of courtesy, for user's sake. > >P.S. Put down your SERA book, you won't find it! :) > >John -KI4AWK > >- Original Message - >From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com>Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 1:15 PM >Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS > >Living 1/2 mile from 'RF hell" on top of Lookout Mtn. requires that a >repeater must have tone before I can listen to the channel without putting >up with constant intermod. We have several untoned repeaters here in the >Denver area that can't understand why someone would want tone on the >output without a toned input even after explanation of the problem. For >this reason, I would like to see a tone required on all repeater outputs >(maybe 100hz) even if the inputs are untoned for those of us with intermod >problems. All 4 of my personal repeaters are toned. > >I've often thought the 100hz tone would be a good idea for use on some >simplex channels were the ex-CBer contingent have taken over. I would >still like to monitor some channels (.52 in this case) if there was some >way to filter out the drivel. > >Just my .08 cents worth (inflation) > >Art - KC7GF >Golden, CO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- >Yahoo! Groups Links >* To visit your group on the web, go to: >* > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ > > >* >* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >* > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >* >* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Or if they would have had tone you could have just dialed up there tone. - Original Message - From: "Q" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 8:28 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS > > Or do like I do,encode 71.9 and decode 141.3 just to confuse the > automatic feature in most riceboxes! Seriously folks,this is the 21st > century! If your radio wont encode AND decode CTCSS,you are behind the > times. It is a necessary evil when the bands get crowded.There are no > available 2 meter pairs within 100 miles of any population center > around the Great Lakes > > Jeff Otterson wrote: > > >Hey! That's pretty funny. > > > >I remember driving to work one day, and hearing a same-channel distant > >repeater after the local repeater dropped, due to a band opening. So I > >turned off my tone encode (so I would not bring up the local machine) and > >had a QSO on a repeater 200 miles away. > > > >If they had tone access, I would not have gotten in at all. > > > >On the other hand, if they had tone access, my QSO through the local > >repeater would not have interfered with their system. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Some of us program in an announcement that comes up once an hour and states the PL, also there is an ID that comes up every so often that my system ENCODES the PL along with that ID (users hear the repeaters, and can catch the PL in their radios with decode). Tell me this . how many hams listen in full CTCSS mode?? I do when on my repeaters, but not when on others usually. James Tony King - W4ZT wrote: At 08:57 PM 12/3/2004, Paul wrote: The only down side that I can see is people that don't have a repeater directory in front of them would not be able to talk on the repeater. A ID with a voice announcement about the CTCSS tone frequency would/and is going to fix that problem on my repeaters. Paul Russ mentioned the same solution earlier. The only down side is that, as you pointed out, folks that don't have a directory in front of them can't key the repeater. If they can't key the repeater, they can't hear the announcement telling them what the CTCSS tone frequency is. That's not meant to be an argument against using tone, just pointing out one of the problems. Two possible solutions are: 1) A common tone defeat code on DTMF which would allow a transient user to at least access the repeater long enough to hear the announcement (there are a couple around here like that, mine being one of them), and 2) Using something like the LITZ code to retrieve the tone information. 73, Tony W4ZT Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
> That's not meant to be an argument against using > tone, just pointing out > one of the problems. Two possible solutions are: 1) > A common tone defeat > code on DTMF which would allow a transient user to > at least access the > repeater long enough to hear the announcement (there > are a couple around > here like that, mine being one of them), and 2) > Using something like the > LITZ code to retrieve the tone information. > I have been usig a DTMF defeat for the subtone for several years. That is also announced of the dtmf code to enter along with the subtone frequency. After the subaudio tone is disabled by the dtmf code if there is no activity on the input frequency for about 30 seconds , the repeater will go from the squelch activation to needing a subaoudio tone. If someone is comming into the area without the subaudio tone programmed in , all he has to do is wait for the repeater to become inactive lone enough to enter a 001 on the dtmf pad. __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
At 08:57 PM 12/3/2004, Paul wrote: > The only down side that >I can see is people that don't have a repeater directory in front of them >would not be able to talk on the repeater. A ID with a voice announcement >about the CTCSS tone frequency would/and is going to fix that problem on my >repeaters. >Paul Russ mentioned the same solution earlier. The only down side is that, as you pointed out, folks that don't have a directory in front of them can't key the repeater. If they can't key the repeater, they can't hear the announcement telling them what the CTCSS tone frequency is. That's not meant to be an argument against using tone, just pointing out one of the problems. Two possible solutions are: 1) A common tone defeat code on DTMF which would allow a transient user to at least access the repeater long enough to hear the announcement (there are a couple around here like that, mine being one of them), and 2) Using something like the LITZ code to retrieve the tone information. 73, Tony W4ZT Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Hello, I guess it's my history from my days in a two way radio shop, I think everything needs CTCSS encode and decode on it unless there is a control operator that has it disabled on a temporary basis. The only down side that I can see is people that don't have a repeater directory in front of them would not be able to talk on the repeater. A ID with a voice announcement about the CTCSS tone frequency would/and is going to fix that problem on my repeaters. My 2 meter and 440 machines do not have a CTCSS disable and both send out CTCSS tone that is muted with COS in the repeater hang time. Paul -Original Message- From: Q [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 7:29 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS Or do like I do,encode 71.9 and decode 141.3 just to confuse the automatic feature in most riceboxes! Seriously folks,this is the 21st century! If your radio wont encode AND decode CTCSS,you are behind the times. It is a necessary evil when the bands get crowded.There are no available 2 meter pairs within 100 miles of any population center around the Great Lakes Jeff Otterson wrote: >Hey! That's pretty funny. > >I remember driving to work one day, and hearing a same-channel distant >repeater after the local repeater dropped, due to a band opening. So I >turned off my tone encode (so I would not bring up the local machine) and >had a QSO on a repeater 200 miles away. > >If they had tone access, I would not have gotten in at all. > >On the other hand, if they had tone access, my QSO through the local >repeater would not have interfered with their system. > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Or do like I do,encode 71.9 and decode 141.3 just to confuse the automatic feature in most riceboxes! Seriously folks,this is the 21st century! If your radio wont encode AND decode CTCSS,you are behind the times. It is a necessary evil when the bands get crowded.There are no available 2 meter pairs within 100 miles of any population center around the Great Lakes Jeff Otterson wrote: >Hey! That's pretty funny. > >I remember driving to work one day, and hearing a same-channel distant >repeater after the local repeater dropped, due to a band opening. So I >turned off my tone encode (so I would not bring up the local machine) and >had a QSO on a repeater 200 miles away. > >If they had tone access, I would not have gotten in at all. > >On the other hand, if they had tone access, my QSO through the local >repeater would not have interfered with their system. > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Hey! That's pretty funny. I remember driving to work one day, and hearing a same-channel distant repeater after the local repeater dropped, due to a band opening. So I turned off my tone encode (so I would not bring up the local machine) and had a QSO on a repeater 200 miles away. If they had tone access, I would not have gotten in at all. On the other hand, if they had tone access, my QSO through the local repeater would not have interfered with their system. ! Jeff (who is in SERA land, is a SERA member, and has tone in and out on all my repeaters...) >Great. Now your repeater becomes our problem during a >band opening. We can't select the repeater that >shares your frequency during the opening. All we get >is hetrodynes. > >Joe > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
> KI4AWK wrote: > I am proud to say now that it is open carrier squelch > with no problems. Great. Now your repeater becomes our problem during a band opening. We can't select the repeater that shares your frequency during the opening. All we get is hetrodynes. Joe Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
KI4AWK wrote: > I think that CTCSS is used too often on input as a crutch for > "solving" (covering up) interference problems. I'll bet a > properly-operating carrier-squelch repeater will work better than one > with a tone, simply because it is open to interference that must be > FIXED, not just covered up with tone. I learned this the hard way. I > have a 6 meter machine at 51.7 right next to a TV channel 2 and a 70 > MHz pager link transmitter, and many other high-power devices. It was > toned input at first, (to shut it up) and operated very poorly until > I spent time and money on filtering and a good receiver. I am proud > to say now that it is open carrier squelch with no problems. I do > have a tone on the output, where the user can implement it or not for > receiving trouble. I do believe that outputs should have tone, just > out of courtesy, for user's sake. > > P.S. Put down your SERA book, you won't find it! :) > > John -KI4AWK The primary interference we're talking about here is on-channel from adjacent areas, not RFI like you're describing. -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
I think that CTCSS is used too often on input as a crutch for "solving" (covering up) interference problems. I'll bet a properly-operating carrier-squelch repeater will work better than one with a tone, simply because it is open to interference that must be FIXED, not just covered up with tone. I learned this the hard way. I have a 6 meter machine at 51.7 right next to a TV channel 2 and a 70 MHz pager link transmitter, and many other high-power devices. It was toned input at first, (to shut it up) and operated very poorly until I spent time and money on filtering and a good receiver. I am proud to say now that it is open carrier squelch with no problems. I do have a tone on the output, where the user can implement it or not for receiving trouble. I do believe that outputs should have tone, just out of courtesy, for user's sake. P.S. Put down your SERA book, you won't find it! :) John -KI4AWK - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 1:15 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS Living 1/2 mile from 'RF hell" on top of Lookout Mtn. requires that a repeater must have tone before I can listen to the channel without putting up with constant intermod. We have several untoned repeaters here in the Denver area that can't understand why someone would want tone on the output without a toned input even after explanation of the problem. For this reason, I would like to see a tone required on all repeater outputs (maybe 100hz) even if the inputs are untoned for those of us with intermod problems. All 4 of my personal repeaters are toned.I've often thought the 100hz tone would be a good idea for use on some simplex channels were the ex-CBer contingent have taken over. I would still like to monitor some channels (.52 in this case) if there was some way to filter out the drivel.Just my .08 cents worth (inflation)Art - KC7GFGolden, CO Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Neil McKie wrote: > > As Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF, pointed out so well a number of years ago: > > 5-2 ... is one half of 10-4 ... ;) > > Neil - WA6KLA mercy sakes... ;cD -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
As Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF, pointed out so well a number of years ago: 5-2 ... is one half of 10-4 ... ;) Neil - WA6KLA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ... snip ... > > I've often thought the 100hz tone would be a good idea for use on > some simplex channels were the ex-CBer contingent have taken over. > I would still like to monitor some channels (.52 in this case) if > there was some way to filter out the drivel. > > Just my .08 cents worth (inflation) > > Art - KC7GF > Golden, CO > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS
Living 1/2 mile from 'RF hell" on top of Lookout Mtn. requires that a repeater must have tone before I can listen to the channel without putting up with constant intermod. We have several untoned repeaters here in the Denver area that can't understand why someone would want tone on the output without a toned input even after explanation of the problem. For this reason, I would like to see a tone required on all repeater outputs (maybe 100hz) even if the inputs are untoned for those of us with intermod problems. All 4 of my personal repeaters are toned. I've often thought the 100hz tone would be a good idea for use on some simplex channels were the ex-CBer contingent have taken over. I would still like to monitor some channels (.52 in this case) if there was some way to filter out the drivel. Just my .08 cents worth (inflation) Art - KC7GF Golden, CO Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
