RE: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Steve Wouldnt it be easy and more effective and cheaper if your: ...hand full of folks just go ahead and use Joes repeater that is already on the air instead of complicating the situation more than it needs to be? Of course this assumes that Joes repeater is open. This brings up another issue in that I believe that closed repeaters should be disallowed where the band is full and there are people who will put up a repeater open to all. Closed repeaters could be allowed on 902 or 1.2G if need be. Refarming ham radio wholesale will be ill advised and I dont think you will see it in our lifetimes.. The users of ham radio are not the US government or public saftey or RCC's with bottomless buckets of money to just go out and replace equipment. We are losing people in the ham radio community not gaining them. Most hams buy a radio and use it for years and dont have to worry about it becoming useless or worthless, nor do they want to have to reinvest in something twice. I would say that the narrow band fm systems we use now work very well and are *much* more spectrally efficient than the wideband stuff that was out there when I became a ham back in the sixties. For those that want to experiment and promote investigation of the new dig modulation such as DStar and P25 that is good and we should encourage this on new spectrum that can be found that is unused, without destroying the existing repeater sub bands. Just my .02 for thought. Glenn N1GBY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 4:10 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic... Illegal is Illegal period. Look at what there is to gain by promoting digital repeater technologies - more spectrum - less interference - better range and better quality communications - no pots to adjust on your repeater - 1s and 0s We have it within reach to re-farm present spectrum for a 2 for 1 or better yield in recovering spectrum by fostering digital technologies, be it P25 or DSTAR, or other means not to market at present. First - voluntary negotiated agreements - ie. Hey Joe, that repeater you have, you know, the one on the North side of town with the bad antenna - our group would like to share the channel and put up a new digital repeater and would like to partner with you - what do you think ? Second - Dear Coordinator - Old Joe has an unused repeater pair on the North side of town. We respectfully request you re-consider coordination because we the undersigned (hand full of folks) have monitored this frequency for the last XX days and find little or no activity - well beyond the alloted 90 days allowed for repair / replacement, and respectfully request Old Joe's coordination be waived to the extent we may construct and operate a digital repeater using part of the spectrum alloted to Joe while at the same time offering to share this spectrum with Joe. (Sharing a frequency is not interference). Third - Dear Coordinator - We have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with Old Joe to share his un-used / underutilized repeater pair, and while we concede the station to be constructed and operational, we also note a lack of activity as documented herein and propose our group would better serve the purpose of amateur radio by being allowed to share this coordination. Maybe the wording is not so great, but the idea is to work within the existing rules to promote more spectrally efficient frequency use to the end that there is more spectrum for everyone. I do not believe DSTAR repeaters to be anything other than repeaters, and unless there is a proper waiver of the FCC rules, should not be placed in any part of the band where repeaters are not permitted. Again, thanks to the volunteer coordinators who do their best to make things fit for the betterment of our hobby and service, Steve NU5D moderator dstar_digital yahoo group.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Good post Steve. -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 3:10 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic... Illegal is Illegal period. Look at what there is to gain by promoting digital repeater technologies - more spectrum - less interference - better range and better quality communications - no pots to adjust on your repeater - 1s and 0s We have it within reach to re-farm present spectrum for a 2 for 1 or better yield in recovering spectrum by fostering digital technologies, be it P25 or DSTAR, or other means not to market at present. First - voluntary negotiated agreements - ie. Hey Joe, that repeater you have, you know, the one on the North side of town with the bad antenna - our group would like to share the channel and put up a new digital repeater and would like to partner with you - what do you think ? Second - Dear Coordinator - Old Joe has an unused repeater pair on the North side of town. We respectfully request you re-consider coordination because we the undersigned (hand full of folks) have monitored this frequency for the last XX days and find little or no activity - well beyond the alloted 90 days allowed for repair / replacement, and respectfully request Old Joe's coordination be waived to the extent we may construct and operate a digital repeater using part of the spectrum alloted to Joe while at the same time offering to share this spectrum with Joe. (Sharing a frequency is not interference). Third - Dear Coordinator - We have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with Old Joe to share his un-used / underutilized repeater pair, and while we concede the station to be constructed and operational, we also note a lack of activity as documented herein and propose our group would better serve the purpose of amateur radio by being allowed to share this coordination. Maybe the wording is not so great, but the idea is to work within the existing rules to promote more spectrally efficient frequency use to the end that there is more spectrum for everyone. I do not believe DSTAR repeaters to be anything other than repeaters, and unless there is a proper waiver of the FCC rules, should not be placed in any part of the band where repeaters are not permitted. Again, thanks to the volunteer coordinators who do their best to make things fit for the betterment of our hobby and service, Steve NU5D moderator dstar_digital yahoo group. MCH wrote: I know, but in many areas there are a lot of unused frequencies. Still, I would never seriously tell someone to operate there. I would also not recommend operating repeaters in the parts of the band where repeaters are prohibited. Others don't see this prohibition as a deterrent, however. The reason? The repeater bands are full and there is a desire to put more repeaters on the air. Yahoo! Groups Links No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.25/1018 - Release Date: 9/19/2007 3:59 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.25/1018 - Release Date: 9/19/2007 3:59 PM Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote: Second - Dear Coordinator - Old Joe has an unused repeater pair on the North side of town. We respectfully request you re-consider coordination because we the undersigned (hand full of folks) have monitored this frequency for the last XX days and find little or no activity - well beyond the alloted 90 days allowed for repair / replacement, and respectfully request Old Joe's coordination be waived to the extent we may construct and operate a digital repeater using part of the spectrum alloted to Joe while at the same time offering to share this spectrum with Joe. (Sharing a frequency is not interference). Third - Dear Coordinator - We have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with Old Joe to share his un-used / underutilized repeater pair, and while we concede the station to be constructed and operational, we also note a lack of activity as documented herein and propose our group would better serve the purpose of amateur radio by being allowed to share this coordination. I don't agree with the 'underutilized/inactive' parts of this. Just because a repeater doesn't have a bunch of jibber-jabber all day long shouldn't make it fair game. I know if we did that here, all of the repeaters that have dedicated agreements with local agencies, EMA, Red Cross, etc, would be the first ones to go, and the truly useless repeaters that have truck drivers blathering away all day long would be all that was left. Now, as far as repeaters that are decidedly not on the air at all, and haven't been for years, well... -- Jim Barbour WD8CHL
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Hi Glenn, If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all means leave it alone. Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a couple of minutes a day. The folks wanting the digital repeater could help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to mess with it. If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM repeater not much different than the others in town. If they partner with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater in the area. This is only because there are no more 2M or 70CM channels available in Joe's neighborhood, and the folks wanting to place the new digital system have no other place within the rules to go in the band they want. Never would I want wholesale run this through and make it happen, but thoughtful well planned migration might be a good thing. Also like you said, the new equipment would cost more than fixing the old system for Joe, but then folks would not have the benefits of the digital system - no white noise (garble instead), good comm grade audio, and a smaller occupied bandwidth. I certainly respect your comments, and your points are valid. I am just trying to put forth some ideas that will foster a planned gradual move for some folks to digital - by no means a wholesale jump like the cellular folks did. Also there are still folks with radios that don't have channel guard tone - some things don't change. Lets put your 2 cents and a few others together and have a cup of coffee, 73, Steve NU5D (BTW - I can assure you that not all land mobile operators, RCCs etc have buckets of money - forced migration in the SMR business was very costly for me, and this don't take into account loss of customers who didn't want to mess with re-programming radios) sb. Glenn Shaw wrote: Steve Wouldnt it be easy and more effective and cheaper if your: ...hand full of folks just go ahead and use Joes repeater that is already on the air instead of complicating the situation more than it needs to be? Of course Refarming ham radio wholesale will be ill advised and I dont think you will see it in our lifetimes.. The users of ham radio are not the US government or public saftey or RCC's with bottomless buckets of money to just go out and replace equipment. We are losing people in the ham radio community not gaining them. Most hams buy a radio and use it for years and dont have to For those that want to experiment and promote investigation of the new dig modulation such as DStar and P25 that is good and we should encourage this on new spectrum that can be found that is unused, without destroying the existing repeater sub bands. Just my .02 for thought. Glenn N1GBY
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you'll find in most areas where the repeater frequencies are Full, that there are more repeaters to talk on than there are people to actually talk on them. And we need more repeaters? My point exactly, Larry - is ham radio best served by more repeaters than there are folks to use them blocking folks who want to try and revitalize things with a digital system? Look at http://www.dstarusers.org and see who is talking now. Maybe this digital stuff is just a fad, and when it dies out, channels used for digital should be returned to re-coordination, but to kill an innovation at the onset by not allowing a place to operate when there is unused / underused space available just isn't right. As far as constant chatter - I would not want that either, but there are some repeaters that are just plain dead. It also seems the assumption here is that Joe would not be agreeable to the new folks proposal, maybe he would be. Anyhow this is all intended in the spirit of amateur radio and I don't want to provoke any arguments or ill will, as before I am thinking about ways to make this work for everyone. Almost coffee time, 73, Steve NU5D
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Hi Steve You have a lot of valid points. There ought to be a way to create a sub band within the 2M and 440 repeater pairs for digital. Maybe interstitial. Who knows. My hope is that people decide on D Star or P25 so we will not have the old VHS vs Beta thing. Glenn N1GBY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 10:26 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic... Hi Glenn, If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all means leave it alone. Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a couple of minutes a day. The folks wanting the digital repeater could help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to mess with it. If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM repeater not much different than the others in town. If they partner with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater in the area. This is only because there are no more 2M or 70CM channels available in Joe's neighborhood, and the folks wanting to place the new digital system have no other place within the rules to go in the band they want. Never would I want wholesale run this through and make it happen, but thoughtful well planned migration might be a good thing. Also like you said, the new equipment would cost more than fixing the old system for Joe, but then folks would not have the benefits of the digital system - no white noise (garble instead), good comm grade audio, and a smaller occupied bandwidth. I certainly respect your comments, and your points are valid. I am just trying to put forth some ideas that will foster a planned gradual move for some folks to digital - by no means a wholesale jump like the cellular folks did. Also there are still folks with radios that don't have channel guard tone - some things don't change. Lets put your 2 cents and a few others together and have a cup of coffee, 73, Steve NU5D (BTW - I can assure you that not all land mobile operators, RCCs etc have buckets of money - forced migration in the SMR business was very costly for me, and this don't take into account loss of customers who didn't want to mess with re-programming radios) sb. Glenn Shaw wrote: Steve Wouldnt it be easy and more effective and cheaper if your: ...hand full of folks just go ahead and use Joes repeater that is already on the air instead of complicating the situation more than it needs to be? Of course Refarming ham radio wholesale will be ill advised and I dont think you will see it in our lifetimes.. The users of ham radio are not the US government or public saftey or RCC's with bottomless buckets of money to just go out and replace equipment. We are losing people in the ham radio community not gaining them. Most hams buy a radio and use it for years and dont have to For those that want to experiment and promote investigation of the new dig modulation such as DStar and P25 that is good and we should encourage this on new spectrum that can be found that is unused, without destroying the existing repeater sub bands. Just my .02 for thought. Glenn N1GBY No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.25/1018 - Release Date: 9/19/2007 3:59 PM
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
At 08:17 AM 09/20/07, you wrote: Hi Steve You have a lot of valid points. There ought to be a way to create a sub band within the 2M and 440 repeater pairs for digital. Maybe interstitial. Who knows. My hope is that people decide on D Star or P25 so we will not have the old VHS vs Beta thing. Glenn N1GBY And one more point - and it's a major one You can get P25 test equipment. Show me one piece of test equipment - an IFR, an HP, a General Dynamics (the folks that made some of Motorolas R-series of service monitors) or any other test equipment manufacturer that makes a dstar tester. Not even the manufacturer has one. So haw do you verify that a dstar system is actually working right? Use a user radio? Does a user radio give a complete test of a conventional transmitter the way that a scope-equipped IFR does?? (would you trust a handheld to tell you that your conventional repeater transmitter deviation was set right?)
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Hi Glen, If i were going to install a digital repeater i would be going with a P25 system. Hardware is very accessible and not to expensive. Also take in to consideration interoperability. Motorola, Kenwood, Macom, Icom, Yeasu, Thales, BK, Datron, etc and many others all provide radios for P25. Not to Bash Icom, butt how many do you think are really going to buy off on the D-Star system. P25 is established and works. Mike -- Original message -- From: Glenn Shaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Steve You have a lot of valid points. There ought to be a way to create a sub band within the 2M and 440 repeater pairs for digital. Maybe interstitial. Who knows. My hope is that people decide on D Star or P25 so we will not have the old VHS vs Beta thing. Glenn N1GBY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 10:26 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic... Hi Glenn, If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all means leave it alone. Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a couple of minutes a day. The folks wanting the digital repeater could help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to mess with it. If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM repeater not much different than the others in town. If they partner with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater in the area. This is only because there are no more 2M or 70CM channels available in Joe's neighborhood, and the folks wanting to place the new digital system have no other place within the rules to go in the band they want. Never would I want wholesale run this through and make it happen, but thoughtful well planned migration might be a good thing. Also like you said, the new equipment would cost more than fixing the old system for Joe, but then folks would not have the benefits of the digital system - no white noise (garble instead), good comm grade audio, and a smaller occupied bandwidth. I certainly respect your comments, and your points are valid. I am just trying to put forth some ideas that will foster a planned gradual move for some folks to digital - by no means a wholesale jump like the cellular folks did. Also there are still folks with radios that don't have channel guard tone - some things don't change. Lets put your 2 cents and a few others together and have a cup of coffee, 73, Steve NU5D (BTW - I can assure you that not all land mobile operators, RCCs etc have buckets of money - forced migration in the SMR business was very costly for me, and this don't take into account loss of customers who didn't want to mess with re-programming radios) sb. Glenn Shaw wrote: Steve Wouldnt it be easy and more effective and cheaper if your: ...hand full of folks just go ahead and use Joes repeater that is already on the air instead of complicating the situation more than it needs to be? Of course Refarming ham radio wholesale will be ill advised and I dont think you will see it in our lifetimes.. The users of ham radio are not the US government or public saftey or RCC's with bottomless buckets of money to just go out and replace equipment. We are losing people in the ham radio community not gaining them. Most hams buy a radio and use it for years and dont have to For those that want to experiment and promote investigation of the new dig modulation such as DStar and P25 that is good and we should encourage this on new spectrum that can be found that is unused, without destroying the existing repeater sub bands. Just my .02 for thought. Glenn N1GBY No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.25/1018 - Release Date: 9/19/2007 3:59 PM
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
* Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007 Sep 20 09:46 -0500]: Look at http://www.dstarusers.org and see who is talking now. Interesting page. Thanks. Maybe this digital stuff is just a fad, and when it dies out, channels used for digital should be returned to re-coordination, but to kill an innovation at the onset by not allowing a place to operate when there is unused / underused space available just isn't right. It's not a fad as I believe it is here to stay. Most likely it won't remain in its present form for very long as new CODECs and other techniques will supplant the current. I just don't see amateur radio becoming an all digital service in the foreseeable future. The present analog modes still have plenty of usefulness and amateur radio will remain a playground where the past, present, and future come together. As far as constant chatter - I would not want that either, but there are some repeaters that are just plain dead. It also seems the assumption here is that Joe would not be agreeable to the new folks proposal, maybe he would be. If they buy him a complimentary radio and respect his prior efforts, Old Joe may well not just approve, but offer more help than they ask for. It's all in the approach. Too many times we prepare for an adversarial position when none exists. Flies to honey and all that. 73, de Nate -- Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998. http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | Debian, the choice of My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @| a GNU generation! http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote: If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all means leave it alone. Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a couple of minutes a day. The folks wanting the digital repeater could help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to mess with it. If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM repeater not much different than the others in town. If they partner with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater in the area. While I have no interest in putting a D-Star system on-air, I agree with Steve's sentiment that people wanting to put things on-air in crowded bands can almost ALWAYS find a limping/dead system that needs some help. And unless the owner is a total jerk (happens... what-do-ya-do?), if a group of people approached Old Joe with a reasonable upgrade plan to digital, and perhaps even offered to BUY OLD JOE A RIG for that new mode... he'd be a proponent and HAPPY to participate, in an awful lot of cases. Old Joe is probably PROUD of his old, tired, beat-down repeater... that's the part that a lot of people forget. Back when Old Joe built it, he had more money, more time, and the technology was probably harder to deal with, and he didn't even have access to test gear! He's not going to toss his hard work out without feeling INVOLVED and APPRECIATED by the newbies, but if they play their cards right -- he'll be their best ALLY, and will start spreading the word about the new repeater on the block... ESPECIALLY if those building it don't mind leaving Old Joe's CALLSIGN on it. There's some basic How to make friends and influence people type stuff going on here, that new builders seem to think aren't important... Want to REALLY impress Old Joe, fire up a mixed-mode Quantar with P25 on his pair, buying whatever new antennas/hardline/duplexer... whatever it takes to get it to perform well. You can't as easily do this with D-Star... You probably have to buy Old Joe a radio or two. But with P-25 mixed-mode repeaters, you can have a transition process for Old Joe and his friends with a mixed-mode repeater for a while... announce a date in which you're going to shut down the analog side of things... talk up the digital side... etc. You don't get the benefit of the smaller utilization of bandwidth at first, but Old Joe's repeater wasn't going anywhere anyway, and now you've got a dual-usage scenario that works. (This idea leaves out a lot... like the fact that D-Star's ability to automatically link person-to-person via Internet gateways and callsigns blows anything currently available at a reasonable price for P25 out of the water for hams... for the time being, anyway... but it's just meant to be an example of thinking outside of the box.) Nevertheless, whatever you do -- work with Old Joe and not against him... again, he's got a personal, EMOTIONAL, connection with that repeater... that you have to take into account when trying to find a place to put something new. Nate WY0X
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic...
To add to Nate's comments, prospective D-Star system builders might coordinate with one of their local MARS services. MARS is currently proposing to partner with the ARRL in providing emergency communications support and an opportunity to have assistance in setting up a D-Star system should be well received. 73 de Jack - N7OO - Original Message - From: Nate Duehr To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Making room for the new guy - repeater coordination - Hope this is not too off topic... Steve S. Bosshard (NU5D) wrote: If old Joe's repeater were usable and folks were making use of it by all means leave it alone. Poor old Joe's repeater is not working so well with a bad antenna, and it only has 2 folks that make contact for a couple of minutes a day. The folks wanting the digital repeater could help fix Joe's antenna and get it back in shape, but Joe don't want to mess with it. If they get is back in shape they have a 20 Khz FM repeater not much different than the others in town. If they partner with Joe and upgrade to digital, depending on whether they occupy the middle of the channel, or offset up or down 6.25 Khz, they can restore Joe's system to a ?better? system, and make room for one more repeater in the area. While I have no interest in putting a D-Star system on-air, I agree with Steve's sentiment that people wanting to put things on-air in crowded bands can almost ALWAYS find a limping/dead system that needs some help. And unless the owner is a total jerk (happens... what-do-ya-do?), if a group of people approached Old Joe with a reasonable upgrade plan to digital, and perhaps even offered to BUY OLD JOE A RIG for that new mode... he'd be a proponent and HAPPY to participate, in an awful lot of cases. Old Joe is probably PROUD of his old, tired, beat-down repeater... that's the part that a lot of people forget. Back when Old Joe built it, he had more money, more time, and the technology was probably harder to deal with, and he didn't even have access to test gear! He's not going to toss his hard work out without feeling INVOLVED and APPRECIATED by the newbies, but if they play their cards right -- he'll be their best ALLY, and will start spreading the word about the new repeater on the block... ESPECIALLY if those building it don't mind leaving Old Joe's CALLSIGN on it. There's some basic How to make friends and influence people type stuff going on here, that new builders seem to think aren't important... Want to REALLY impress Old Joe, fire up a mixed-mode Quantar with P25 on his pair, buying whatever new antennas/hardline/duplexer... whatever it takes to get it to perform well. You can't as easily do this with D-Star... You probably have to buy Old Joe a radio or two. But with P-25 mixed-mode repeaters, you can have a transition process for Old Joe and his friends with a mixed-mode repeater for a while... announce a date in which you're going to shut down the analog side of things... talk up the digital side... etc. You don't get the benefit of the smaller utilization of bandwidth at first, but Old Joe's repeater wasn't going anywhere anyway, and now you've got a dual-usage scenario that works. (This idea leaves out a lot... like the fact that D-Star's ability to automatically link person-to-person via Internet gateways and callsigns blows anything currently available at a reasonable price for P25 out of the water for hams... for the time being, anyway... but it's just meant to be an example of thinking outside of the box.) Nevertheless, whatever you do -- work with Old Joe and not against him... again, he's got a personal, EMOTIONAL, connection with that repeater... that you have to take into account when trying to find a place to put something new. Nate WY0X
