Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[JOHN MACKEY]

Daron-

Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to them.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> Hello Folks,
> 
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> 
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.  
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Daron
> 
> 
>  
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> 
>  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a 
> dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125 
> reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is multiplied

> in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection 
> oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an 
> outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a 
> special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> 
>  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may 
> be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that is

> compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed 
> to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance 
> of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed 
> to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that 
> means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but 
> the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent 
> specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> 
>  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham 
> use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a
time...
> 
> Doug
> KD8B
> 
> 
> At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> >
> >Chuck
> >WB2EDV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Neil McKie]

  I would consider one site in favor of a circularly polarized 
 antenna system.  Where that site should be placed is another issue. 
 If you are thinking of your employeers located city, I know that 
 one a tiny bit. 

  Neil - WA6KLA 


Daron Wilson wrote:
> 
> Hello Folks,
> 
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> 
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Daron
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> 
>  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a
> dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is multiplied
> in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a
> special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> 
>  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may
> be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that is
> compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed
> to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance
> of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed
> to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that
> means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but
> the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> 
>  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham
> use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a time...
> 
> Doug
> KD8B
> 
> At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> >
> >Chuck
> >WB2EDV
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Neil McKie]

  Daron, 

  At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is 
 digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is 
 still used in your area. 

  If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know. 

  Neil - WA6KLA 

JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> 
> Daron-
> 
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be 
> simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, 
> try listening to them.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> 
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Daron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> >
> >  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a
> > dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> > reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is multiplied
> 
> > in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> > oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> > outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a
> > special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> >
> >  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may
> > be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that is
> 
> > compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed
> > to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance
> > of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed
> > to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that
> > means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but
> > the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> > specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> >
> >  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham
> > use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a
> time...
> >
> > Doug
> > KD8B
> >
> >
> > At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> > >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> > >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> > >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> > >
> > >Chuck
> > >WB2EDV
> >





 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)]

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:35 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters



  I would consider one site in favor of a circularly polarized 
 antenna system.  Where that site should be placed is another issue. 
 If you are thinking of your employeers located city, I know that 
 one a tiny bit. 

  Neil - WA6KLA 


Daron Wilson wrote:
> 
> Hello Folks,
> 
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> 
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Daron
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> 
>  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a
> dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is multiplied
> in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a
> special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> 
>  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may
> be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that is
> compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed
> to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance
> of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed
> to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that
> means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but
> the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> 
>  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham
> use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a time...
> 
> Doug
> KD8B
> 
> At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> >
> >Chuck
> >WB2EDV
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>

IF YOU'RE READING THIS, YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE MUCH TO DO, COMPARED TO 
THOSE WHO ARE SO BUSY THEY CAN'T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO RENAME THE SUBJECT LINE 
OR TO CROP OFF THE HALF-DOZEN OR SO REPLIES AND REPLIES TO THE REPLIES, OR 
(LIKE ME) SIMPLY LIKE TO FIND WAYS TO IRRITATE THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THIS IS 
OFF-TOPIC, BY THE WAY. REPLY, IF YOU LIKE, AS I OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE A LIFE OF 
MY OWN. HAVE A DIFFERENT DAY.

Kenneth Buley
Bullitt County EMA Deputy Director CD-2
Bullitt/Spencer Counties Red Cross ECRV Driver/Operator BC-6
Bullitt County ARES/RACES Coordinator KY4DES 




 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)]

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters



  Daron, 

  At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is 
 digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is 
 still used in your area. 

  If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know. 

  Neil - WA6KLA 

JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> 
> Daron-
> 
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be 
> simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, 
> try listening to them.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> 
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Daron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> >
> >  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a
> > dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> > reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is multiplied
> 
> > in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> > oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> > outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a
> > special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> >
> >  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may
> > be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that is
> 
> > compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed
> > to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance
> > of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed
> > to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that
> > means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but
> > the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> > specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> >
> >  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham
> > use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a
> time...
> >
> > Doug
> > KD8B
> >
> >
> > At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> > >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> > >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> > >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> > >
> > >Chuck
> > >WB2EDV
> >

ONCE MORE INTO THE BREACH !!

IF YOU'RE READING THIS, YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE MUCH TO DO, COMPARED TO THOSE 
WHO ARE SO BUSY THEY CAN'T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO RENAME THE SUBJECT LINE OR TO 
CROP OFF THE HALF-DOZEN OR SO REPLIES AND REPLIES TO THE REPLIES, OR (LIKE ME) 
SIMPLY LIKE TO FIND WAYS TO IRRITATE THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THIS IS OFF-TOPIC, BY 
THE WAY. REPLY, IF YOU LIKE, AS I OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE A LIFE OF MY OWN. HAVE A 
DIFFERENT DAY.

Kenneth Buley
Bullitt County EMA Deputy Director CD-2
Bullitt/Spencer Counties Red Cross ECRV Driver/Operator BC-6
Bullitt County ARES/RACES Coordinator KY4DES 



 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Kevin Custer]

Ken,

Your email program is going wacky
I'd hope it isn't being a responder...

Kevin

Buley, Kenneth L (GE Consumer & Industrial) wrote:

  
  
ONCE MORE INTO THE BREACH !!
  
IF YOU'RE READING THIS, YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE MUCH TO DO, COMPARED TO THOSE WHO ARE SO BUSY THEY CAN'T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO RENAME THE SUBJECT LINE OR TO CROP OFF THE HALF-DOZEN OR SO REPLIES AND REPLIES TO THE REPLIES, OR (LIKE ME) SIMPLY LIKE TO FIND WAYS TO IRRITATE THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THIS IS OFF-TOPIC, BY THE WAY. REPLY, IF YOU LIKE, AS I OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE A LIFE OF MY OWN. HAVE A DIFFERENT DAY.

Kenneth Buley
Bullitt County EMA Deputy Director CD-2
Bullitt/Spencer Counties Red Cross ECRV Driver/Operator BC-6
Bullitt County ARES/RACES Coordinator KY4DES 















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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

Daron,

I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system stay
away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was still
a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the other
half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they would
not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a dB
between them, Motorola did no matching.

The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
overlaps where people will not be using the system.

There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.

There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
some used equipment available.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


Daron-

Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
them.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> Hello Folks,
>
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
>
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Daron
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
>
>  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with a
> dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is
multiplied

> in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as a
> special from the vendor on our requested freq.
>
>  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it may
> be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that
is

> compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more designed
> to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX performance
> of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as opposed
> to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess that
> means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation but
> the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
>
>  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for ham
> use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a
time...
>
> Doug
> KD8B
>
>
> At 07:14 PM 4/28/2005, you wrote:
> >Certainly would be nice to put one through it's paces on a repeater.
> >Checking it for temperature stability and purity, etc. Obviously someone
> >would need to have some decent test equipment to conduct the testing.
> >
> >Chuck
> >WB2EDV
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>








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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

Daron,

One other thing, if they are pine trees you would have a lot of problems at
900 MHz, not much at 150-170 MHz, at least we did not in Houston, Texas
around the pine trees at 152 MHz.  I am for Simulcast systems for this
application if they are engineered and constructed properly.

By the way, OK, I lied, two things.  Our only 900 MHz system (40 +
transmitters) started out as a Motorola PURC 5000 system, after too many
years of problems it was changed out to a Glenayre.  There is a long history
between the company I worked for and Motorola, mainly because my boss, an
ex-Motorola engineer had Bat Wings tattooed to the backside of his eyelids.
It took the afore mentioned mess on our 900 MHz system to erase the wings!

Don't get me wrong, Motorola made a lot of good equipment.  Their pagers
were the best in the world and you could get a response from the paging
engineering team.  On the other hand, when you take a mobile radio and try
and modify it to a high stability simulcast transmitter it can't be done.
At least Motorola could not.

OK, guess it's three.  I guess my history with Motorola has clouded my
opinion enough I don't have a single Motorola Ham repeater on my tower.  I
have to admit, the Micor while over-engineered is a pretty good working
radio, I just prefer other radios to build my repeaters out of.  I have had
Micors in the past but sold them last year at Dayton, still have one
un-modified hi-band Micor I don't know what I am going to do with.  I have
five commercial Kenwood's two Johnson's and one GE Mastr II.  The Johnson's
and GE's are Ham repeaters.

Next time I will try and be more forthcoming about my feelings!  

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:48 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters



  Daron,

  At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is
 digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is
 still used in your area.

  If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.

  Neil - WA6KLA

JOHN MACKEY wrote:
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be
> simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,
> try listening to them.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
>
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Daron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> >
> >  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with
a
> > dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> > reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is
multiplied
>
> > in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O injection
> > oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used an
> > outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as
a
> > special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> >
> >  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it
may
> > be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that
is
>
> > compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more
designed
> > to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX
performance
> > of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[JOHN MACKEY]

I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for
Simulcast analog/digital paging.  I know the analog part is still working
every time my pager goes beep.

I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice 
pager still receiving commercial service.  I've had the same pager number for
20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up to
Keynote!!

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT
From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> 
> 
> 
>   Daron, 
> 
>   At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is 
>  digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is 
>  still used in your area. 
> 
>   If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know. 
> 
>   Neil - WA6KLA 
> 
> JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> > 
> > Daron-
> > 
> > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be 
> > simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, 
> > try listening to them.
> > 
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> > 
> > > Hello Folks,
> > >
> > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small
coastal
> > > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
tall
> > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
when
> > > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
issues
> > > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> > >
> > > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
this,
> > > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
and
> > > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but
I
> > > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> > >
> > > Ideas?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Daron
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> > >
> > >  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running with
a
> > > dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> > > reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is
multiplied
> > 
> > > in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O
injection
> > > oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used
an
> > > outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up as
a
> > > special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> > >
> > >  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it
may
> > > be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference that
is
> > 
> > > compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more
designed
> > > to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX
performance
> > > of the station after the mod was slightly lower with this unit as
opposed
> > > to my service monitor generating the 17.6125 in other tests. I guess
that
> > > means it does exhibit some sideband noise which influenced operation
but
> > > the spec sheet and printouts that come with it indicate pretty decent
> > > specs.. at least for a pll/vco.
> > >
> > >  Not an answer for all but a very interesting development for
ham
> > > use etc maybe an answer for some.. It also only does 1 freq at a
> > time...
> > >
> > > Doug
> > > KD8B
> > >
> > >
> > 

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

John,

What carrier is still letting you get away with analog pager???  All of the
big guys have gone satellite links which don't pass analog audio, I don't
like anything but terrestrial links, guess I am to worried about that
service call to the satellite!!!  The satellite link has it's place but you
can't beat the terrestrial link system for dependability.

Paul

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:18 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for
Simulcast analog/digital paging.  I know the analog part is still working
every time my pager goes beep.

I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice
pager still receiving commercial service.  I've had the same pager number
for
20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up to
Keynote!!

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT
From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
>
>   Daron,
>
>   At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is
>  digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is
>  still used in your area.
>
>   If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.
>
>   Neil - WA6KLA
>
> JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> >
> > Daron-
> >
> > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be
> > simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,
> > try listening to them.
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> >
> > > Hello Folks,
> > >
> > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small
coastal
> > > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
tall
> > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
when
> > > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
issues
> > > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> > >
> > > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
this,
> > > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
and
> > > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but
I
> > > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> > >
> > > Ideas?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Daron
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Bade
> > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 7:56 AM
> > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] I'm stunned...
> > >
> > >  It uses what looks like a JFET type VCO oscillator running
with
a
> > > dc controlled/varicap pll on board. I used it to replace a 17.6125
> > > reference oscillator on a synthesized 900 station. The output is
multiplied
> >
> > > in this case and used to sync lock a free running 70.45 RX L.O
injection
> > > oscillator and  is the clock reference for the TX exciter PLL. I used
an
> > > outboard 10 mhz ovenized oscillator to set it up and it was tuned up
as
a
> > > special from the vendor on our requested freq.
> > >
> > >  It is likely not 2ppm itself, but in a stable environment it
may
> > > be ok without an ovenized reference. It can use about any reference
that
is
> >
> > > compatible with the programming. It has no mod port as it is more
designed
> > > to replace a crystal than replace the channel element. The RX
performance
> > > of the station after the mod was slightly lower with th

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[JOHN MACKEY]

I think the name of the paging company is using this month is "Page USA", they
used to be called "MetroCall", before that they were "Telepage Northwest, a
Division of McCall Paging", before that they were "MCI Airsignal".

For about 5 years they have been telling me that they will be dis-continuing
my analog paging service in about a year.  

About once a year they call me & tell me that they "have a great new paging
service to transfer me to which will be exactly like what I have now only
better".  I tell them "GREAT, as long as it operates on 150 MHz and provides
voice paging service I'll be happy to change".  Then they tell me "yes, it is
exactly the same except you will be operating on 900 Mhz and rather than
listen to a small speaker on your pager you will read the messages on a LCD
screen on the pager".  Then I say "Gee, that really isn't exactly what I have
now & would be a step down in quality".  Then our discussion ends.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:59:50 PM CDT
From: "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> John,
> 
> What carrier is still letting you get away with analog pager???  All of the
> big guys have gone satellite links which don't pass analog audio, I don't
> like anything but terrestrial links, guess I am to worried about that
> service call to the satellite!!!  The satellite link has it's place but you
> can't beat the terrestrial link system for dependability.
> 
> Paul
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:18 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> 
> 
> I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for
> Simulcast analog/digital paging.  I know the analog part is still working
> every time my pager goes beep.
> 
> I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice
> pager still receiving commercial service.  I've had the same pager number
> for
> 20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up to
> Keynote!!
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT
> From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
> 
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> > transmitters
> >
> >
> >
> >   Daron,
> >
> >   At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is
> >  digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is
> >  still used in your area.
> >
> >   If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.
> >
> >   Neil - WA6KLA
> >
> > JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> > >
> > > Daron-
> > >
> > > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be
> > > simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,
> > > try listening to them.
> > >
> > > -- Original Message --
> > > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> > > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: 
> > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
> > >
> > > > Hello Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small
> coastal
> > > > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters
with
> > > > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
> tall
> > > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
> when
> > > > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
> issues
> > > > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> > > >
> > > > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
> this,
> > > > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
> and
> > > > not real great audio for the mobile units based

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Dave VanHorn]

>
>About once a year they call me & tell me that they "have a great new paging
>service to transfer me to which will be exactly like what I have now only
>better".  I tell them "GREAT, as long as it operates on 150 MHz and provides
>voice paging service I'll be happy to change".  Then they tell me "yes, it is
>exactly the same except you will be operating on 900 Mhz and rather than
>listen to a small speaker on your pager you will read the messages on a LCD
>screen on the pager".  Then I say "Gee, that really isn't exactly what I have
>now & would be a step down in quality".  Then our discussion ends.

Almost, but not quite completely unlike what I asked for! 





 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Daron Wilson]

I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging, this
is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The proposal
is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as suggested
in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
to.

Thanks,

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Daron 

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

Daron,

I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system stay
away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was still
a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the other
half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they would
not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a dB
between them, Motorola did no matching.

The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
overlaps where people will not be using the system.

There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.

There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
some used equipment available.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


Daron-

Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
them.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> Hello Folks,
>
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
>
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks,






 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Brent]

well to do that correct  I believe you will need a master oscillator per
site and GPS compensation for path distance changes.
that is for the transmitters.

- Original Message -
From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters


>
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Daron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
> Daron,
>
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
>
> The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
>
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
>
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
have
> some used equipment available.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> them.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
>
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses at TNWEB LLC]
>
>
>


---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses at TNWEB LLC]





 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[DCFluX]

As long as all the transmitters are ran in synchronisity you should
not encounter very much multipath or speed of light error as the
transmitters are so close to each other. But your performance may
improve with spacing. In the world of FM who ever is 15dB greater wins
due to the capture effect of the receiver.

What I would do is find a nice synthisized radio to make the
transmitters from, all three must match.  I assume you will be using
one link transmitter to talk to all three main sites,  I would then
build a high stability reference oscillator that would generate what
ever frequency the PLL reference divides down to, and run it as a
subcarrier with the audio information to the transmitters and recover
the tone with sharp ass filters. This is the same approch that TFT
uses in their "Reciter" system, only they use the 19kHz pilot tone and
divide it to the reference.

But this would only be fessable on radios that have multichip
synthisizers and you can get at the 5kHz, 10kHz or 12.5kHz reference. 
But you could still use it by building a second PLL that would take
the control tone and create a fake 10-20MHz for the radios original
crystal or oscillator, which would also work on "Times Up" crystal
exciters.

On 5/3/05, Brent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> well to do that correct  I believe you will need a master oscillator per
> site and GPS compensation for path distance changes.
> that is for the transmitters.
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:46 PM
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> 
> >
> >
> > I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
> this
> > is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
> proposal
> > is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> > receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> > control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> > receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> > know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> > looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> > experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> > the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
> suggested
> > in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> > to.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Daron
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> >
> > Daron,
> >
> > I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> > basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> > Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
> stay
> > away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
> still
> > a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
> other
> > half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> > you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
> would
> > not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> > matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
> dB
> > between them, Motorola did no matching.
> >
> > The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> > overlaps where people will not be using the system.
> >
> > There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> > kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
> >
> > There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> > Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> > manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
> have
> > some used equipment available.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with si

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Joe Montierth]

The killer on these simulcast systems is in the
overlap areas. If the transmitters are only a few
miles apart, you could see some real problems, since
most everywhere is an overlap area. A rule of thumb is
that a simulcast system will never sound as good as a
non-simulcast system in the overlap areas. If the
transmitters were further apart, and the overlap area
fell into "no man's land", then it might work OK.

We have one here, and in the overlap areas audio
sounds funny or "buzzy", etc. If there is anyway
around a simulcast system, it might be better. These
systems tend to be costly and hard to set up, and keep
aligned.

Read this article for some more insight, but remember
that it was written by the president of Simulcast
Solutions.

http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/PDF/Simulcast.pdf

Joe

--- Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> 
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with
> the simulcast paging, this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog
> repeaters.  The proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4
> miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the
> 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So,
> they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three
> repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a
> simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation
> like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will
> multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a
> good thing as suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating
> systems out there to listen
> to.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Daron 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers
> with simulcast transmitters
> 
> Daron,
> 
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast
> systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment,
> Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly
> good sounding system stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging
> back when there was still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems
> were Motorola, the other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola
> systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but
> the next day they would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK
> modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators
> were matched to .2 of a dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
> 
> The trick that will help the most with either system
> is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
> 
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast
> system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running
> simulcast system.
> 
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells
> the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC
> Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the
> Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
> some used equipment available.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
> Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers
> with simulcast
> transmitters
> 
> 
> Daron-
> 
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are
> going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems
> around, try listening to
> them.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with
> simulcast transmitters
> 
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants
> for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three
> simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the
> terrain is covered with tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and
> contribute tons of multipath when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any
> place with terrain issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater sy

Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Q]

I prefer a big,powerful,high central transmitter with sattelite 
receivers. Our city and county uses this type of system and it works 
very well over some tough terrain. I was never happy with any simulcast 
system,they all have areas of cancellation and fuzzyness. I'd use 
trunking before even considering simulcast.  Thats my  2 cents worth 
along with 25 years experience.

Joe Montierth wrote:

>The killer on these simulcast systems is in the
>overlap areas. If the transmitters are only a few
>miles apart, you could see some real problems, since
>most everywhere is an overlap area. A rule of thumb is
>that a simulcast system will never sound as good as a
>non-simulcast system in the overlap areas. If the
>transmitters were further apart, and the overlap area
>fell into "no man's land", then it might work OK.
>
>We have one here, and in the overlap areas audio
>sounds funny or "buzzy", etc. If there is anyway
>around a simulcast system, it might be better. These
>systems tend to be costly and hard to set up, and keep
>aligned.
>
>Read this article for some more insight, but remember
>that it was written by the president of Simulcast
>Solutions.
>
>http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/PDF/Simulcast.pdf
>
>Joe
>
>--- Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with
>>the simulcast paging, this
>>is not paging.  This is public safety police analog
>>repeaters.  The proposal
>>is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4
>>miles apart, voting
>>receivers at the two south ones linked back to the
>>'main' site via UHF
>>control links and a voting controller there.  So,
>>they would vote the best
>>receiver and simulcast the output of all three
>>repeaters.  Not paging, I
>>know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a
>>simulcast system.  What I'm
>>looking for is somone who has seen an installation
>>like this or has
>>experience with it.  Personally, I think it will
>>multipath like crazy and
>>the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a
>>good thing as suggested
>>in the recommendation, there must be operating
>>systems out there to listen
>>to.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>Daron 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>  
>





 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

John, good for you!  Of course Metrocall is now USA Mobility, I think!!!
Never know from month to month!

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 5:55 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


I think the name of the paging company is using this month is "Page USA",
they
used to be called "MetroCall", before that they were "Telepage Northwest, a
Division of McCall Paging", before that they were "MCI Airsignal".

For about 5 years they have been telling me that they will be dis-continuing
my analog paging service in about a year.

About once a year they call me & tell me that they "have a great new paging
service to transfer me to which will be exactly like what I have now only
better".  I tell them "GREAT, as long as it operates on 150 MHz and provides
voice paging service I'll be happy to change".  Then they tell me "yes, it
is
exactly the same except you will be operating on 900 Mhz and rather than
listen to a small speaker on your pager you will read the messages on a LCD
screen on the pager".  Then I say "Gee, that really isn't exactly what I
have
now & would be a step down in quality".  Then our discussion ends.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:59:50 PM CDT
From: "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> John,
>
> What carrier is still letting you get away with analog pager???  All of
the
> big guys have gone satellite links which don't pass analog audio, I don't
> like anything but terrestrial links, guess I am to worried about that
> service call to the satellite!!!  The satellite link has it's place but
you
> can't beat the terrestrial link system for dependability.
>
> Paul
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:18 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
> I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for
> Simulcast analog/digital paging.  I know the analog part is still working
> every time my pager goes beep.
>
> I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice
> pager still receiving commercial service.  I've had the same pager number
> for
> 20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up
to
> Keynote!!
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT
> From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> > transmitters
> >
> >
> >
> >   Daron,
> >
> >   At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is
> >  digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is
> >  still used in your area.
> >
> >   If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.
> >
> >   Neil - WA6KLA
> >
> > JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> > >
> > > Daron-
> > >
> > > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be
> > > simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,
> > > try listening to them.
> > >
> > > -- Original Message --
> > > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> > > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: 
> > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
> > >
> > > > Hello Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small
> coastal
> > > > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters
with
> > > > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
> tall
> > > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of
multipath
> when
> > > > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
> issues
>

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

Daron,

Simulcast is the same in analog paging and two-way analog public safety.
The only difference you will be using control links to feed the mobile
transmit back through the system to the simulcast system.  From the link
output feeding all transmitters it's the same.

A good system will sound pretty good, but like I said in the earlier post be
careful who you buy the system from.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daron Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:47 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters




I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging, this
is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The proposal
is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as suggested
in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
to.

Thanks,

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Daron

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

Daron,

I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system stay
away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was still
a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the other
half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they would
not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a dB
between them, Motorola did no matching.

The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
overlaps where people will not be using the system.

There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.

There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
some used equipment available.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


Daron-

Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
them.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> Hello Folks,
>
> I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
>
> If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks,







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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Thomas Oliver]

You will need the three transmitters to have uhso (high stab oscilators) to
keep them within a few hz of each other, you will have to delay the audio
so all three transmitters transmit the audio at the same time. I do not
know what effect the multipath from buildings will have on the recieved
signal. I think it is worth a shot.

tom n8ies


> [Original Message]
> From: Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 5/3/2005 8:47:55 PM
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
>
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Daron 
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
> Daron,
>
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
>
> The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
>
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
>
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
have
> some used equipment available.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> them.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
>
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain
issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like
this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems
and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> 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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

Tom and group,

There is several things you need for simulcasting.  I will help if I can.

1-You need a super high stab oscillator, there is ways now to use one and
use GPS signals as the time base.
2-Frequency offsets.  2 cycles per transmitter, working out from the link, a
good simulcast engineer can help you here.
3-Phasing.  The audio must reach each transmitter at the same time, the
longest delay is at the closest transmitter to the link transmitter.
4-Audio levels.  Audio levels must be set the same across the link to each
of the transmitters as read on a good quality audio meter fed by the demod
out from a service monitor.
5-Flat Audio.  Audio must track the same from transmitter to transmitter
from 300 to 3000 Hz within .2 of a dB.  Read with same setup as #4.

These are most of the things that will give you a good working system.

If you use good equipment and set it up correctly it can work well.

Suggestion, don't try and link the sites with telephone company land lines.

Paul
WB5IDM



-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Oliver
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 9:48 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


You will need the three transmitters to have uhso (high stab oscilators) to
keep them within a few hz of each other, you will have to delay the audio
so all three transmitters transmit the audio at the same time. I do not
know what effect the multipath from buildings will have on the recieved
signal. I think it is worth a shot.

tom n8ies


> [Original Message]
> From: Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Date: 5/3/2005 8:47:55 PM
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
>
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Daron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
> Daron,
>
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
>
> The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
>
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
>
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
have
> some used equipment available.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> them.
>
> -- Or

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Jamey Wright]

Depending the size of the area, maybe you could get away with voting with
transmitter steering.  The local police department does it here on 460.xxx
with 3 sites and it works good.  99% of the problems with the system are
related to the telco circuits coming back from the remote sites to the voter

Jamey Wright

-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe Montierth
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


The killer on these simulcast systems is in the
overlap areas. If the transmitters are only a few
miles apart, you could see some real problems, since
most everywhere is an overlap area. A rule of thumb is
that a simulcast system will never sound as good as a
non-simulcast system in the overlap areas. If the
transmitters were further apart, and the overlap area
fell into "no man's land", then it might work OK.

We have one here, and in the overlap areas audio
sounds funny or "buzzy", etc. If there is anyway
around a simulcast system, it might be better. These
systems tend to be costly and hard to set up, and keep
aligned.

Read this article for some more insight, but remember
that it was written by the president of Simulcast
Solutions.

http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/PDF/Simulcast.pdf

Joe

--- Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with
> the simulcast paging, this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog
> repeaters.  The proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4
> miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the
> 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So,
> they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three
> repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a
> simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation
> like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will
> multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a
> good thing as suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating
> systems out there to listen
> to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Daron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers
> with simulcast transmitters
>
> Daron,
>
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast
> systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment,
> Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly
> good sounding system stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging
> back when there was still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems
> were Motorola, the other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola
> systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but
> the next day they would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK
> modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators
> were matched to .2 of a dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
>
> The trick that will help the most with either system
> is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
>
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast
> system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running
> simulcast system.
>
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells
> the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC
> Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the
> Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
> some used equipment available.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
> Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers
> with simulcast
> transmitters
>
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are
> going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems
> around, try listening to
> them.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with
> simu

RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[JOHN MACKEY]

Yes, you are right!!  USA Mobility is the current name.

-- Original Message --
Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 09:11:34 PM CDT
From: "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

> John, good for you!  Of course Metrocall is now USA Mobility, I think!!!
> Never know from month to month!
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 5:55 PM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> 
> 
> I think the name of the paging company is using this month is "Page USA",
> they
> used to be called "MetroCall", before that they were "Telepage Northwest, a
> Division of McCall Paging", before that they were "MCI Airsignal".
> 
> For about 5 years they have been telling me that they will be
dis-continuing
> my analog paging service in about a year.
> 
> About once a year they call me & tell me that they "have a great new paging
> service to transfer me to which will be exactly like what I have now only
> better".  I tell them "GREAT, as long as it operates on 150 MHz and
provides
> voice paging service I'll be happy to change".  Then they tell me "yes, it
> is
> exactly the same except you will be operating on 900 Mhz and rather than
> listen to a small speaker on your pager you will read the messages on a LCD
> screen on the pager".  Then I say "Gee, that really isn't exactly what I
> have
> now & would be a step down in quality".  Then our discussion ends.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:59:50 PM CDT
> From: "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
> 
> > John,
> >
> > What carrier is still letting you get away with analog pager???  All of
> the
> > big guys have gone satellite links which don't pass analog audio, I don't
> > like anything but terrestrial links, guess I am to worried about that
> > service call to the satellite!!!  The satellite link has it's place but
> you
> > can't beat the terrestrial link system for dependability.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:18 PM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> > transmitters
> >
> >
> > I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for
> > Simulcast analog/digital paging.  I know the analog part is still working
> > every time my pager goes beep.
> >
> > I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice
> > pager still receiving commercial service.  I've had the same pager number
> > for
> > 20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up
> to
> > Keynote!!
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT
> > From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM
> > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> > > transmitters
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   Daron,
> > >
> > >   At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is
> > >  digital.  You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is
> > >  still used in your area.
> > >
> > >   If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.
> > >
> > >   Neil - WA6KLA
> > >
> > > JOHN MACKEY wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Daron-
> > > >
> > > > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be
> > > > simulcast.  If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,
> > > > try listening to them.
> > > >
> > > > -- Origi

Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Kevin Custer]

>Read this article for some more insight, but remember
>that it was written by the president of Simulcast
>Solutions.
>
>http://www.simulcastsolutions.com/PDF/Simulcast.pdf
>
>Joe
>

Here is another article written by a ham that has a bit more practical 
approach than others I have seen suggested:


The main site seems down, so I have included a link to a cached copy on 
Google:


The High Stability oscillators Peter is using are from 800 MHz Micors.  
These are the heated oscillators that have the FM modulator built in 
(how convenient).
I purchased a few of these to do a Simulcast experiment, but I have too 
many "irons in the fire" right now.

Kevin




 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[T.J.]

And you are probably one of the only users left too.
 
T.J.JOHN MACKEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the name of the paging company is using this month is "Page USA", theyused to be called "MetroCall", before that they were "Telepage Northwest, aDivision of McCall Paging", before that they were "MCI Airsignal".For about 5 years they have been telling me that they will be dis-continuingmy analog paging service in about a year. About once a year they call me & tell me that they "have a great new pagingservice to transfer me to which will be exactly like what I have now onlybetter". I tell them "GREAT, as long as it operates on 150 MHz and providesvoice paging service I'll be happy to change". Then they tell me "yes, it isexactly the same except you will be operating on 900 Mhz and rather thanlisten to a small speaker on your pager you will read the messages on a LCDscreen on the pager". Then I say "Gee, that really isn't
 exactly what I havenow & would be a step down in quality". Then our discussion ends.-- Original Message --Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:59:50 PM CDTFrom: "Paul Finch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters> John,> > What carrier is still letting you get away with analog pager??? All of the> big guys have gone satellite links which don't pass analog audio, I don't> like anything but terrestrial links, guess I am to worried about that> service call to the satellite!!! The satellite link has it's place but you> can't beat the terrestrial link system for dependability.> > Paul> > -Original Message-> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:18
 PM> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast> transmitters> > > I know that here in Portland 158.700 MHz is STILL occasionally used for> Simulcast analog/digital paging. I know the analog part is still working> every time my pager goes beep.> > I think I am just about the last person in town with a two-tone voice> pager still receiving commercial service. I've had the same pager number> for> 20 years, but have been thru about 8 different pagers from Pageboy to up to> Keynote!!> > -- Original Message --> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:00:37 AM CDT> From: "Buley, Kenneth L \(GE Consumer & Industrial\)"> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> To: > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcasttransmitters> >
 >> >> > -Original Message-> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil McKie> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:48 AM> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast> > transmitters> >> >> >> > Daron,> >> > At last report 152.24 MHz is still used by Arch paging but is> > digital. You might contact Arch and ask if any analog paging is> > still used in your area.> >> > If you have trouble contacting them, please let me know.> >> > Neil - WA6KLA> >> > JOHN MACKEY wrote:> > >> > > Daron-> > >> > > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be> > > simulcast. If
 there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around,> > > try listening to them.> > >> > > -- Original Message --> > > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT> > > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > > To: > > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcasttransmitters> > >> > > > Hello Folks,> > > >> > > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small> coastal> > > > community. The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaterswith> > > > voting receivers. We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with> tall> > > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath> when> > > > wet, and it rains plenty. I can't think of any place with
 terrain> issues> > > > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.> > > >> > > > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like> this,> > > > please drop me a note. I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems> and> > > > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location,but> I>

Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[mch]

I have two such systems near me - both on UHF. Come to think of it,
there is one on 800, too. All analog voice simulcast (800 one trunked,
but only two sites). It is definitely annoying to hear the heterodynes
of all the TXs. Only one of the UHF systems doesn't do that much. I
suspect it is the exception that is set up extremely well.

Joe M.

Daron Wilson wrote:
> 
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging, this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> to.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Daron
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> 
> Daron,
> 
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
> 
> The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
> 
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
> 
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may have
> some used equipment available.
> 
> Paul
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> 
> Daron-
> 
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> them.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> 
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with tall
> > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath when
> > wet, and it rains plenty.  I can't think of any place with terrain issues
> > where I have seen a simulcast VHF repeater system built out.
> >
> > If you have any references (for or against) a simulcast system like this,
> > please drop me a note.  I suspect a fair amount of multipath problems and
> > not real great audio for the mobile units based on their location, but I
> > wouldn't be able to prove it until the thing got installed.
> >
> > Ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> 
> 
> 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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[mch]

To work well, you will need more than 'a few Hz' stability. Even 1/2 Hz
is very noticable and annoying.

Joe M.

Thomas Oliver wrote:
> 
> You will need the three transmitters to have uhso (high stab oscilators) to
> keep them within a few hz of each other, you will have to delay the audio
> so all three transmitters transmit the audio at the same time. I do not
> know what effect the multipath from buildings will have on the recieved
> signal. I think it is worth a shot.
> 
> tom n8ies
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Daron Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Date: 5/3/2005 8:47:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> >
> >
> >
> > I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
> this
> > is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
> proposal
> > is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> > receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> > control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> > receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> > know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> > looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> > experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> > the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
> suggested
> > in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> > to.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Daron
> >
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
> >
> > Daron,
> >
> > I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> > basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> > Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
> stay
> > away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
> still
> > a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
> other
> > half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> > you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
> would
> > not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> > matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
> dB
> > between them, Motorola did no matching.
> >
> > The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> > overlaps where people will not be using the system.
> >
> > There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> > kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
> >
> > There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> > Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> > manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
> have
> > some used equipment available.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> > transmitters
> >
> >
> > Daron-
> >
> > Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> > If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> > them.
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> > From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 
> > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
> >
> > > Hello Folks,
> > >
> > > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the terrain is covered with
> tall
> > > trees that make wonderful reflectors and contribute tons of multipath
> w

Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Kevin Custer]

Joe,

Did you mean "offset" when you said stability?  I'd agree that 1/2, to a 
few Hertz would be annoying.  In testing here, and as shown in practice, 
simple systems sound better if run at about 10 - 20 Hz offset.  This 
makes the beating more tolerable without being able to be reproduced 
(very well) by the listening speaker.  This is also why it is nice to 
have high pass filtering in the listening receivers.  Radios with PL 
filters do nicely, something like the Com-Spec TS-64's PL filter works 
well.  Unfortunately, many made for ham rigs don't have adequate (if 
any) high-pass filtering even if the radio has PL decode.  Simulcast 
Systems are one area that benefit from Total HPF of a PL filter, where 
Notch Filtering would do no good for the Simulcast beats in the very low 
frequency range; <60 Hz.

Of course, at 10 Hz offset, a few Hz. of instability at each transmitter 
could result in something very annoying; as the two drifting 
transmitters could come within a few Hz. of one another or worse yet, 
zero beat.

I remember one particular instance many years ago where we did testing 
of two transmitters that were close together and run at 67 Hz offset.  
You could decode this PL tone when you heard both transmitter sites, but 
they didn't have HSO's and drifted enough that PL decoding was not reliable.

Kevin Custer

mch wrote:

>To work well, you will need more than 'a few Hz' stability. Even 1/2 Hz
>is very noticable and annoying.
>
>Joe M.
>
>Thomas Oliver wrote:
>  
>
>>You will need the three transmitters to have uhso (high stab oscilators) to
>>keep them within a few hz of each other, you will have to delay the audio
>>so all three transmitters transmit the audio at the same time. I do not
>>know what effect the multipath from buildings will have on the recieved
>>signal. I think it is worth a shot.
>>
>>tom n8ies
>>




 
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] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[Paul Finch]

Joe,

Do you know who manufactured the systems?  I will admit that the simulcast
systems take more upkeep, we would go out and optimize our systems every 6
months to keep it working properly but it was old technology.  Like I said
the new thing is using the sync pulse from GPS (I think).  The GPS time base
technology came out after I got out of paging so I don't understand it
completely.  With the new C-2000 and C-NET controllers the phase and
frequency are set automatically and can be updated for the control point.

We had a lot of analog pagers the first 8 years until we had to start
getting them off because of airtime problems and had little problems with
overlaps.

Equipment, Equipment, Equipment, Equipment!

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of mch
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 11:07 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters


I have two such systems near me - both on UHF. Come to think of it,
there is one on 800, too. All analog voice simulcast (800 one trunked,
but only two sites). It is definitely annoying to hear the heterodynes
of all the TXs. Only one of the UHF systems doesn't do that much. I
suspect it is the exception that is set up extremely well.

Joe M.

Daron Wilson wrote:
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I'm familiar with the simulcast paging,
this
> is not paging.  This is public safety police analog repeaters.  The
proposal
> is to put three in a row down the town, about 3-4 miles apart, voting
> receivers at the two south ones linked back to the 'main' site via UHF
> control links and a voting controller there.  So, they would vote the best
> receiver and simulcast the output of all three repeaters.  Not paging, I
> know how paging works, I have a VHF pager on a simulcast system.  What I'm
> looking for is somone who has seen an installation like this or has
> experience with it.  Personally, I think it will multipath like crazy and
> the recovered audio will be crappy.  But, if it is a good thing as
suggested
> in the recommendation, there must be operating systems out there to listen
> to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Daron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Finch
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:07 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
transmitters
>
> Daron,
>
> I will tell you what I know about analog simulcast systems.  There is
> basically two manufactures of this equipment, Motorola and
> Quintron/Glenayre.  If you want it to be a fairly good sounding system
stay
> away from Motorola equipment.  I worked in paging back when there was
still
> a lot of analog pagers on the air, half our systems were Motorola, the
other
> half Quintron.  We finally gave up on the Motorola systems running analog,
> you could set them one day and they may work OK but the next day they
would
> not.  There is a problem how the built their FSK modulators, they were not
> matched like Quintron's.  The Quintron modulators were matched to .2 of a
dB
> between them, Motorola did no matching.
>
> The trick that will help the most with either system is; try and keep the
> overlaps where people will not be using the system.
>
> There is other problems with Motorola's simulcast system but that is what
> kept them from having a good (as possible) running simulcast system.
>
> There is still a company in Quincy Il. that sells the Quintron (now
> Glenayre) line, their company name is ISC Technologies.  They have the
> manufacturing rights for most of the Quintron/Glenayre line or they may
have
> some used equipment available.
>
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JOHN MACKEY
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast
> transmitters
>
> Daron-
>
> Most all your 150 MHz or 900 MHz paging systems are going to be simulcast.
> If there are any 150 MHz analog paging systems around, try listening to
> them.
>
> -- Original Message --
> Received: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:26:06 AM CDT
> From: "Daron Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters
>
> > Hello Folks,
> >
> > I'm looking over a radio study done by consultants for our small coastal
> > community.  The recommendation includes three simulcast repeaters with
> > voting receivers.  We live on the coast, the

Re: [Repeater-Builder] voting receivers with simulcast transmitters

[mch]

Well, offset results from instability, but yes, offset is a better
choice of wording. You could have perfect stability and still have an
offset.

Yes, the phase would have to be matched, too. 180 degrees off with
perfect stability would not be good. ;->

Joe M.

Kevin Custer wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Did you mean "offset" when you said stability?  I'd agree that 1/2, to a
> few Hertz would be annoying.  In testing here, and as shown in practice,
> simple systems sound better if run at about 10 - 20 Hz offset.  This
> makes the beating more tolerable without being able to be reproduced
> (very well) by the listening speaker.  This is also why it is nice to
> have high pass filtering in the listening receivers.  Radios with PL
> filters do nicely, something like the Com-Spec TS-64's PL filter works
> well.  Unfortunately, many made for ham rigs don't have adequate (if
> any) high-pass filtering even if the radio has PL decode.  Simulcast
> Systems are one area that benefit from Total HPF of a PL filter, where
> Notch Filtering would do no good for the Simulcast beats in the very low
> frequency range; <60 Hz.
> 
> Of course, at 10 Hz offset, a few Hz. of instability at each transmitter
> could result in something very annoying; as the two drifting
> transmitters could come within a few Hz. of one another or worse yet,
> zero beat.
> 
> I remember one particular instance many years ago where we did testing
> of two transmitters that were close together and run at 67 Hz offset.
> You could decode this PL tone when you heard both transmitter sites, but
> they didn't have HSO's and drifted enough that PL decoding was not reliable.
> 
> Kevin Custer
> 
> mch wrote:
> 
> >To work well, you will need more than 'a few Hz' stability. Even 1/2 Hz
> >is very noticable and annoying.
> >
> >Joe M.
> >
> >Thomas Oliver wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You will need the three transmitters to have uhso (high stab oscilators) to
> >>keep them within a few hz of each other, you will have to delay the audio
> >>so all three transmitters transmit the audio at the same time. I do not
> >>know what effect the multipath from buildings will have on the recieved
> >>signal. I think it is worth a shot.
> >>
> >>tom n8ies
> >>
> 
> 
> 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/