Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote: Maybe we can put a 6m repeater on the channel 2 tower? It's 970 feet tall on top of a 5,000 foot mountain, and the chief engineer is ham-friendly... Mike WA6ILQ Now THAT would be cool! Build up something that runs about 1300-1400W out (properly metered of course), and run remote rx's all over the place with a voter. The antenna should work OK on a higher pair, above 52.5 or 53. That'd be a screamer!
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
At 2/17/2009 07:13, you wrote: Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote: Maybe we can put a 6m repeater on the channel 2 tower? It's 970 feet tall on top of a 5,000 foot mountain, and the chief engineer is ham-friendly... Mike WA6ILQ Now THAT would be cool! Build up something that runs about 1300-1400W out (properly metered of course), and run remote rx's all over the place with a voter. The antenna should work OK on a higher pair, above 52.5 or 53. That'd be a screamer! Don't we already have something like that around here on 53.62? Bob NO6B
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
In general, same as analog TV uses. Any specific station can be looked up the same as analog, too. Joe M. Maire-Radios wrote: ** *Sent:* Sunday, February 15, 2009 11:02 PM *Subject:* freg *we are going to put a repeater on a site near a new DTV site. could anyone here give me the freg the DTV channels use?* ** *thanks John* **
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
Check here: http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/ Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Maire-Radios To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 11:03 PM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 11:02 PM Subject: freg we are going to put a repeater on a site near a new DTV site. could anyone here give me the freg the DTV channels use? thanks John
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Check here: http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/ Supposedly, the benefit to DTV is that it requires a tight filter mask, so out of band interference should be minimized. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR k...@catonic.us But remember, with no superpowers comes no responsibility. --rly
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
At 08:13 PM 02/15/09, you wrote: On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Chuck Kelsey wrote: Check here: http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/ Supposedly, the benefit to DTV is that it requires a tight filter mask, so out of band interference should be minimized. But you still have intermod and mix between carriers, and the DTV signal looks like a solid block on the spectrum analyzer. And it gets worse if you have multiple transmitters. For an example of a worst-case scenario, lets look at the Los Angeles marketplace (i.e. the stations I can see from my location using a good antenna) after the switchover: The three columns are callsign, old channel and new channel KABC 7 7 KCAL 9 9 KTTV 11 11 KCOP 13 13 KSCI 18 18 KTBN 40 23 KVCR 24 26 KCET 28 28 KFTR 46 29 KTLA 5 31 KDOC 56 32 KMEX 34 34 KRCA 62 35 KNBC 4 36 KPXN 30 38 KVEA 52 39 KLCS 58 41 KWHY 22 42 KCBS 2 43 KAZA 54 47 KOCE 40 48 KJLA 57 49 KXLA 44 51 We are going to have a solid block of DTV energy from channel 31-36 (from 572 to 608 MHz), and that does not count the other stations. The only reason that 37 is unoccupied is that it's reserved for radio astronomy. I think that the existing multi-microvolt UHF noise floor is going to get worse, and the mix products are going to go through the roof. But for the first time in my lifetime 6m will get better - channels 2, 4, and 5 are going off the air (until the FCC sells that spectrum). Maybe we can put a 6m repeater on the channel 2 tower? It's 970 feet tall on top of a 5,000 foot mountain, and the chief engineer is ham-friendly... Mike WA6ILQ
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Fw: freg
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote: KABC 7 7 KCAL 9 9 KTTV 11 11 KCOP 13 13 KSCI 18 18 KTBN 40 23 KVCR 24 26 KCET 28 28 KFTR 46 29 KTLA 5 31 KDOC 56 32 KMEX 34 34 KRCA 62 35 KNBC 4 36 KPXN 30 38 KVEA 52 39 KLCS 58 41 KWHY 22 42 KCBS 2 43 KAZA 54 47 KOCE 40 48 KJLA 57 49 KXLA 44 51 We are going to have a solid block of DTV energy from channel 31-36 (from 572 to 608 MHz), and that does not count the other stations. The only reason that 37 is unoccupied is that it's reserved for radio astronomy. I think that the existing multi-microvolt UHF noise floor is going to get worse, and the mix products are going to go through the roof. But think of all the power you'll save with a log-periodic pointed at the mountain connected to a rectifier. But for the first time in my lifetime 6m will get better - channels 2, 4, and 5 are going off the air (until the FCC sells that spectrum). Maybe we can put a 6m repeater on the channel 2 tower? It's 970 feet tall on top of a 5,000 foot mountain, and the chief engineer is ham-friendly... Go for it. See if you can find anyone who'd donate a repeater to that cause. Though I shudder to think how you'd contain six meter duplexer in a NEMA box, let alone mount it on a non-elevator tower. -- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR k...@catonic.us But remember, with no superpowers comes no responsibility. --rly
