Bill Powell wrote:
> (b) Provisions are incorporated to limit transmission by the station
> to a period of no more than 3 minutes in the event of malfunction in
> the control link."
>
> Nothing about timeout though.
The 3-minute timeout timer is the accepted means of accomplishing the
above. I
skipp025 wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> I don't remember seeing the book/manual yet...
>
> Anything anyone sends me gets scanned into pdf files and is made
> available to anyone for free.
>
> Scom Bob sent me the Repco vhf and uhf manuals and I've already
> sent complete manual scans to Mike (and bac
skipp025 wrote:
> Funny you should mention the tone remote stuff... I just scanned
> the SSC 831y tone remote manual into pdf and it's free to anyone
> by simply contacting me direct (not through the group) for a copy.
BTW-did you get the ST-822 book OK? I expect to get those boxed and out
th
anpap wrote:
> Yes, the controller is in the Tait station.
> You may be right, it could be a Tone Remote board or
> something similar.
>
> Any idea where I can find more infromation about it?
>
> cheers,
>
> Andreas - 5B8AP
It doesn't appear so. The name of the company was Solid-State
Commu
Tim S wrote:
> I've been asked to help spec out the new equipment and I've been stuck in a
> radio time warp for the last 12 years maintaining these Master II's. So I'm
> just looking for some direct experience with the new stuff as far as
> reliability and serviceability as well.
>
>
>
> It's
Paul Finch wrote:
I just completed a crossband repeater for a
> balloon launch built out of Johnson's old HT line of radios. Weighs 10
> ounces without batteries, the controller adds about 2 I think.
>
> Paul
> WB5IDM
587/589's? I remember them! I remember one customer that had a fleet of
Nate Duehr wrote:
> There's a number of decent options out there along those lines. People
> have
> been discussing Cresend with reasonably favorable comments, lately here --
> for one example. I've seen a few analog public safety systems that are
> Kenwood's driving Crescend and/or Vocom (they
N9WYS wrote:
> Tim,
> Now THAT'S a loaded question. hehehehe
> Be prepared - now you'll get responses from Motorola fans,
> GE/Ericsson/MA-Com/Tyco fans, Kenwood, et al. So now it becomes a
> question of: new vs. old equipment; what purpose of usage (commercial
> vs. ham); etc. Ad Nauseum
>
> M
Steven Samuel Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
> I remember once upon a time a couple of hams were running RTTY on 2M using a
> non-ascii code. Back then the take was that as long as both parties kept a
> record of the coding being used and had same readily available for
> inspection in their station record
mch wrote:
> So, it looks like even non-open standards may be used now - INCLUDING
> ENCRYPTION! That used to be specifically prohibited.
>
> Joe M.
"non-open standards" have always been legal. The point is whether you
need a special code or other key to receive it, ie, can the FCC pick up
a r
mch wrote:
> Wrong. If it's not an open protocol, it's not legal in the ham band.
>
> If AOR's is not an open standard, it too would not be legal.
>
> The fact that a unit only works with other like units does not matter.
> After all, D-Star only talks with D-Star, and P25 with P25.
>
> Joe M.
>
anpap wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Does anyone have a manual or information on an "SSC 836AA"
> repeater controller? It also has the following on the PCB:
> T-A2-1761-4 if it makes any difference...
Was this in the Tait station you mentioned? I ask because I think this
is not a repeater controller, b
Bob Dengler wrote:
> At 4/24/2007 05:17 PM, you wrote:
>> I don't know. Like any other radio gear it depends on the brand, model,
>> and how badly the seller wants to sell I guess. Motorola isn't the only
>> maker offering P25 digital audio capable radios (we'll assume CAI/IMBE
>> compatible). I
Steve Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
> Until P25 radios become ham affordable I don't think they will be
> mainstream
> ham radio. I believe there is still a pretty hefty payment to Moto for use
> of the P25 standard, but I may be wrong.
>
> Steve NU5D
Hi, Steve,
I think you're right, but I don't see
Bryon Jeffers K0BSJ wrote:
> Too many acronyms...
>
> Bryon Jeffers KØBSJ
Rgr that!
;cD
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
nn6j wrote:
> Does anyone know about Spectrum Communications? I ordered a receiver
> from them over two months ago and have not received it as yet. I call
> almost every day to find out the status of the shipment and get nobody
> to answer the phone. I leave a message every time I call for Ke
Nate Duehr wrote:
> Not trying to be a spoil-sport, but since Mototrbo isn't a "documented
> public protocol" doesn't it fall under the "encrypted" transmission
> rules, and wouldn't be allowed in the Amateur bands?
No, because any Mototrbo radio can talk to any other Mototrbo radio set
for the
James wrote:
> Bryon Jeffers K0BSJ wrote:
>>
>> Well I will agree with Nate on this one.. The crazy D-Star will only do
>> it's AMBE digital and will not pass analog voice...
>>
>> At least when using a Quantar/Quantro with P25 capability you can set it up
>> with CAI (Clear Air Interface)/P25 IMBE
Bryon Jeffers K0BSJ wrote:
> Well I will agree with Nate on this one.. The crazy D-Star will only do
> it's AMBE digital and will not pass analog voice...
>
> At least when using a Quantar/Quantro with P25 capability you can set it up
> with CAI (Clear Air Interface)/P25 IMBE and it will do eith
skipp025 wrote:
>> "Nate Duehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> how are people testing/working on their D-Star systems?
>> I can't think of a single SM that knows how to do bit-error
>> rates and/or other AMBE vocoder functions.
>
> The fudge answer is... most people just connect the equipment
Steve Bosshard (NU5D) wrote:
> Cheep Service Monitor - Take a receiver and an oscilloscope and calibrate
> the scope to measure transmitter deviation. Then use an inexpensive
> frequency counter. For receiver testing find a surplus generator and
> use it
> with the counter and home made deviatio
Jack Taylor wrote:
> Along with a custom built repeater project, how about a custom built
> basic service monitor? The $1500 and up used/new service monitors are
> a necessity for those in the business but for those who only have a
> need to tune an occasional radio, a less expensive tool would be
Nate Duehr wrote:
> On 4/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Sky Command does not do any control on 2 meters. This aspect of the
>> rules has not changed. What did change is that an auxiliary link can
>> now be used on 2 meters. This makes it possible to link into a 2 meter
>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sky Command does not do any control on 2 meters. This aspect of the
> rules has not changed. What did change is that an auxiliary link can
> now be used on 2 meters. This makes it possible to link into a 2 meter
> repeater in-band without violating the rules. I think t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 4/20/2007 6:17:20 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL
> PROTECTED]
> writes:
>
> Beware!!! It is a violation of FCC rules to install and operate a BDA
> without the permission of the licensee, and this includes cellular!
> Many illegally and i
William Delbert Ellis wrote:
> Howdy, New to this group today.
> I am the control operator for two of our ham club repeaters.
> A 2m Motorola and 70cm Motorola.
> We had them next to each other hard wired linked with antennas on a
> very tall commercial
> tower in Austin. The UHF antenna was turne
Eric Lemmon wrote:
> I have installed and/or specified several repeater systems at my work, which
> has many buildings that are Butler-type, completely metal with very few
> perimeter windows. A six-element Yagi antenna is on the roof, pointing to
> one of several cell sites. A BDA (Bi-Direction
Paul M Schmitter wrote:
> Ooops. Re-read the rules. It's 15 watts for a fixed
> station as long as it's not within 50 miles of Canada.
>
>
> --- "Jim B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Not to mention that even with a GMRS license, power
>>
rtoplus wrote:
> My only response on this topic since Kevin doesn't allow rules
> discussions.
>
> GMRS is allowed up to 50 watts TPO unless you are operating a small
> base station, then the 15 watt rule comes into play. A small base
> station operates at 5ppm minimum frequency tolerance an
Bob & Linda Smith wrote:
> Dear Chuck and everyone else who gave valuable suggestions,
>
> It looks like I, and the club, need to rethink this question. I am very
> impressed with some of the new equipment out there and was thinking our
> radio is a bit outdated. Also, I was thinking of the sp
Paul M Schmitter wrote:
> Running it on GMRS. The way I read the rules, a GMRS
> repeater can be 50 watts. The frequency of a FRS radio
> can be adjusted slightly to fall into the GMRS
> frequecies and since it's only for receive there is no
> type acceptance issue.
Ok-but I don't know how you did
KD5SFA wrote:
> 'retuned as receiver'..may be that it is tuned elsewhere
> and it was just a radio laying around to be used as a
> inexpensive receiver...by no means does it imply it is
> being used on FRS frequencies.
>
> Jon
Yes it does. There are no mods for FRS radios to put them anywhere oth
Jay Urish wrote:
> I think that was the thinking behind the DARC decision to replace the
> micor.. You cant go to the corner store and buy parts...
> I agree.. They are bullet proof as hell...
Heh-you can't go to the corner store and buy parts for ANYTHING anymore...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Jay Urish wrote:
> Jim..
> That is an ASSumption.
>
> How do you know that that radio won't drop into the ham band?
Because it's an FRS radio-channels are hard-coded into the controller.
They are ALL like that.
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Jay Urish wrote:
> playing devils advocate--
> I don't recall seeing the frequencies that this repeater is running.
>
> How do you know what they are?
>> Paul M Schmitter wrote:
>> > Radio Shack FRS Cat # 21-1811 retuned as receiver(not
>> > very selective)
That tells me.
--
Jim Barbour
WD8C
Paul M Schmitter wrote:
> I'm actually working on improving my poor man's
> repeater right now.
> Basically here's what I've been using during tests:
> Vertex FTL-7011 as transmitter
> Advanced research preamp
> Radio Shack FRS Cat # 21-1811 retuned as receiver(not
> very selective)
You DO know t
Bill Hudson wrote:
>
>
> Let me help you a little with this 38 vs. 38A thing.
> If you were talking to someone with a 38 on the repeater, and the other
> station answers (keys up) during the hang delay, the repeater passes the
> audio from the responding station, but drops out after the normal
>> Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Looks like I better program
>> in some way to keep the weather receiver from hanging my repeater TOT
>> for hours and hours...
BTW-I determined that the Midland WX radio I have is a WR-300. To
rehash, it does NOT support the 'turn-off code' in SAME, it
skipp025 wrote:
> Re: Poor Mans Repeater Project anyone?
>
> Would some of you group members be interested in a "Poor Mans
> Repeater Project" as described below?
Back in the 70's I breadboarded a VOX circuit that used a diode voltage
doubler driving a big cap and a NPN transistor keying a sm
I like how so many people did such a great job of exacerbating the
problem exponentially by continuing to post instead of shutting up until
the problem was fixed.
Almost as bad as the people who hear the repeater go into battery
backup, and spend an hour or two talking about it instead of shutt
> That would be a Pulsar II. The first Pulsar goes back to the late 60's,
> and was made out of componentry from...I think a Mocom-30 or 35. The one
> you're thinking of was built from a Mocom-70, and the early version of
> that, plus the first one were not synthesized, but "crystal-plex"-two or
Doug wrote:
> I have just about completed setting up the MSR2000 as per the
> article by K4HAL and WA6ILQ
> and it appears to work just great. I have to interface it to the 7k
> and Doug Hall interface and
> it will be ready to go. All the cabling is done. The only option
> cards left in a
achowalogen457 wrote:
> Gretings,
>
> I may be showing my inexperience, but has anyone ever used the Midland
> 70-0375c radios to build a repeater. I seem to find this model radio
> fairly common and it can be tuned to the 6m band. I'm just not sure
> that it would be a good choice for a repe
Mike Morris wrote:
> Would either of you two would like to contribute the info to the
> Standard page at www.repeater-builder.com ???
What would you want, Mike? About all I have is the basic op's, pretty
much available anywhere I would think.
And not very repeater-related...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jim, you may be my last hope. I have an HW-24 talkie and need to change
> the encode/decode tone frequency. Most functions are pretty straight
> forward, but for the life of me I can't remember how to set the tone
> frequency.
>
> If you could enlighten me, I would su
skipp025 wrote:
> Re: 2007 IWCE Las Vegas
>
> So the big thing/buzz at the IWCE Las Vegas Convention is narrow
> bandwidth digital uhf radios.
>
> Both Motorola and Icom are trying to drive narrow bandwidth hype...
> both having working 6KHz radios demos.
>
> Nice idea until you pick up a p
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "crackedofn0de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> I just interfaced one of these to an Arcom RC210 controller for
>> automatic announcement and broadcast of NOAA warnings in my county.
> If
>> you're interested, see below URL for a photo with the hookup p
nj902 wrote:
> The Pulsar mobile phone is not a 1969 product, they were produced from
> the late 1970's through the 1980's.
>
That would be a Pulsar II. The first Pulsar goes back to the late 60's,
and was made out of componentry from...I think a Mocom-30 or 35. The one
you're thinking of was
Gotta be better then using one of those 'mini' or 'micro' earphone plug
style connectors!
You know where the center pin shorts to the outer contact briefly while
your inserting/removing?
ZAP!
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
Robin Midgett wrote:
> Personally I don't like the RCA connector for power use.
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 08:25 AM 3/23/2007, you wrote:
>
>> Going back into history... I'm told the original RCA style connector
>> is one of the better early rf connectors. Heathkit used to drive hams
>> crazy with it... but it is/was the better animal.
>
> <---Everyone from Motorola to GE to Marco
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Question for the gurus: I am tuning up and donating an E.F. Johnson
> CR1100 repeater to the local Ham Club. They have asked me to install
> a talking, chirping, beeping type repeater controller (which they
> have offered to buy). I work with basic "repeater, one each" ty
Gareth Bennett wrote:
> Interestingly we replaced the -750 with a Vertex VXR-9000 repeater
> and commissioning tests revealed about 3 dB better sensitivity than
> the 750's for 12dB Sinad.
Hmmm-you might check effective sensitivity with the antenna connected,
etc, and see what you get.
---
Jim Ba
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> BTW, these things need not triple or even double the price of a new radio,
> as some have suggested. An extra pot for CTCSS deviation, decent CTCSS
> decoders, higher IP3 front-end amps & mixer & more front-end filtering
> would probably add $50-$100 to the cost of th
Milt wrote:
> Remembering of course that a PURC station was designed for PAGING service...
> If you have ever had to set levels in a paging or fire dispatch system that
> used the very low end tones just above the PL range you know real fast why
> the "flat audio board" was created.
>
> Milt
>
James wrote:
> Yes, thank you Jim .. I did say channel steps not spacing. 2.5 Khz channel
> step
> tends to go with 12.5 KHz channel spacing. 7.5 Khz is a form of ultra narrow
> that I have yet to use for anything.
>
> James
If you do anything in the commercial spectrum from about 150 to 175
> Oh, and one last comment, most every Amateur Radio potable is unable
> to do split Tone PL's. One Tone PL for TX and another Tone PL for RX.
> I don't know why that is so. It would just take a little extra code
> writing, but what do we expect, It's Amateur Radio Grade Equipment.
>
>
> Pa
mch wrote:
> OK. Let me approach this from another angle. What is the deviation on
> your system that is not the standard 5.0 kHz or so (running 16K0F3E)?
>
> Joe M.
>
Deviation has nothing to do with it. He was talking about the minimum
channel step resolution, which is a function of the synth
Fred Flowers wrote:
> Eric,
> I understand all that. Any of them will have the shelf, the TX & RX, &
> system module. Beggars can't be choosers. I can get started with about
> anything.
> Fred
They're not all the same. There have been several different tx and rx
synth modules especially, and t
'nj902' wrote:
Real world transmitters always have limiters. Those DO change
flatness.
>>
>> That keeps throwing me. I hear 'limiter' and I go towards the
>> receiver.
>
>
> Jeff DePolo wrote:
> Actually, it wasn't me that said "Real world transmitters always have
> limiters." I
Jeff DePolo wrote:
>> Real world transmitters always have limiters. Those DO change
>> flatness.
That keeps throwing me. I hear 'limiter' and I go towards the receiver.
A limiter is a low IF amplifier that is biased to go into saturation
with very little input. This clips off amplitude peaks
mch wrote:
> 2.5 kHz channel spacing? Where is that used? It's not in the commercial
> USA market. Or did you mean 7.5 kHz?
>
> Joe M.
FWIW-He said channel steps, not spacing.
>> James wrote:
It even does 2.5 KHz channel steps to
>> comply with modern narrow band channel planning
--
Jim B
skipp025 wrote:
>> mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In the real world, if someone's radio sounds crappy, it needs
>> fixed by someone or the radio will get a (well deserved) reputation
>> as a POS and people need to know to not buy that model.
>
> But an over deviated new radio doesn't sound c
Eric Lemmon wrote:
> Nate,
>
> Several years ago, I chastised ARRL Labs for failing to report the basic
> 2-way radio performance parameters of 12dB SINAD sensitivity, voice
> deviation limit, CTCSS deviation limit, and center frequency accuracy. I
> did not get a satisfactory answer, but I suspe
Nate Duehr wrote:
> Sure would be nice to see ARRL labs do a shootout of repeater
> controllers with tests like this one... they spend days and days (and
> page after page) testing out $10,000 HF rigs...
And people wonder why I don't join...
If I could afford to blow $10K on an HF pos rig, I wou
Nate Duehr wrote:
> A...
>
> We haven't had a good "What kind of audio is it REALLY" mini-debate on
> the list in quite a while... good to see it again... heh. I agree
> with Bob that people keep mixing the term "flat" with "discriminator"
> and that's just downright confusing to new folks.
> Most times when we hear or read about the term flat audio... our
> attention is normally directed toward the demodulated audio sections
> of the repeater hardware. Or at least our attention should normally
> be directed at the demodulated audio stages.
>
> When you look at the global repeate
skipp025 wrote:
> which seems rather odd because most of the 220-220 Licenses I've
> seen are narrow band acsb type emissions. But I can't see a
> reason why nb fm wouldn't work or be allowed. Certainly be more
> practical in the commercial radio world than the acsb format.
>
> cheers,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This radio is doing LTR Trunking FM Right now .
>
> Steve. KB3FSR
> ** AOL now offers free
> email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
> http://www.aol.com.
>
Hmmm-I don't think that radio's from around these
Captainlance wrote:
> Anyone have any luck using a 450-470 Micor receiver below 440? I am
> considering using them as link receivers. Or, anyone use a 403-420
> model in 430-440 use? Lance N2HBA
>
Yes-I took one down to 438-something years ago, just to try it. (I just
retuned an existing element
Richard wrote:
> My opinion is that a repeater should be used a lot, that way it's known to
> be reliable in case of emergency use. Plus, as you say, there'll be people
> listening.
hmph-the more a repeater is used, the less likely I am to want to listen
to it...
Who wants a radio tied up all da
Kris Kirby wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Eric Lemmon wrote:
>> talkative. Most of these blabbermouths consider setting the TOT on
>> their own radios as "too restrictive."
>>
>> Every user radio in my commercial fleet has the TOT set for 30 seconds. In
>> my mind, that's more than enough time to
Stephen Reynolds wrote:
> On the North Fulton ARS Repeater (145.47) in North Atlanta we have
> Fred Flintstone and the End of the Work Day Whistle set for 5PM.
> Problem is the clock on the repeater is 10 minutes early so we all
> leave work early.
> Steve W4CNG
And the problem is?
Daniel M LePage wrote:
> I have a Micor repeater that I can not get the CTCSS tone through the
> receiver. I can get a good 1Khz tone but when I try and put a CTCSS
> tone through the receiver it is broken up.
> I did not convert this Micor and it will operate as a repeater with out
> a CTCSS t
skipp025 wrote:
> Well... to sell radios to Amateurs most mfgrs promise the moon and try
> to build it into the radio. Most hams use radios in locations where
> the excessive gain is desired (ie not on a mountain top). So a user
> outside most metro - busy areas really loves the red hot receiver
Tim and Janet wrote:
> Repeater BuilderWhat is the standard spacing for a VHF antenna side
> mounted on rohn 25 tower? I found a page on repeater builder that
> showed 1/4-1/2 wavelength with a null behind the tower. I don't want
> to mount it any further than 4' from the tower but of course I wo
Bob M. wrote:
> Thank you for writing to Yahoo! Groups.
>
> I have read your email and understand that you are
> unable to received group messages since Feb. 28. I
> appreciate you contacting us and I'll be glad to
> assist you on this matter.
>
> As you've noticed, we were experiencing som
George Henry wrote:
> I think Yahoo has been having hiccups the last couple of days... I
> see quite a few messages on the Yahoogroups site that I never got in
> my email, and other messages have been arriving out of order (replies
> before the originals...)
>
> Very weird.
>
>
> George
>
Rig
Ken Arck wrote:
> At 07:23 PM 3/1/2007, you wrote:
>> Were about to implement it on a site in Portland and from preliminary
>> testes it looks good.
>
> <---Has a lot of balls, eh?
>
> Ken
Oh, dear...
--
Jim Barbour
WD8CHL
James wrote:
> Ok, one more thought here. Does anyone know if MOTOTRBO uses the
> IS-54/IS-136
> standard for TDMA? If so, I have found publicly available information on
> this
> standard which means that it could be put to use in the amateur bands.
>
> James
>
As far as I can tell, it's a
Mike Mullarkey wrote:
> They will work but the Motorola SM-50 radio works much better and you don't
> have to modify the VCO.
What Kenwood radios do you need to modify the VCO on to get them to work
on the ham bands? Every Kenwood commercial rig I've played with since
the 705/805 series has gone
skipp025 wrote:
> Re: GM300 Repeater with Harris Duplexer
>
> Depends on which Harris Mobile Duplexer you're using. One version
> is almost plug and play into the ham bands while another is not
> such a great performer when used below say... 452MHz.
>
> Are you using the Black Celwave Flat-pa
skipp025 wrote:
> So would/should we actually call the below problem desense, blocking
> or capture of the repeater receiver?
> s.
>
>> Years ago an upside down repeater in New Mexico on the intertie using
>> PL access would regularly be de-sensed by one in Texas 300 miles away
>> in the spri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You laugh, but with the use of Time Division Multiplex it may be
> possible to transmit and receive on the same frequency in different
> time slots. It may not be that far fetched.
>
> 73, Joe, k1ike
Technically, it's not full duplex when you do that. You transmit a
p
Bob Dengler wrote:
> At 2/23/2007 12:50 PM, you wrote:
>> With respect to using the GE MII mobile frame for repeater applications:
>>
>>> 1. Can you say categorically that there is sufficient TX/RX shielding
>> to prevent any desense at any power level the conversion is capable of
>> operating?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> For Scott:
>
> With respect to using the GE MII mobile frame for repeater applications:
>
> 1. Can you say categorically that there is sufficient TX/RX shielding to
> prevent any desense at any power level the conversion is capable of
> operating?
At UHF-c
Phil wrote:
> might take a look at a Quantar if you already have one, or even a
> Mastr III can be upgraded (if not already)
Not all of either can be upgraded-only the newer ones. Older Quantars
and MIII's don't have the hardware to accomodate it.
BTW-Kenwood, Icom, Vertex, and Relm are resellin
Tony L. wrote:
> What manufacturers currently have P25 capable repeaters on the market?
Motorola, M/A-Com, EADS, Daniels, EFJ, Tait, maybe Racal. Several others
are reselling Daniels, maybe other brands.
Also, Raytheon has a P25CC controller that is supposed to add P25 to an
existing base, like
Ken Harrison wrote:
> Thanks for the recommendation, Don. Though I'm sure a MastrII would
> be a great conversion for 220, we (in the group sense) want to try to
> save some of our money to get a remote base setup going on our
> repeater, too. Our small savings would be wiped out to replace the
In a message dated 2/22/2007 11:40:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> The number of active ham repeaters in my area is way, way down in
> comparison to levels of 10 years ago. It isn't uncommon to monitor a
> repeater frequency and hear no traffic for weeks. Some club
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I see the same thing even in the big cities - Los Angeles, San
> Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Vancouver B.C., etc. As you tune across
> 2-Meters, 220 and 440 MHz, most Repeaters are quiet, most of the
> time. You can often scan the entire band(s) from a clear location and
W8MIA wrote:
> There is one SMALL problem with your Hypothesis. RF is transmitted by
> Electrons. Light is transmitted by Photons. Science has a rather good
> handle on Electrons but Photons are still not fully understood!!!
>
> Apples & Oranges!!
>
> August
> W8MIA
Details, details...
--
Jim
Gary wrote:
> I suggest checking with your local frequency coordination group(s) for
> the bands. Linking in the 440Mhz band is generally not acceptible
> however the 420-430Mhz portion of the amateur 70cm band is used for
> linking in some regions.
> Gary
Unless you live near the CDN border, wher
Jeff DePolo wrote:
>> Oh, and 'mag mounts' didn't really exist much then...you
>> either mounted
>> the antenna in a hole, or you didn't have an antenna.
>
> Ah, the gold old days, when men armed with a drill and Greenlee punch
> thought nothing of putting holes in their roofs, fearing not the W
Jeff DePolo wrote:
> There are a lot of unknown variables here, including, but not limited to the
> size of the ground plane the antennas were mounted on, their heights above
> the ground plane, the method of coupling to the ground plane (direct, mag
> mount, etc.), matching networks' efficiencies
Gary Schafer wrote:
>> Measured on their range-they used to be based in Cleveland, and my
>> father was one of the designers.
>> (anybody here remember the PRO-27JR 27Mhz antenna? Or the original 4BTV?)
>> --
>> Jim Barbour
>> WD8CHL
>>
>
> With all due respect to your father Jim, I think that 4
Paul Holm wrote:
> Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but think of our
> last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to replace the
> VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224 because the
> Diamond "has 8.3 dB gain".
And even worse
Mike Morris WA6ILQ wrote:
> And as of today we have 3402 members
>
> Mike WA6ILQ
Wow...pretty impressive!
You guys all deserve a lot of congrats for putting this together and
making it the resource it is!
I remember Kevin making comments about how the list just passed 500,
800, then 1000...my
Don wrote:
> I have a Friend who always Times out my Repeater and others , Not
> that this is a Bad thing, The Repeaters are being used, He has
> jokingly wondered why No one or I has sent Him a Time out Award. I
> looked on line and found nothing can anyone please let me know of one.
> I could
>> Right-slightly OT, for a mobile antenna, you will find that you can
>> squeak out a bit more gain by using a .64-wavelength whip instead of a
>> pure 5/8-wave (.625)
>> In the late 60's/early 70's, the NewTronics BBL series VHF gain antennas
>> were rated at an honest 4dB gain-and did it. The A/
Laryn Lohman wrote:
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Barry C'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I presume its some sort of stacked arrangment , in chich case it
> will make
>> that gain at resonance ,
>>
>
> Yes, the ASPB602 is four stacked dipoles, just like the DB224. My
> point aga
1 - 100 of 695 matches
Mail list logo
