Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 440-450 band plan (The normal North vs So Cal :-)

2007-02-25 Thread mch
Based on this argument, why is the commercial 450-460 band not inverted from the commercial 460-470 band? The same logic would apply. If ham repeaters were LIHO, the mixing between two systems would be much worse. For example, you could not have a 443/8.500 MHz repeater co-site with a 458/3.500 MH

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 440-450 band plan (The normal North vs So Cal :-)

2007-02-25 Thread k7pfj
Being the chairman on a repeater cordination councel and having many operational UHF repeaters. One could only wish that the band plans were the same as in the country but everyone has to be a little bit differant. We the hams dictate what we want to do and if we all in the country could decide

Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: 440-450 band plan (The normal North vs So Cal :-)

2007-02-25 Thread Maxwell D Pratt

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 440-450 band plan (The normal North vs So Cal :-)

2007-02-24 Thread Laryn Lohman
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [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. That would be an intriguing device. I'm sure W

[Repeater-Builder] Re: 440-450 band plan (The normal North vs So Cal :-)

2007-02-24 Thread skipp025
Since both the previous mentioned north/south reverse co-channel repeaters are owned by a few "mule heads"... I simply wrote a macro to place the repeater in ctcss for a time after a 30 second time out. Members normally encode tx ctcss (sub tone) so they don't even notice the change. The band