[Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Recommendations?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Cort Buffington
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>
>> Tony,
>
>>
>
You nailed it! The dipoles are more versatile, easier to move, easier
to store, and take lightning better when they're on top. At least
that's my experience, I'm sure we all have differing experiences.
On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 PM, crackedofn0de wrote:
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Cort Buffington
wrote:
>
> Tony,
>
> Obviously this is an area where many of us have very strong opinions.
> I tried very hard to love fiberglass radomed colinears. I tried very
> hard, but came back to the exposed dipole as the antenna of choice
> every ti
--- I probably should have done a Google Search. My first choice was
to search for the manufactor of the antenna first. Radio Frequency
Systems.
.
In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Ed Yoho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Randy wrote:
> > --- One person says one thing...Like I've said before; I
Randy wrote:
> --- One person says one thing...Like I've said before; I know nothing
> about Motorola products...
If you know nothing about it, you might want to at least do a simple
Google search for:
super stationmaster 220-3an
If you did, you would see $1046.00 is the correct list price for
--- One person says one thing...Like I've said before; I know nothing
about Motorola products...
.
In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> $3,000 new? Tessco list price is $1,046.00
>
> Joe
>
> Randy wrote:
> > I have a Repeater antenna. Radio Frequency Systems,
> Chuck
> WB2EDV
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Keith, KB7M
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Choice
>
>
> The area served by man
About 275 - 280 feet.
Chuck
- Original Message -
From: "Laryn Lohman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 10:39 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Choice
> Chuck, how far vertically above the portables would that 420-style
Chuck, how far vertically above the portables would that 420-style
antenna have been, considering the hills in the area, etc.
Laryn K8TVZ
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Kelsey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> We had a DB-420 style antenna (actually it was made by Signals, but
it
7 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Choice
The area served by many of our radio sites (we are in Central Utah), sit at
approximately a 12 degree downtilt from the sites. Most of these sites are at
3000-4000' AGL. In some cases, we have opted for lower gain
Simple...
The largest Decibel, Sinclair, Telewave or similar folded dipole
style antenna you can manage to put in the air.
Antennas are probably the only part of the "free lunch rule"...
when applied to radio system coverage.
There are two types... the standard folded dipole "Dec
The area served by many of our radio sites (we are in Central Utah), sit at
approximately a 12 degree downtilt from the sites. Most of these sites are
at 3000-4000' AGL. In some cases, we have opted for lower gain antennas to
cover close in areas better. We designate repeaters as local or wide a
I've not seen "overshoot" from relatively low AGL sites either. Maybe
someone could bring up some examples of this happening, with details?
Laryn K8TVZ
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Agreed. I think what I was trying to say was there were
On Nov 25, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Laryn Lohman wrote:
Hi Larry, yeah... reading back through it I transposed 408 and 420.
> Nate, perhaps you could clarify that paragraph...
>
> Anyway, I was just comparing published vertical beamwidth numbers for
> various bands/manufacturers/gains. Within a degree
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think the comments about where you want to put your signal
> apply as much as some folks would have you believe. Even though the
> 408 pushes more gain to the horizon, it still is rated for something
9ee/r
>From: gervais fillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/11/24 Sat AM 08:06:27 CST
>To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Choice
>
>Hi all
>we have been using here
>Sinclair SRL-210 a4 for many y
Hi all
we have been using here
Sinclair SRL-210 a4 for many years ,they are well built,4 dipoles .
they have been cloned by many telecom compagny as Comprod too
we have tested Fiberglass antenna,after a time the coating of the fibreglass
dissapear and the fiber of the fiberglass broke
due to
Derek,
Going to the higher gain antenna may cause shadowing in some areas
close in to the repeater site if its up real high. I also like the
DB-408 antennas and am using them on my systems. The fiberglass
antennas are OK also, But if they take a lightning hit they are gone.
I had an ASP copy of
The Telewave unit is a tuned circut type too (low pass VHF / high pass UHF),
just much more robust. They are capable of running at a much higher power level
than the Amateur type. They are also weather proof (with proper connector
sealing) if you want to "break out" your feedline at the top of t
meter input.
73 - Jim W5ZIT
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 8:58 AM
Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Question
I don't think any of them have cavities in them. I would suspect that
the
telewa
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> At 4/27/2007 06:34, you wrote:
>
>> How about a diplexer from Comet or Diamond? I looked into this
>
> They work fine provided you use the model WITHOUT the pigtail leads, IOW
> all connectors must be directly on the diplexer. Use only coax with
> silver-plated braid
peater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of crackedofn0de
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:34 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater Antenna Question
>
> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTEC
At 06:34 AM 4/27/2007, you wrote:
>I was thinking about going with a Diamond product (they at least have
>a metal housing) and swapping out any UHF connectors for N types.
At 06:34 AM 4/27/2007, you wrote:
>How about a diplexer from Comet or Diamond? I looked into this
>recently for a similar application and couldn't tell the difference
>between the expensive Telewave crossband couplers and the dime-a-dozen
>amateur diplexers.
<---I'm using a Diamond one on one of
At 4/27/2007 06:34, you wrote:
>How about a diplexer from Comet or Diamond? I looked into this
They work fine provided you use the model WITHOUT the pigtail leads, IOW
all connectors must be directly on the diplexer. Use only coax with
silver-plated braid (RG-214, 223, 142 or 400) or hardline
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 4/26/2007 4:39:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> cross band coupler
>
>
> Thanks that sounds like the ticket. Seems like the way to go
>
>
> JA
How about a dip
In a message dated 4/26/2007 4:39:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
cross band coupler
Thanks that sounds like the ticket. Seems like the way to go
JA
** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
JA,
Since you have good quality duplexers already, i would go with
the "cross band coupler" that Telewave makes. This is a very good
commercial grade product, reasonably priced and is designed for
repeater applications.
I am using similar duplexers, a cross band coupler and a Diamond X-
500HNA
alf Of
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:N8BQN%40sbcglobal.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:06 AM
> > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: repeater antenna suggesti
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:06 AM
> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: repeater antenna suggestions
>
>
>
> OK .. how many of you were immediately thinking of the &q
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: repeater antenna suggestions
OK .. how many of you were immediately thinking of the "barrel of tools up
the
tower" story?
(raises hand)
Nate Duehr wrote:
Clip the pulley to something sturdy up-top, and have your buddy who
thought he was getting out of
OK .. how many of you were immediately thinking of the "barrel of tools up the
tower" story?
(raises hand)
Nate Duehr wrote:
Clip the pulley to something sturdy up-top, and have your buddy who
thought he was getting out of doing the hard part down at the truck --
pull the heavy stuff up to you
- Original Message -
From: "Nate Duehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] RE: repeater antenna suggestions
Steve Hutzley wrote:
> I inherited this repeater system. And I'm still learning as I go.
Ron Wright, Skywarn Coodinator wrote:
> The only problem we have here in Florida is with the salt air. When
> close to the Gulf the salt has eaten the exposed elements after
> about 8 years, but most do not have a problem. We often coat the
> joints for added protection. Ice can be a problem
Steve Hutzley wrote:
> I inherited this repeater system. And I'm still learning as I go. There
> is alot of work to do both inside and outside of the shack. The shack
> and 160' tower is located on private property owned by a ham, so access
> and tower work is not an issue.
> The tower came of
I appriciate everyones suggestions of either a station master or a DB-***
antenna.
I inherited this repeater system. And I'm still learning as I go. There is alot
of work to do both inside and outside of the shack. The shack and 160' tower
is located on private property owned by a ham, so acc
Steve,
One other comment about the DB224 folded dipoles. One can arrange
the 4 dipoles to squeue the pattern. My repeater is on the Gulf of
Mexico and don't need to much west coverage. It can also help
distortion of the pattern from side mounting.
73, ron, n9ee/r
--- In Repeater-Builder@
Steve,
I agree with most of the replies. One can tell a serious repeater
builder by he/she not taking the typical Ham route and look for
rugged antennas and feedline.
I have a DB224 folded dipole here at 1175 ft above ground for about
10 years. Local club just replaced one over 25 years old.
Our club's 1151-2 Station Master was installed professionally in 1990
and is still going strong. No SWR problems at all and excellent wind
rating. I'd highly recommend you spend the extra $150 for a top
notch antenna.
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Sean Fitzharris" <[EMAIL PROTECT
At 6/17/2005 04:57 AM, you wrote:
>The GAMMA MATCH is somewhat narrow banded and if there is any weather
>conditions involved such as ICE, the antenna will detune quite
>quickly
>thus rendering the antenna to be useless till the ice thaws from the
>matching device.
>I would look at something else!!
D]>
To:
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 12:57 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Repeater antenna??
> The GAMMA MATCH is somewhat narrow banded and if there is any weather
> conditions involved such as ICE, the antenna will detune quite
> quickly
> thus rendering the antenna to be useless
The GAMMA MATCH is somewhat narrow banded and if there is any weather
conditions involved such as ICE, the antenna will detune quite
quickly
thus rendering the antenna to be useless till the ice thaws from the
matching device.
I would look at something else!!
73's
Gary - W5GNB
--- In Repeater
42 matches
Mail list logo
