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,
>
> D
ilder@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 hetero
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
MAIL 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
> &g
ent 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] vo
TECTED]>> 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:
>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:
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
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
ilder@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.
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.
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 simulcas
@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
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 con
t 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
ginal 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
> 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
ssage-
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
>
>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
. 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: [Repea
dustrial\)"
<[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, 20
ct: 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
>
o:[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 as
y 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
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 TH
-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
-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
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 you
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
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: [Repeate
30 matches
Mail list logo
