[Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT
I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD Onhttp://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Quantar and PL
Some of the Yaesu dual-band mobiles have no filtering in the audio chain. They tout the fact that the audio is very hi-fi sounding. In fact, almost anything from 50 Hz to 10 kHz will make it through the MIC audio circuit. After that, they mix in the CTCSS. I have one user on my repeater that drives GM vehicles, and for some reason, the tire noise at certain speeds comes through the microphone and beats with the CTCSS tone. He drops out like crazy and it frustrates us all. Several other Yaesu users got rid of their radios because they wouldn't work with Motorola repeater PL decoders. One cure was to turn deviation way up so the CTCSS came out at over 1 kHz deviation, but then the user had to remember to speak softer because the radio waw now capable of over 7 kHz deviation. Not the right way to go. Many radios have bandpass or highpass filters in the MIC audio stages so the low frequency audio doesn't interfere with the CTCSS or DCS signals, but not Yaesu. So I'm not surprised that this feature is present in a lot of their products. Strangely, the Yaesu quad-band mobile radio doesn't suffer from this problem. I've had this problem using MSF5000 and MaxTrac receivers. I know both units are capable of decoding PL down to less than 100 Hz of deviation, and everything works fine with a Yaesu if you can key it up but not pass any MIC audio through the transmitter. Of course, while that's a fix, it's not what the users want. It'll be hard to convince all those people that their radios are the cause of the trouble, not the repeater. Bob M. == --- Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Al, Something doesn't sound right here... most Yaesu portables- including my own VX7- have far too much tone deviation as delivered. This is common with many Amateur-grade radios, and Alinco is the worst. The CTCSS deviation is usually not adjustable in the small portables, so the manufacturers apparently think that more is always better. I don't have experience with the VX6, but I would be surprised if the CTCSS deviation wasn't close to 900 Hz. Perhaps these users modified all of the radios to pad down the tone deviation, but I think that 500 Hz is ideal. I will check my Quantar service manuals at work for confirmation, but I suspect that the tone sensitivity is fixed. I wonder if there is another factor at work here, such as the purity of tone coming from the VX6 radios, and the tone accuracy. Does the Quantar work with other radio brands/models? Maybe it doesn't like raspy tones. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:24 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Quantar and PL We recently replaced an aging UHF machine with a Quantar for a local ham repeater. Now it seems that some users are not able to key up the system. Turns out their radios (all VX6's) have fairly low tone deviation. Tests on the Quantar show that it needs at least 300 htz to key it. This seems reasonable to me but the users all say Well, my radio used to work with the old repeater. So fix the new one. Is there a way to increase the sensitivity to PL tones in a UHF Quantar? Is this desirable? Al, K9SI Yahoo! Groups Links (Yahoo! ID required) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396545433
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
Eric, Thanks for your quick response. It's true that most of the ham grade portables have far too much tone deviation as delivered. The issue here is only with VX6's so far. Of the VX6's actually measured one was only 200 Hz deviation and all seemed low, that is, none were up to 500 Hz. Have not measured tone accuracy or distortion. I doubt if these radios have been modified as the owners aren't particularly technically inclined. One is blind. So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? My radio worked before you guys messed with the repeater. Now it doesn't. So fix the repeater. is the attitude. I would hate to compromise an otherwise great repeater. Al, K9SI Re: Quantar and PL Posted by: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wb6fly Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:53 pm ((PDT)) Al, Something doesn't sound right here... most Yaesu portables- including my own VX7- have far too much tone deviation as delivered. This is common with many Amateur-grade radios, and Alinco is the worst. The CTCSS deviation is usually not adjustable in the small portables, so the manufacturers apparently think that more is always better. I don't have experience with the VX6, but I would be surprised if the CTCSS deviation wasn't close to 900 Hz. Perhaps these users modified all of the radios to pad down the tone deviation, but I think that 500 Hz is ideal. I will check my Quantar service manuals at work for confirmation, but I suspect that the tone sensitivity is fixed. I wonder if there is another factor at work here, such as the purity of tone coming from the VX6 radios, and the tone accuracy. Does the Quantar work with other radio brands/models? Maybe it doesn't like raspy tones. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:24 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Quantar and PL We recently replaced an aging UHF machine with a Quantar for a local ham repeater. Now it seems that some users are not able to key up the system. Turns out their radios (all VX6's) have fairly low tone deviation. Tests on the Quantar show that it needs at least 300 htz to key it. This seems reasonable to me but the users all say Well, my radio used to work with the old repeater. So fix the new one. Is there a way to increase the sensitivity to PL tones in a UHF Quantar? Is this desirable? Al, K9SI
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
Al, As far as I know the Quantar PL sensitivity is fixed. Do verify the programming of the repeater, but then verify the frequency and deviation of the user radios and fix the user radios; that's where the problem lies. Milt N3LTQ - Original Message - From: Al Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:09 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL Eric, Thanks for your quick response. It's true that most of the ham grade portables have far too much tone deviation as delivered. The issue here is only with VX6's so far. Of the VX6's actually measured one was only 200 Hz deviation and all seemed low, that is, none were up to 500 Hz. Have not measured tone accuracy or distortion. I doubt if these radios have been modified as the owners aren't particularly technically inclined. One is blind. So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? My radio worked before you guys messed with the repeater. Now it doesn't. So fix the repeater. is the attitude. I would hate to compromise an otherwise great repeater. Al, K9SI Re: Quantar and PL Posted by: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wb6fly Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:53 pm ((PDT)) Al, Something doesn't sound right here... most Yaesu portables- including my own VX7- have far too much tone deviation as delivered. This is common with many Amateur-grade radios, and Alinco is the worst. The CTCSS deviation is usually not adjustable in the small portables, so the manufacturers apparently think that more is always better. I don't have experience with the VX6, but I would be surprised if the CTCSS deviation wasn't close to 900 Hz. Perhaps these users modified all of the radios to pad down the tone deviation, but I think that 500 Hz is ideal. I will check my Quantar service manuals at work for confirmation, but I suspect that the tone sensitivity is fixed. I wonder if there is another factor at work here, such as the purity of tone coming from the VX6 radios, and the tone accuracy. Does the Quantar work with other radio brands/models? Maybe it doesn't like raspy tones. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:24 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Quantar and PL We recently replaced an aging UHF machine with a Quantar for a local ham repeater. Now it seems that some users are not able to key up the system. Turns out their radios (all VX6's) have fairly low tone deviation. Tests on the Quantar show that it needs at least 300 htz to key it. This seems reasonable to me but the users all say Well, my radio used to work with the old repeater. So fix the new one. Is there a way to increase the sensitivity to PL tones in a UHF Quantar? Is this desirable? Al, K9SI Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is I tried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hear this guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD Onhttp://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Reminds me of 'W6JJ4'. On 9/26/07, n9wys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is I tried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hear this guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD Onhttp://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG Yahoo! Groups Links
[Repeater-Builder] Motorola CDR500 link radio
Does anyone know if it is possible to connect a link radio directly to a CDR500 or will an external controller be needed. Thanks, Bill - W4RVN
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
Thanks for the great info as soon as we get the service monitor back we are going to try these things. I have already seperated the 2 sides and have seen much improvement so I think that this is really my problem. I do have a question about duplexers in general. I am sure that this is a dumb question but What is the purpose of notching out the receive frequency on the transmit side? Since I have 6 cans couldn't I move one of the cans from the transmit side to the receive side to give me 4 on the receive and 2 on the transmit? Thanks, Vern On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:46:12 -0600 Nate Duehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had them tuned because I had just bought them and didn't really trust that they were right. They were very far out so it's good that I got them tuned. I was having the same problem as now though very poor receive. Right now I have a radio on there for receive that was getting about 30 miles of coverage as an Echolink link node with home made antenna and now hooked up to the repeater using a big Tram Dualband antenna through the duplexer I am lucky if I am getting 3 miles. So I don't think the repeater's built in receiver is the problem which leads me to either desense or a bad antenna cable. Transmit is getting out very well and the swr is almost 1 to 1 so I think the cable is OK. I am running LMR 400 up the tower 95% of the way. I just have a short coax jumper that goes into the antenna. I am going to try to split them and see what I get. Thanks, Vern KI4ONW Before you do that. Have someone transmit a weak signal (or use an iso-T and transmit it in yourself, as someone else mentioned) into the repeater while you're at the site, listening to the receiver while the transmitter is on. Turn the transmitter off. If their signal gets better, you're fighting desense. It's that simple to find out. To find out exactly how bad it is, feeding a weak signal into the receiver with an iso-T and measuring the audio coming from the repeater receiver with a SINAD meter is the next level of knowing what's going on. (I've seen people do this by ear with practice and get close, but you need to see it on a meter first or have someone demonstrate to even try it. Hey... sometimes when you're starting out you don't have the gear, we understand...) Feed a weak signal (usually 12 dB SINAD for these tests, as a standard starting point) and then turn the transmitter on. The weak signal will disappear or be noisier if you have a desense problem, as mentione above. Increase the signal generator to the point where the weak signal is the same as before (usually 12 dB SINAD is used when you have a meter). The difference between where the signal generator was level-wise when you started, and where you end up, is how MUCH desense you're fighting, and how much more isolation you need in the overall system to make it work. Plus if gather numbers like this, folks here can tell you ballpark numbers to expect from your particular radio and setup. Also be forewarned, some antennas simply don't duplex well... it's difficult to explain, but you'll find antennas that throw all sorts of crap around when used in duplex operation, that are fine for simplex. I know nothing about the Tram antennas, but dual-band antennas for repeater operation, sets off warning bells for me. Use the best cables for interconnect you can possibly buy! Having nice double-shielded stuff built onto the duplexer by the manufacturer, only to run lossy/leaky crud from the repeater to the duplexer, is just asking for trouble. If you used your LMR 400 for that, good... it'll work in most cases, just fine. Many people do have problems with LMR 400 in duplexed service, other's don't. There's a long thread about it around here somewhere in the archives... If you can afford/get hardline - always do it. 1/2 will work fine at VHF unless you have an enormous run, and you might want 7/8 for UHF, depending on the length of your run. Keep an ear to the ground and scrounge hardline any which way you can. Hardline connectors too. They're not cheap. You can test your inside setup by replacing the antenna with a GOOD dummy load rated for the power you're pushing, and that is a solid 50 ohm load. (Don't use a cheap one for this. Find something big and stable. I found a 500W Bird load at a hamfest once for $12, best purchase that year.) See if the system desenses itself when not hooked to the outside antenna. If it does, you have something wrong right there in the repeater itself. Stop and figure that out. I could go on and on, but will stop and give the admonishment my elmers gave me... MEASURE IT... don't guess. Beg, borrow or steal test gear and get someone to show you how to use it. You can stumble into correct
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT
Don You may also be surprised that Florida is issuing license plates with ham calls on them to people who are not hams. Several people have seen these plates with their ham calls on them. Life is interesting. 73 de Tom Manning, AF4UG - Original Message - From: Don To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Don, WD prefixes and WD#xxx formats are not reserved for experimental. It is part of the former novice block of calls issued in the mid 70's. Ron WD4RBJ To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:31:01 -0500Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don,This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is Itried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that wasalso denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended upwith W9WIL.)Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hearthis guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. HeheheheModerator note: Sorry for the OT thread...Mark - N9WYS-Original Message-From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of DonSent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOTI found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on alarge Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Justlook up the Call to find more info about the person to see If Wemight have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Calland the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Sitehttp://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, Idoubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it,But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We getolder, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old DaysWe just took people at their word , But with the Internet I findthings are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG _ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=createwx_url=/friends.aspxmkt=en-us
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Looking for Midland Manual
Hello back, Do you know about the Yahoo Midland Group? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MidlandLMR/ You might check the files section of the Midland Group for some Service Manual information. the 342 is similar to the 340 and 341 so you might be able to use some basic information from those manuals. cheers, skipp Naber, Benjamin L. SPC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings Does anyone have a manual for a Midland 70-342 BXL or AXL(?) mobile radios? ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ Moderator Central Get answers to http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12jflp78f/M=493064.10729651.1142.8674578/D=groups/S=1705063108:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1190690584/A=4699084/R=0/SIG=115gt68pf/*http://moderators.groups.yahoo.com/ your questions about running Y! Groups. .
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Well, I guess there ARE still some old WD calls around... but don't try to get that one now. Oh well. I stand corrected. The reason I know this though, is from my attempts to obtain a vanity callsign for Will County EMA's (WCEMA) ham club - we looked at WC9EMA and others. That's when I found out about the experimental callsign block. That being said, the callsign Don wrote about IS an experimental callsign - I looked it up myself on the FCC's database. Mark - N9WYS _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Ron _ Don, WD prefixes and WD#xxx formats are not reserved for experimental. It is part of the former novice block of calls issued in the mid 70's. Ron WD4RBJ _ To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:31:01 -0500 Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is I tried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hear this guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@ mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz. http://www.qrz.com/ com/ and http://hamcall. http://hamcall.net/call net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss. http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG _ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=createwx_url=/friends.aspx mkt=en-us
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Not all WD are experimental calls. My XYL had WD5DXK call as a General until she let it expire in Oct. 2006. She is a quadriplegic with MS and felt that there was no reason to keep her license as she has not been on the air for a long time. Age and illness gets to all of us eventually. Fred W5VAY Extra class - Original Message - From: Ron _ To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:32 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, WD prefixes and WD#xxx formats are not reserved for experimental. It is part of the former novice block of calls issued in the mid 70's. Ron WD4RBJ To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:31:01 -0500 Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is I tried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hear this guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think .! 73 De Don KA9QJG -- Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
Drop in a Com Spec Board in the repeater and solve your problem. Chuck WB2EDV - Original Message - From: Al Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:09 AM Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL Eric, Thanks for your quick response. It's true that most of the ham grade portables have far too much tone deviation as delivered. The issue here is only with VX6's so far. Of the VX6's actually measured one was only 200 Hz deviation and all seemed low, that is, none were up to 500 Hz. Have not measured tone accuracy or distortion. I doubt if these radios have been modified as the owners aren't particularly technically inclined. One is blind. So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? My radio worked before you guys messed with the repeater. Now it doesn't. So fix the repeater. is the attitude. I would hate to compromise an otherwise great repeater. Al, K9SI Re: Quantar and PL Posted by: Eric Lemmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wb6fly Date: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:53 pm ((PDT)) Al, Something doesn't sound right here... most Yaesu portables- including my own VX7- have far too much tone deviation as delivered. This is common with many Amateur-grade radios, and Alinco is the worst. The CTCSS deviation is usually not adjustable in the small portables, so the manufacturers apparently think that more is always better. I don't have experience with the VX6, but I would be surprised if the CTCSS deviation wasn't close to 900 Hz. Perhaps these users modified all of the radios to pad down the tone deviation, but I think that 500 Hz is ideal. I will check my Quantar service manuals at work for confirmation, but I suspect that the tone sensitivity is fixed. I wonder if there is another factor at work here, such as the purity of tone coming from the VX6 radios, and the tone accuracy. Does the Quantar work with other radio brands/models? Maybe it doesn't like raspy tones. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Al Wolfe Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:24 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Quantar and PL We recently replaced an aging UHF machine with a Quantar for a local ham repeater. Now it seems that some users are not able to key up the system. Turns out their radios (all VX6's) have fairly low tone deviation. Tests on the Quantar show that it needs at least 300 htz to key it. This seems reasonable to me but the users all say Well, my radio used to work with the old repeater. So fix the new one. Is there a way to increase the sensitivity to PL tones in a UHF Quantar? Is this desirable? Al, K9SI Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
At least they can't do that in Illinois - IL requires a copy of your ham license along with the application for the plate. And our plates say ham radio down the left side. _ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Likewise in Oregon. We were at a ham lunch several times and saw a plate with the letters N4CER. It was some Security company guy, who wanted it to be a cute version of Enforcer - we visited with him and he wasn't aware of what ham radio was and really seemed to care less. I guess if N4CER had moved to Oregon and wanted a Call Letter plate, he would have been out of luck since it was already taken. LJ -Original Message- From: Tom Manning Don You may also be surprised that Florida is issuing license plates with ham calls on them to people who are not hams. Several people have seen these plates with their ham calls on them. Life is interesting. 73 de Tom Manning, AF4UG
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
A transmitter may have broadband noise with considerable noise content at the receive frequency. The notch in the transmit side removes transmitter noise that may impair your receiver's capability. In an earlier post there was mention of a solid state transmitter. Traditionally tube transmitters have higher Q output circuits as opposed to wideband circuits in solid state transmitters, so a solid state transmitter may need more filtering. There are also combination band pass / band reject duplexers and also band pass only. Each has a characteristic suited for a particular job. Beware, a duplexer may pass an intended frequency PLUS unintended frequencies outside the normal band pass. I found that 158.100 radio paging was being received by a dual band antenna, and passed right thru a 440 duplexer to cause overload in the receiver front end. In this particular instance the best solution was to go to a monoband antenna. Wishing you best success, Steve NU5D [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the great info as soon as we get the service monitor back we are going to try these things. I have already seperated the 2 sides and have seen much improvement so I think that this is really my problem. I do have a question about duplexers in general. I am sure that this is a dumb question but What is the purpose of notching out the receive frequency on the transmit side? Since I have 6 cans couldn't I move one of the cans from the transmit side to the receive side to give me 4 on the receive and 2 on the transmit? Thanks, Vern
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Same here in NJ, if you apply for a ham plate, but does exclude someone to apply for a personal plate that just happens to be a ham call 73 de KB2SSE On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 10:50 -0500, n9wys wrote: At least they can’t do that in Illinois – IL requires a copy of your ham license along with the application for the plate. And our plates say “ham radio” down the left side… __ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Likewise in Oregon. We were at a ham lunch several times and saw a plate with the letters N4CER. It was some Security company guy, who wanted it to be a cute version of Enforcer - we visited with him and he wasn't aware of what ham radio was and really seemed to care less. I guess if N4CER had moved to Oregon and wanted a Call Letter plate, he would have been out of luck since it was already taken. LJ -Original Message- From: Tom Manning Don You may also be surprised that Florida is issuing license plates with ham calls on them to people who are not hams. Several people have seen these plates with their ham calls on them. Life is interesting. 73 de Tom Manning, AF4UG
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT
I've got one or two funny stories... Once at a Radio Club Meeting a guy introduced himself as a WR6*** callsign. Those of you with hair showing out of your ears remember the WR prefix for repeater stations. Almost lost my drink hearing that one... :-) Now... I'm under the impression one or more persons actually have the WR prefix under a vanity callsign. One guy local to my area has a WN6*** callsign, which is/was his original Novice Call back in days of old. I remember hearing people calling newer N6*** bootleggers when they first arrived on the air. Same thing with the Bicentennial Extra Class callsigns. People can have callsigns not yet available in the QRZ FCC database, but after a time they should show up... otherwise a simple phone call can track down the information. You can also reverse name search people to a ham call that might be their former ticket/call. cheers, s.
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
should read: but that does not exclude Sorry On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 12:07 -0400, Kenneth Hansen wrote: Same here in NJ, if you apply for a ham plate, but does exclude someone to apply for a personal plate that just happens to be a ham call 73 de KB2SSE On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 10:50 -0500, n9wys wrote: At least they can’t do that in Illinois – IL requires a copy of your ham license along with the application for the plate. And our plates say “ham radio” down the left side… __ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Likewise in Oregon. We were at a ham lunch several times and saw a plate with the letters N4CER. It was some Security company guy, who wanted it to be a cute version of Enforcer - we visited with him and he wasn't aware of what ham radio was and really seemed to care less. I guess if N4CER had moved to Oregon and wanted a Call Letter plate, he would have been out of luck since it was already taken. LJ -Original Message- From: Tom Manning Don You may also be surprised that Florida is issuing license plates with ham calls on them to people who are not hams. Several people have seen these plates with their ham calls on them. Life is interesting. 73 de Tom Manning, AF4UG
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Fred Seamans wrote: Not all WD are experimental calls. My XYL had WD5DXK call as a General until she let it expire in Oct. 2006. All the experimental calls I know of with a WD prefix are WD2. I hold WD2XKO authorized for 2200 meters (137 kHz) and am one of the WD2XSH 600 meter (505 kHz) licensees. However no repeaters are authorized in those bands :) Dex, W4DEX, WD2XKO, WD2XSH/10
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Duplexers
At 11:12 AM 9/26/2007, Steve wrote: A transmitter may have broadband noise with considerable noise content at the receive frequency. The notch in the transmit side removes transmitter noise that may impair your receiver's capability. In my day job 99% of the problems I have with noise floor is related to transmitter noise that is in band on my RX freq. Usually it is another transmitter at the site and we ask them to install a bandpass/notch filter to lower the noise floor on our receiver. The notch is tuned to our receiver frequency. That happened two weeks ago in Hawaii. 73, Mark N5RFX
Re: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Funny, when I upgraded to Advanced I got WD4AYD. Dropped the WD4 call and changed to my secondary call (which we could have at the time) WA4ECM. David WA4ECM = From: Ron _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/09/26 Wed AM 10:32:58 CDT To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, WD prefixes and WD#xxx formats are not reserved for experimental. It is part of the former novice block of calls issued in the mid 70's. Ron WD4RBJ  To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:31:01 -0500 Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is IBRtried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hearBRthis guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
On Sep 26, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Al Wolfe wrote: So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? Not trying to sound sarcastic here at all, just serious... Since the Quantar and the VX-6 are both current product from both Motorola and Yaesu, it would seem that a discussion with both regarding the problem would be in order. (I know we're all used to using stuff that was end of life years before we put it on the air, but... this stuff is being sold today, and both companies should offer support. Whether or not they'll try to CHARGE you for that support in today's stupid support climate, is another story.) It's a pain, but I would start with a call to Motorola, possibly following up (and being prepared ahead of time to send) with screen- shots from some test gear of what's coming out of the Yaesu to both companies. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
I doubt you would get far with Motorola since the problem is that Yaesu is not using good engineering practice by not filtering the TX audio to remove CTCSS components. I would start with Yaesu asking them why not. Joe M. Nate Duehr wrote: On Sep 26, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Al Wolfe wrote: So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? Not trying to sound sarcastic here at all, just serious... Since the Quantar and the VX-6 are both current product from both Motorola and Yaesu, it would seem that a discussion with both regarding the problem would be in order. (I know we're all used to using stuff that was end of life years before we put it on the air, but... this stuff is being sold today, and both companies should offer support. Whether or not they'll try to CHARGE you for that support in today's stupid support climate, is another story.) It's a pain, but I would start with a call to Motorola, possibly following up (and being prepared ahead of time to send) with screen- shots from some test gear of what's coming out of the Yaesu to both companies. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT
On Sep 26, 2007, at 10:26 AM, skipp025 wrote: People can have callsigns not yet available in the QRZ FCC database, but after a time they should show up... otherwise a simple phone call can track down the information. You can also reverse name search people to a ham call that might be their former ticket/call. QRZ I could believe, but since the FCC's DB is what drives the paper that shows up...? Not sure that's valid anymore... maybe back when the DB was a secondary thing and the paper was King... but today, if it's not in the DB, I'd really doubt that it's a valid call. Especially since the FCC is fine with Amateurs who are waiting on new licenses to start operating as soon as they see their callsign show up in the DB, but before they've received the paper copy... print a copy for reference and fire up the rig... -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT
On Sep 26, 2007, at 9:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Likewise in Oregon. We were at a ham lunch several times and saw a plate with the letters N4CER. It was some Security company guy, who wanted it to be a cute version of Enforcer - we visited with him and he wasn't aware of what ham radio was and really seemed to care less. I guess if N4CER had moved to Oregon and wanted a Call Letter plate, he would have been out of luck since it was already taken. LJ In Colorado, you can have both a WY0X vanity plate, and a WY0X callsign plate. The price is different, and the real callsign plate will have SCL printed vertically down the left side of the plate in very small letters. (Special Callsign License) Someone without a ham ticket could get the vanity plate, but not the SCL plate. You have to provide a copy of your license to get the SCL plate. SCL plates are also issued for commercial broadcast stations wishing to have their callsign on remote trucks/whatever. For broadcasters with multiple of these semi-vanity plates, a -# is usually added to the plates... KBCO-1, KBCO-2... etc. (Disclaimer: I don't know if KBCO uses the SCL plates or not, just using them as an example of what I've seen on some remote trucks.) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Tait 220 equipment
On Sep 22, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Jed Barton wrote: Does anyone know if any of the tait mobiles or portables will work in the amateur 220 band, or have any specs for them? I know they have a bunch of repeaters. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Jed They do have them, and according to a local Tait dealer, they will program into the ham bands, but I have no direct experience with them. I have programmed Tait 220 LTR rigs into the ham bands before... it was a trial-and-error thing, since the LTR rigs are channelized. I was dorking around with making one a transmitter and one a receiver for a backyard repeater. The project never got finished. But I was able to trick them into having one rig transmitting on 224.34 and the receiver on the receive portion of that pair. He was going to order a couple of mobiles into his collection and try them out. I should follow up with him and see what he thinks of them. I would guess from my experience with the LTR rigs, as long as their newer programming software doesn't lock the rigs to commercial frequencies (unlikely), they'd probably work just fine in Amateur service. Looking at their website, the TM8115 is a 99 channel conventional rig, and they have a version banded D1 that is 216-266 MHz. Not sure how you go about finding a dealer in any particular area, or whether the dealer could sell the D1 banded radios in the U.S. Can't see why not, though... http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,html for docs on all the models. http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/sp8115_final.pdf - see page two/specifications for bands, etc. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Tait 220 equipment
There was some notes I read somewhere that the channel steps on the 220 version was limited and in this country we could not access ALL freq's on 15/20 khz band plans.. just some... I think I read it was 12k5or 10k0 or something like this, and channel stepped which did not match all of our bandplans...I would want to check into it before finding out the hard way.. Doug KD8B At 02:47 PM 9/26/2007, you wrote: On Sep 22, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Jed Barton wrote: Does anyone know if any of the tait mobiles or portables will work in the amateur 220 band, or have any specs for them? I know they have a bunch of repeaters. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Jed They do have them, and according to a local Tait dealer, they will program into the ham bands, but I have no direct experience with them. I have programmed Tait 220 LTR rigs into the ham bands before... it was a trial-and-error thing, since the LTR rigs are channelized. I was dorking around with making one a transmitter and one a receiver for a backyard repeater. The project never got finished. But I was able to trick them into having one rig transmitting on 224.34 and the receiver on the receive portion of that pair. He was going to order a couple of mobiles into his collection and try them out. I should follow up with him and see what he thinks of them. I would guess from my experience with the LTR rigs, as long as their newer programming software doesn't lock the rigs to commercial frequencies (unlikely), they'd probably work just fine in Amateur service. Looking at their website, the TM8115 is a 99 channel conventional rig, and they have a version banded D1 that is 216-266 MHz. Not sure how you go about finding a dealer in any particular area, or whether the dealer could sell the D1 banded radios in the U.S. Can't see why not, though... http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,htmlhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,html for docs on all the models. http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/sp8115_final.pdfhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/sp8115_final.pdf - see page two/specifications for bands, etc. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X mailto:nate%40natetech.com[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Tait 220 equipment
That souds like a plan Yeah 220 stuff is getting very very hard to find for sure On Sep 26, 2007, at 2:55 PM, Doug Bade wrote: There was some notes I read somewhere that the channel steps on the 220 version was limited and in this country we could not access ALL freq's on 15/20 khz band plans.. just some... I think I read it was 12k5or 10k0 or something like this, and channel stepped which did not match all of our bandplans...I would want to check into it before finding out the hard way.. Doug KD8B At 02:47 PM 9/26/2007, you wrote: On Sep 22, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Jed Barton wrote: Does anyone know if any of the tait mobiles or portables will work in the amateur 220 band, or have any specs for them? I know they have a bunch of repeaters. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Jed They do have them, and according to a local Tait dealer, they will program into the ham bands, but I have no direct experience with them. I have programmed Tait 220 LTR rigs into the ham bands before... it was a trial-and-error thing, since the LTR rigs are channelized. I was dorking around with making one a transmitter and one a receiver for a backyard repeater. The project never got finished. But I was able to trick them into having one rig transmitting on 224.34 and the receiver on the receive portion of that pair. He was going to order a couple of mobiles into his collection and try them out. I should follow up with him and see what he thinks of them. I would guess from my experience with the LTR rigs, as long as their newer programming software doesn't lock the rigs to commercial frequencies (unlikely), they'd probably work just fine in Amateur service. Looking at their website, the TM8115 is a 99 channel conventional rig, and they have a version banded D1 that is 216-266 MHz. Not sure how you go about finding a dealer in any particular area, or whether the dealer could sell the D1 banded radios in the U.S. Can't see why not, though... http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,htmlhttp:// www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,html for docs on all the models. http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdfhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdf - see page two/specifications for bands, etc. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X mailto:nate%40natetech.com[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Si gn and Sounds like a Ham  ,  NOT
In Texas you can have up to 10 vehicles with the same ham call sign as long as you are the owner of the vehicles. What a mess when you see two cars with the same ham radio plate. David Deputy Collin CO SO WA4ECM = From: Nate Duehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/09/26 Wed PM 01:28:42 CDT To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT On Sep 26, 2007, at 9:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Likewise in Oregon. We were at a ham lunch several times and saw a plate with the letters N4CER. It was some Security company guy, who wanted it to be a cute version of Enforcer - we visited with him and he wasn't aware of what ham radio was and really seemed to care less. I guess if N4CER had moved to Oregon and wanted a Call Letter plate, he would have been out of luck since it was already taken. LJ In Colorado, you can have both a WY0X vanity plate, and a WY0X callsign plate. The price is different, and the real callsign plate will have SCL printed vertically down the left side of the plate in very small letters. (Special Callsign License) Someone without a ham ticket could get the vanity plate, but not the SCL plate. You have to provide a copy of your license to get the SCL plate. SCL plates are also issued for commercial broadcast stations wishing to have their callsign on remote trucks/whatever. For broadcasters with multiple of these semi-vanity plates, a -# is usually added to the plates... KBCO-1, KBCO-2... etc. (Disclaimer: I don't know if KBCO uses the SCL plates or not, just using them as an example of what I've seen on some remote trucks.) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Repeater-Builder] RE:MOTOROLA MTRD5532AA RECEIVER
Can anyone tell me if this is good for anything. Trying to clean up the basement. I am not sure what frequency it is for as the icom is missing.. 73 Doug VE5DA
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 220 equipment
I wonder if the Tait 220 stuff is type accepted. Not that I care, but it may make a difference in whether or not the dealer would try and get them for us. Just curious. We could always go directly to a tait dealer in ZL land and get them shipped, but the shipping costs would be high. Another option to consider is getting stuff from the UK and Europe. Over there, that band segment was/is called VHF Band 3(some trunked). I looked into that awhile back. Most of the equipment I found on UK ebay was narrow band, but might be modified (or used as-is?) Anyway, VHF Band 3 is now some sort of terrestrial digital broadcast band, so the old two way radio gear is pretty much worthless there now. It should be able to be had for a bargain, not counting shipping.. 7treez, na6df --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jed Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That souds like a plan Yeah 220 stuff is getting very very hard to find for sure On Sep 26, 2007, at 2:55 PM, Doug Bade wrote: There was some notes I read somewhere that the channel steps on the 220 version was limited and in this country we could not access ALL freq's on 15/20 khz band plans.. just some... I think I read it was 12k5or 10k0 or something like this, and channel stepped which did not match all of our bandplans...I would want to check into it before finding out the hard way.. Doug KD8B At 02:47 PM 9/26/2007, you wrote: On Sep 22, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Jed Barton wrote: Does anyone know if any of the tait mobiles or portables will work in the amateur 220 band, or have any specs for them? I know they have a bunch of repeaters. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Jed They do have them, and according to a local Tait dealer, they will program into the ham bands, but I have no direct experience with them. I have programmed Tait 220 LTR rigs into the ham bands before... it was a trial-and-error thing, since the LTR rigs are channelized. I was dorking around with making one a transmitter and one a receiver for a backyard repeater. The project never got finished. But I was able to trick them into having one rig transmitting on 224.34 and the receiver on the receive portion of that pair. He was going to order a couple of mobiles into his collection and try them out. I should follow up with him and see what he thinks of them. I would guess from my experience with the LTR rigs, as long as their newer programming software doesn't lock the rigs to commercial frequencies (unlikely), they'd probably work just fine in Amateur service. Looking at their website, the TM8115 is a 99 channel conventional rig, and they have a version banded D1 that is 216-266 MHz. Not sure how you go about finding a dealer in any particular area, or whether the dealer could sell the D1 banded radios in the U.S. Can't see why not, though... http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,htmlhttp:// www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,html for docs on all the models. http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdfhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdf - see page two/specifications for bands, etc. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X mailto:nate%40natetech.com[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 220 equipment
Much of it is commercially type accepted as we have a commercial band from 216-220 that is populated with LTR users in some places..it is not Part 90 but it is a commercial band segment. Coastal radio services ( Maritime) and shared with some land mobile auction licensees away from the coastal areas...( I am not referring to the 220-222 segment using ACSB etc that IS Part 90.) TAIT is one of the vendors that supports this market... also Kenwood I hear, but I have never seen those particular radios in person... Many of the 220 TAIT radios are MPT 1327 radios and do not do conventional well if at all.. so buyer beware Doug KD8B At 07:14 PM 9/26/2007, you wrote: I wonder if the Tait 220 stuff is type accepted. Not that I care, but it may make a difference in whether or not the dealer would try and get them for us. Just curious. We could always go directly to a tait dealer in ZL land and get them shipped, but the shipping costs would be high. Another option to consider is getting stuff from the UK and Europe. Over there, that band segment was/is called VHF Band 3(some trunked). I looked into that awhile back. Most of the equipment I found on UK ebay was narrow band, but might be modified (or used as-is?) Anyway, VHF Band 3 is now some sort of terrestrial digital broadcast band, so the old two way radio gear is pretty much worthless there now. It should be able to be had for a bargain, not counting shipping.. 7treez, na6df --- In mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.comRepeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Jed Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That souds like a plan Yeah 220 stuff is getting very very hard to find for sure On Sep 26, 2007, at 2:55 PM, Doug Bade wrote: There was some notes I read somewhere that the channel steps on the 220 version was limited and in this country we could not access ALL freq's on 15/20 khz band plans.. just some... I think I read it was 12k5or 10k0 or something like this, and channel stepped which did not match all of our bandplans...I would want to check into it before finding out the hard way.. Doug KD8B At 02:47 PM 9/26/2007, you wrote: On Sep 22, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Jed Barton wrote: Does anyone know if any of the tait mobiles or portables will work in the amateur 220 band, or have any specs for them? I know they have a bunch of repeaters. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, Jed They do have them, and according to a local Tait dealer, they will program into the ham bands, but I have no direct experience with them. I have programmed Tait 220 LTR rigs into the ham bands before... it was a trial-and-error thing, since the LTR rigs are channelized. I was dorking around with making one a transmitter and one a receiver for a backyard repeater. The project never got finished. But I was able to trick them into having one rig transmitting on 224.34 and the receiver on the receive portion of that pair. He was going to order a couple of mobiles into his collection and try them out. I should follow up with him and see what he thinks of them. I would guess from my experience with the LTR rigs, as long as their newer programming software doesn't lock the rigs to commercial frequencies (unlikely), they'd probably work just fine in Amateur service. Looking at their website, the TM8115 is a 99 channel conventional rig, and they have a version banded D1 that is 216-266 MHz. Not sure how you go about finding a dealer in any particular area, or whether the dealer could sell the D1 banded radios in the U.S. Can't see why not, though... http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,htmlhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,htmlhttp:// www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/1,178,0,44,html for docs on all the models. http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdfhttp://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/http://www.taitworld.com/main/index.cfm/3,178,241/ sp8115_final.pdf - see page two/specifications for bands, etc. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X mailto:nate%40natetech.com[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Tait 220 equipment
On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Doug Bade wrote: Much of it is commercially type accepted as we have a commercial band from 216-220 that is populated with LTR users in some places..it is not Part 90 but it is a commercial band segment. Coastal radio services ( Maritime) and shared with some land mobile auction licensees away from the coastal areas...( I am not referring to the 220-222 segment using ACSB etc that IS Part 90.) TAIT is one of the vendors that supports this market... also Kenwood I hear, but I have never seen those particular radios in person... I've also seen some odd-ball 220 MHz Motorola rigs on eBay recently, but it looked like they came from a foreign market and weren't targeted at the U.S. segment. Could be wrong about that one, for sure. -- Nate Duehr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
I agree with Joe and Nate. The Quantar shares audio and data between modules on a digital SPI bus, and there is no provision for adjusting the CTCSS sensitivity. Hello? This is Motorola's flagship station, and a high-tier one at that. Pardon my sarcasm, but we should not lower the bar to accommodate Amateur-grade equipment! Is the group a bunch of licensed Hams who believe that the Yaesu VX6 is a top-quality rig? Okay, okay, the sarcasm switch is now off. When the statement was made that the CTCSS deviation from the VX6 portables seemed to be very low, I hafta wonder if the bandwidth setting of the service monitor was not set to include the 5-300 Hz bandwidth, rather than just the voice 300-3000 Hz bandwidth. Hey, I've made this mistake myself, so I know it is possible. When my R2600D service monitor is set for 300-3000 Hz bandwidth (its default), CTCSS deviation looks very anemic. As well it should! I think the Yaesu VX6 radios are sending trashy CTCSS tones, and the Quantar is properly ignoring them. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MCH Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:26 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL I doubt you would get far with Motorola since the problem is that Yaesu is not using good engineering practice by not filtering the TX audio to remove CTCSS components. I would start with Yaesu asking them why not. Joe M. Nate Duehr wrote: On Sep 26, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Al Wolfe wrote: So the questions remain: Is the Quantar PL sensitivity adjustable? Is it a good thing to make it more sensitive? How do I convince some users that there may be a problem with their radio? Not trying to sound sarcastic here at all, just serious... Since the Quantar and the VX-6 are both current product from both Motorola and Yaesu, it would seem that a discussion with both regarding the problem would be in order. (I know we're all used to using stuff that was end of life years before we put it on the air, but... this stuff is being sold today, and both companies should offer support. Whether or not they'll try to CHARGE you for that support in today's stupid support climate, is another story.) It's a pain, but I would start with a call to Motorola, possibly following up (and being prepared ahead of time to send) with screen- shots from some test gear of what's coming out of the Yaesu to both companies. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:nate%40natetech.com
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT
Yep, WD0FYF Gerald Pelnar McPherson, Ks - Original Message - From: Ron _ To: repeater-builder@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:32 AM Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, WD prefixes and WD#xxx formats are not reserved for experimental. It is part of the former novice block of calls issued in the mid 70's. Ron WD4RBJ To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:31:01 -0500 Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham, NOT Don, This is an experimental callsign. The reason I'm familiar with this is I tried to obtain a WC9 callsign for my county's EMA Ham Club - that was also denied since WC and WD prefixes are experimentals. (BTW - we ended up with W9WIL.) Which system was he on? SARA, CFMC? I'd be interested in listening to hear this guy some time... Maybe I'd even query him on his callsign. Hehehehe Moderator note: Sorry for the OT thread... Mark - N9WYS -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Don Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 2:31 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Call Sign and Sounds like a Ham , NOT I found something interesting and Thought Would share, I heard a Ham talking as He was driving through the Chicago Metro area on a large Repeater System , and when I am near the Computer , I Just look up the Call to find more info about the person to see If We might have something in common to talk about I looked up His call WD9XAD On http://www.qrz.com/ and http://hamcall.net/call nothing Found , Sure looks like a Older Call and the Person talked like a Ham But now days who knows so I went to the FCC Site http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/reports7/ Top Search for Call sign Well it came up But NOT A Ham radio call, I doubt very much if it was the Person with the Non ham lic using it, But I found it interesting and Nice to learn something as We get older, it's just remembering it is the Problem Back in the Old Days We just took people at their word , But with the Internet I find things are not always what We think . 73 De Don KA9QJG -- Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
I own a VX6 and regularly use a local Quantar repeater without any problems. To the best of my knowledge, the Quantar is stock. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Al Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We recently replaced an aging UHF machine with a Quantar for a local ham repeater. Now it seems that some users are not able to key up the system. Turns out their radios (all VX6's) have fairly low tone deviation. Tests on the Quantar show that it needs at least 300 htz to key it. This seems reasonable to me but the users all say Well, my radio used to work with the old repeater. So fix the new one. Is there a way to increase the sensitivity to PL tones in a UHF Quantar? Is this desirable? Al, K9SI
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Quantar and PL
Tony L. wrote: I own a VX6 and regularly use a local Quantar repeater without any problems. To the best of my knowledge, the Quantar is stock. I also know of at least two people using VX-6's through a digital-capable (set in dual-mode analog and P25, they're of course using analog!) Quantar. Two Quantars in fact. Not my Quantar's though. Something odd is going on there. That's why I recommended contacting both Yaesu *and* Moto... something's fishy. And there's always other things to consider like... are the received signals being phase-shifted by something (lots of reflections/multipath) and it's confusing the Reverse Burst squelch-closure mechanism in the Quantar? I forget now, wasn't there some mention of voting and/or Astro modems or something? Maybe I'm mixing this conversation up with another about P25 I was having... I haven't ever set up one, but I bet that the RB feature can be turned off to find out if it's involved in the problem you're hearing. And if there's other stuff on the repeaters, make sure the repeaters are working properly all by their little selves without all that stuff attached and doing things. Anyway, that's more ideas that came to mind. No Quantar's here for me... just another @#^%^#$ unhappy MASTR II VHF PA to go deal with... (sigh). (Wish we could figure out what kills them. The thing is driving directly into a dual-stage isolator, it's definitely seeing a 50 ohm load and no reflected power...) I'm sure my GE friends would be appalled that I'd love to have a Quantar up there to try out... LOL! Nate WY0X
