Glenayre???? That is if you can afford them!!!
-----Original Message----- From: franknmiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 2:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters I like the continuous tone for two reasons. Lack of delays and squelch noises, but with the continuous tone you have a way of determining if the link is good or has faulted out. Good discussion and I do appreciate the ideas and help fron all. My main question was if anyone had found inexpensive (or expensive) equipment that would operate 24/7/365 as a UHF link with out going up in smoke! ;>) Frank, KO5S --- In [email protected], mch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I do agree that it's not the best practice technically (an > arguable point, I suppose), but such animals are common on the public > safety bands. As for security, that too is a debatable point, as such > links use a high frequency tone to indicate absence of a signal. If you > could override the remote site, the worst you could do is get voted for > retransmission. Most people can't simulate the control tone (users of > this list excluded, of course!), as it's not standard on a user radio. > As such, it is a rather highly secure link method. > > But, one thing you could do is to reverse the tone logic and have it > send the tone when a signal is received. That would decode faster than > CTCSS or CDCSS, so your remote TX would respond faster. The only > drawback is that you then have to notch that tone out of the transmit > audio (which could be done after voting - one notch filter). Then, just > switch the link TX with CAS/COS. Oh - you would have to switch the logic > in the voter, too, so it sees tone as an active site rather than > inactive. > > My copy of part 97 is not that old - in fact, it's a URL. :-) > > Another point to add - just make sure any continuous link has an ID on > it that runs every 10 minutes. That part is still in the rule book. :-) > > Joe M. > > Lee Williams wrote: > > > > My source? Bad memory,,,Ok,maybe it "used to be" but a full time link > > just isnt good practice. Its too easy for others to find and fiddle > > with,jammers and the like. Its easier on the equipment as well. > > Gee,wouldnt it fall under beacon rules then? Lets just say that > > personnaly,I would not run a continuously transmitting link. My copy > > of part 97 is so old,it fell apart when I pulled it out,and I KNEW you > > would respond... 73,Lee > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:26 PM > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: UHF Links with Voters > > > > > Lee, > > > > > > Please cite your source. Repeaters USED to be limited to > > > 5 second tails, but that rule went away over 10 years ago. > > > > > > It is perfectly legal for a repeater (let alone a link) to TX > > 24/7/365. > > > > > > Joe M. > > > > > > Lee Williams wrote: > > > > > > > > If its for amateur use,full time transmit links are illegal !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
