On one of the systems that I take care of, we fought interference from a paging transmitter for about 12 months before making the choice to go to PL access full time. In our case, the signal was weak enough that a mobile on the fringe of our coverage area could cover it, but strong enough to hit the receiver and bring the repeater up. We tried different receivers, additional cavities, etc. until the only alternative was to take the system down or go PL. In some (perhaps most) situations, despite expending a great deal of time, energy, and expense, the only workable solution to solve an interference issue is to go to tone access.
Incidentally,a properly implemented PL tone decoder will detect subaudible tone before the squelch circuit in your receiver will unsquelch. This should have the effect of slightly increasing your talk-in range compared to a non-pl repeater. 73, Kevin, K9HX At 08:10 AM 12/3/2004 -0500, you wrote: >I think that CTCSS is used too often on input as a crutch for "solving" >(covering up) interference problems. I'll bet a properly-operating >carrier-squelch repeater will work better than one with a tone, simply >because it is open to interference that must be FIXED, not just covered up >with tone. I learned this the hard way. I have a 6 meter machine at 51.7 >right next to a TV channel 2 and a 70 MHz pager link transmitter, and many >other high-power devices. It was toned input at first, (to shut it up) and >operated very poorly until I spent time and money on filtering and a good >receiver. I am proud to say now that it is open carrier squelch with no >problems. I do have a tone on the output, where the user can implement it >or not for receiving trouble. I do believe that outputs should have tone, >just out of courtesy, for user's sake. > >P.S. Put down your SERA book, you won't find it! :) > >John -KI4AWK > >----- Original Message ----- >From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com>Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 1:15 PM >Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Requiring CTCSS > >Living 1/2 mile from 'RF hell" on top of Lookout Mtn. requires that a >repeater must have tone before I can listen to the channel without putting >up with constant intermod. We have several untoned repeaters here in the >Denver area that can't understand why someone would want tone on the >output without a toned input even after explanation of the problem. For >this reason, I would like to see a tone required on all repeater outputs >(maybe 100hz) even if the inputs are untoned for those of us with intermod >problems. All 4 of my personal repeaters are toned. > >I've often thought the 100hz tone would be a good idea for use on some >simplex channels were the ex-CBer contingent have taken over. I would >still like to monitor some channels (.52 in this case) if there was some >way to filter out the drivel. > >Just my .08 cents worth (inflation) > >Art - KC7GF >Golden, CO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >---------- >Yahoo! Groups Links > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > * > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ > > > * > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > * > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > * > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
