Ron is right. Tone is a band-aide, not a cure all. The way it ‘solves’ many problems is through masking the interference. The interference is still present, and when the interference is present at the same time as a valid signal, the interference again appears on the repeater output.
Yes, tones allow more close spacing of repeaters on the same channel/frequency, and generally these repeaters are far enough apart that capture effect voids the problem of having 2 stations transmitting on the same frequency at the same time, thus the tone does the job for which it was intended. But… if you get a good band opening, then the likelihood of having to listen to some pretty ugly mixing on the repeater output(s) greatly increases… tone or not. I agree with Ron’s logic… if you need it, use it. If not, why bother? It’s a hassle for the users… especially those who just happen to be passing through and might need directions or just want to chat. Our repeater here in Middle Georgia is just a few miles off I-75, and we get a great number of folks passing through who use our repeater for a variety of things. Our membership STRONGLY opposes the idea of putting a tone on the machine, and I’m glad of that. We do have a decoder installed, and I have the ability to DTMF the tone on at any time, although in the past 4 years I‘ve never had the need to do so. We also transmit a tone, which allows those of us who work in or near high-RF environments to set our receivers on decode and not have to listen to all the other junk that’s around. It also keeps the various squeaks and squawks off of our Echolink node. Just my 2-cents worth. Mike WM4B WA4ORT/R (146.25/85) From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Wright Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 3:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones.. Al, Has nothing to do with pride, just sound sense that we don't need tone. Tone has its uses, but not a solve all problems approach. In my case solves no problem and in fact does create one...vacationers have trouble finding the tone freq. Most directories are not always up to date and to have a computer on vacation to look it up is not what many can or want to do. Most mobiles still require a tone decoder as an add on, HTs usually have it built in. One can do the set and try approach, but not exactly something one wants to do while driving. However, there are uses for tones, not just one so some applications use transmitting different tones for different modes. We have a few repeaters here that do not have tone with no problems. Go tone and bring your repeater into the 21st century. This is junk. Tone is old stuff. If you need it fine and it can help with some problems. I have no problem with some putting on tone, but to think this is bringing anything into the 21st century not much of an imagination. 73, ron, n9ee/r >From: Al Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:k9si%40arrl.net> > >Date: 2007/08/29 Wed PM 08:22:50 CDT >To: [email protected] ><mailto:Repeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com> >Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: subaudibe tones.. > > It seems Ron, N9EE, is quite proud of the fact that his repeater doesn't >use tone squelch. Ron, you are most fortunate to be able to do that. For the >rest of us lets get real. From my modest station I can normally hear five >or six repeaters on 146.76. Using tone I can work any one of them should I >choose to do so as they all use different tones. Think of the chaos that >would result if they all were carrier access. > >Our friends in commercial two way radio figured out about FIFTY years >ago that they could get ten time the channel loading using tone squelch. So >why are hams so resistant to implementing it? To me it make a lot of sense >to use tone squelch. > >About six years ago at the meetings of the Illinois Repeater Association >(general membership, not just the board members) the idea of mandatory tone >squelch (CTCSS or DPL) on all repeaters was suggested. After much >discussion, a couple of years later the general membership voted, almost >unanimously, to proceed with this plan. As of the end of 2005, all Illinois >repeaters (29 mhz on up) were required to have available some kind of access >other than carrier squelch. Although there are some hold-outs, most think it >is a resounding success. Basically, what it means is that any repeater using >carrier squelch will get no protection from interference from users of >coordinated repeaters, as far as the IRA is concerned. > >So what about mobiles or other transients? The ARRL and others publish >directories that are reasonably up to date. Info is available on line. Most >repeaters repeat during their hangtime for emergencies. > >I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who pi** and moan about their >HR2-B not having tone capabilities. Retire it. If you can afford to spend >$75 to fill your gas tank maybe you can afford to buy a rig less than thirty >years old. Or pick up a tone board off of ebay for $20 if you are really in >love with your old rig. (Actually, I have a working G-Strip Motorola base >that can use the local repeater because it has the right reeds in it. It's >probably 45 years old and still useful. And it came that way, with TONE >SQUELCH!) > >Friends don't let friends use carrier squelch (on repeaters). > >73, >Al, K9SI > > > Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome.
<<image001.jpg>>
<<image002.jpg>>
