The same goes for the Pacific Northwest area as well. Before I moved to Colorado, I owned the Oregon Repeater Linking Group of witch had 15 full-duplex linked repeater system. The system had three other system connections, one to the north that connected into the Evergreen Intertie and one to the South to the RVLA system and one to the East to the HiDARG system. As a system owner, I feel your frustration. It seems that everyone wants coverage butt when you build it out for them they do not use it as it should be used. I am convinced that the users are intimated by the system and use the no frills approach to talking on repeater.
Mike Mullarkey (K7PFJ) _____ From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony L. Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 8:59 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Usage of Linked Repeater Systems vs. Stand Alone Repeaters Our club operates a RF full-time linked repeater system in metro New York City, currently comprised of four (4) repeaters. We've observed that the addition of a new repeater into the system doesn't always equate to added usage. In fact, we've noticed that many of the linked systems in metro NYC typically aren't as busy as local area stand alone systems. We're puzzled as to why people seem to shy away from most, but not all, of the very wide coverage area systems. The busiest repeaters in our area seem to be the "no frills" stand alones. Are voice IDs, courtesy tones, and coverage footprints beyond a 25-mile radius just more than people can handle nowadays? Comments anyone?
