I recently did some maintainence on a repeater that went on the air in the San Antonio TX area in January this year. In the time it has been on the air it accumulated 135 hours of key down use from local users. This does not count the time it was key down by remote users (EchoLink). So a pretty low duty cycle, but not bad usage for a brand new repeater.
73 - Jim W5ZIT --- Jack Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In our area, monitor 5-6 repeaters and with an area > ham population of an estimated 700, the > repeaters are used much less than 10% during a 24 > hour period. This includes linked systems > and IRLP/Echolink nodes. 20 years ago the chatter > was higher. These days the primary use are > by a few 'channel masters', otherwise it would be > pretty quiet. Suspect cell phones, internet, and > 24 hour movie channels contribute to the reduced > usage. > > 73 de Jack - N7OO > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Barrett > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:21 AM > Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Usage of Linked > Repeater Systems vs. Stand Alone Repeaters > > > > I think the main problem is TOO MANY REPEATERS J > I've got a good antenna where I'm at and can hit > every repeater in a 75-100 mile radius. as part of > my hunting for a pair, I checked EVERY VHF repeater > that I found in the K1IW database in a 100 mile > radius.. About 30% were dead (not responding to key > up with a courtesy tone.. but they may not have had > courtesy tones turned on), and maybe 2-3 dozen of > the rest actually with traffic on them.. Call it > about 1 repeater per city/club in the area that was > actually getting used. The sample was taken between > 4pm and 7pm (drive time) over a couple of weeks, > though I didn't spend more than 30 minutes (less if > I heard traffic) on any given repeater so I could > have missed something. > > > > I've got 4 repeaters listed In my county. only one > gets any serious use, the other is dead except as a > C3 channel for ARES and Weather Nets, and one other > has a small group that uses it pretty exclusively.. > the 4th is on the air, but inactive. > > > > People just don't have much to talk about with > people too far away from them, pointing up the fact > that repeaters are mostly social gathering places, > and its not interesting to socialize with people you > don't really know J > > > > I guess I'm as bad as anyone though. I stick to > one repeater, monitor one other but rarely talk on > it (just a couple of people there that I talk to, > and they aren't on much), and ignore the rest of the > repeaters around J > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Tony L. > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:59 AM > To: [email protected] > 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? > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
