On Dec 28, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Doug Dickinson wrote: > I still don't understand why people object to two repeaters - > properly designed - cannot share the same channel? With separate PL > tones and limited hand time, they can complement each other.
No one here "objects" to this -- it happens all the time. It's called a co-channel repeater coordination. It also works just fine on Shared Non-Protected pairs, if your area has such pairs. > The use of a coordinator that "assigns" a channel based on > antiquated criteria is still providing exclusive use of a channel to > an amateur repeater. As such, I think it could be challenged. The criteria for a co-channel coordination in most areas (check with your own coordinators) is measured in DISTANCE between two co- channeled repeaters for a "normal" coordination. The distance criteria includes an attempt to keep the overlap coverage areas of two co-channeled machines from being too large, which also limits the area where mobile stations transmitting into one system will be heard by the other. CTCSS or not, mobiles in the overlap coverage area are going to be using one system and interfering with the other, and coordination is an attempt to mitigate mutual interference. Repeater owner/operators in most areas can allow the distance criteria to be lowered or removed altogether if a desire to do so is sent in writing to the coordinators. Coordination rules are typically set up (and agreed to by the local repeater operators) to provide high levels of "protection" from interference. If repeater owner/operators (BOTH of them) wish to raise their personal tolerances for interference and problems, they certainly are allowed to do so by most coordination bodies. All they have to do is to send a note, and the coordinator will happily dump two or three other repeater owners who also claim they don't care about interference, right on top of their coordinated frequency. If that's what they truly want. > In reality, two properly designed and implemented repeaters with PL > tones can share the same electromagnetic space and live nicely > together - they just get used one at a time based on the initiator's > communications need at that time. In reality, the two repeaters won't have the same coverage and sooner or later a user who doesn't have a clue and is only in the coverage pattern of ONE of the repeaters, will cause unintentional QRM ... Which will either be a big problem for lots of people, or it won't, all depending on how the owner/operators of the systems react, whether or not the end-user is teachable, and various multitudes of other factors. -- Nate Duehr, WY0X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
