Reverse what I wrote... the current 6-meter repeater offset in California is 500KHz. One of the original 6-meter repeater offsets when I put up my first "solid state" six-meter box was 600KHz.
Anyone remember the 52.525 output and "52.76" input pair? I keep my original pre-narcc coordination notification 600KHz offset letter framed on the wall in the shack. Partly because the letter was from the famous (friend and co-worker) Joel (n6amg, now sk). I've got to get off the decafe again... :-) Meanwhile back to the rainstorm. cheers, s. > MCH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I checked NARCC and SCRRBA. Who has the 600 kHz splits? > > Joe M. > > skipp025 wrote: > > > > Gareth describes a very creative application with frequency > > agile receivers scanning various commercial repeater inputs. > > > > In the ham world we've applied scanning repeater receivers to > > our six-meter repeaters, which allow us to comply with the > > current 600KHz and original 500KHz "legacy" repeater offset. > > We also scan the 52.525 simplex channel for activity... > > > > One six-meter repeater receiver scans both input offsets and > > stops on the active frequency. Since the application uses a > > Midland Mobile as the six-meter repeater receiver we also use > > a priority look-back scan function to ensure the formal repeater > > frequency input always captures the repeater. > > > > In the case of the 600KHz & 500Khz repeater inputs there is > > no additional duplexer hardware required. Both frequencies > > "sneak through" the same pre-selector/duplexer filters without > > any modifications. > > > > The use of Scanning Receivers can be very creative... but also > > quickly get out of hand if you're easily excited. > > > > cheers, > > s. > > > > > "Gareth Bennett" <garethb@> wrote: > > > > > > We have used a similar, and unique way of linking multiple sites > > here in NZ, > > > > > > Utilising four sites and multiple CTCSS, We utilise One repeater > > per site, Vertex Standard VXR-9000, programmed to scan all four > > frequencies (That site repeater input frequency, and the other three > > repeater sites output (TX) frequencies. > > > > > > Once valid activity has been detected, TX is on the single > > allocated frequency for that site location. > > > > > > The VXR-9000 has a tone panel integral to the repeater, so can > > decode/encode 16 CTCSS or DCS codes. > > > > > > Needless to say frequency co-ordination is very important, as each > > repeater site is also listening on the output frequencies as well. To > > make this work for our client, separate TX and RX antennas were > > required, as well as some clever filter engineering. > > > > > > What I am saying is that a repeater that has multiple channels, and > > that can also scan, can replace your link receiver in some instances. > > > > > > All the best for 08' > > > > > > Cheers > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Gareth Bennett > > > > > > > > > This email is confidential, if you received this message in error, > > or you > > > are not the intended recipient, > > > please return it to the sender and destroy any copies. > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Kerincom > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 5:04 PM > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Linking two shared repeaters > > > > > > > > > Each of my repeaters operate on different frequencies .e.g. > > Repeater #1 rx 483.9mhz and TX on 489.1mhz 5.2 meg split. > > > #2 may be on rx 490mhz and TX on 495.2mhz > > > Correction my #2 repeater link receiver is tuned to #1 > > output frequency (489.1mhz) .and transmitt on the #1 input frequency > > (483.9mhz). > > > Yes each on my clients on the private have a separate ctcss > > frequency assigned to their radios for TX and rx so they can only hear > > their own cars. > > > > > > > > > Thank You, > > > Ian Wells, > > > Kerinvale Comaudio, > > > 361 Camboon Road.Biloela.4715 > > > www.kerinvalecomaudio.com.au > > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > > > > > From: Jim Brown > > > Date: 5/01/2008 12:36:06 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Linking two shared repeaters > > > > > > I think I understand what you are saying Ian. Your > > > #2 repeater has it's input frequency on the #1 > > > repeater's output frequency. That way you would only > > > require one extra receiver (on a third frequency) and > > > precedence circuit at the #1 repeater site. The #2 > > > site would have to have it's output on the third > > > frequency to make it all work. > > > > > > I think you have simplified the system down to the > > > minimum required hardware to make it work. CTCSS > > > Transmitted only while an input is present would round > > > out the system requirement. Your multi-user CTCSS > > > controllers should keep things private as different > > > users use the different tones. > > > > > > Sometimes thinking outside the box can make for a real > > > worthwhile reduction in hardware. > > > > > > 73- Jim W5ZIT > > > > > > --- Kerincom <kerincom@> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi again Jim > > > > With your thinking below .My remote private site > > > > should work in the same > > > > sort of way as what you are suggesting except while > > > > s2 has a signal on it > > > > it sends this signal to both s2 users and back to s1 > > > > repeater at the same > > > > time.In return the signal works the same as your > > > > first 3-5 lines below.I > > > > only require one link radio on the remote sites and > > > > not one at each end of > > > > the link .However with our open we have a separate > > > > link repeater paired with > > > > the s1 (explained better in my response to skip) so > > > > the link system works at > > > > the same time as the central site repeater.In the > > > > open system we don't link > > > > the TX frequencies directly from site to site > > > > .I.e.(s1tx to s2rx)(s2tx to > > > > s1rx) due to a error in frequency allocation,which > > > > will be fixed and which > > > > we expect to link directly with our private system > > > > as we wont get the sites > > > > frequencies licensed so close together next time > > > > > > > > Thank You, > > > > Ian Wells, > > > > Kerinvale Comaudio, > > > > 361 Camboon Road.Biloela.4715 > > > > www.kerinvalecomaudio.com.au > > > > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > > > > > > > From: Jim Brown > > > > Date: 4/01/2008 8:25:48 AM > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Linking two shared > > > > repeaters > > > > > > > > Ian, here is my thinking. When site 1 has a signal > > > > on > > > > the repeater input, the signal from site 2 is > > > > blocked > > > > because of the circuit that gives precedence to the > > > > local site repeater receiver. When a site 1 user > > > > unkeys, there will be no CTCSS tone coming back from > > > > site 2 to key the site 1 repeater. The combination > > > > of > > > > the precedence circuit and CTCSS requirement for > > > > both > > > > repeaters keeps the system from locking up. The same > > > > circuit would be required between the receivers at > > > > site 2 as in site 1. And both repeaters would have > > > > to > > > > be configured to only transmit a CTCSS tone when a > > > > user keys the input, not during the squelch tail. > > > > > > > > 73 - Jim W5ZIT > > > > > > > > --- Kerincom <kerincom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I will have a look at the circuit and see .The > > > > > problem we found with link > > > > > setup 1 upper design is we could not have one link > > > > > radio on one site and one > > > > > on another site as when the site 2 link stops > > > > > transmitting and rx site 1 > > > > > tail retrips site 2 and keeps them on .Another > > > > > problem was while s1 link in > > > > > transmitting s2 receiver is trying to pick up the > > > > > incoming signal and s1 > > > > > link transmission at the same time . > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. > > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
